Motor imagery group practice for gait rehabilitation in individuals with post-stroke hemiparesis: A pilot study

See what your therapist and doctor think of this.
http://iospress.metapress.com/content/c56702u312756214/

Journal NeuroRehabilitation Publisher IOS Press ISSN 1053-8135 (Print) 1878-6448 (Online) Subject Medicine, Clinical Neurology, Exercise & Occupational Therapy and Rehabilitation & Assistive Technology Pages - DOI 10.3233/NRE-131035 Subject Group Medicine and Health Online Date Tuesday, January 07, 2014 Publisher's Copyright Statement	Add to marked items Add to shopping cart Add to saved items Recommend this article

PDF (343.5 KB)HTMLFirst Page Preview

Authors

Ruth Dickstein¹, Sandra Levy², Sara Shefi¹, Sarit Holtzman¹, Sara Peleg³, Jean-Jacques Vatine⁴

¹Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel
²Stroke Alliance for Europe (SAFE)
³Department of Physical Therapy, Reuth Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel
⁴Outpatient and Research Division, Reuth Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv, Israel

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Stroke is the leading cause of adult disability, with walking impairment being a devastating indicator of chronic post-stroke hemiparesis. Limited resources exist for individual treatments; therefore, the delivery of safe group exercise therapy is highly desired. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the application of group-based motor imagery practice to community-dwelling individuals with chronic hemiparesis improves gait. METHODS: Sixteen individuals with chronic hemiparesis from two community centers participated in the study, with eight from each center. Four participants in each center received five weeks of the experimental intervention, consisting of group-based motor imagery exercises of gait tasks, followed by five weeks of control treatment of motor imagery exercises for the affected upper extremity. Four other subjects in each center received the same treatments in reverse order. Pre- and post intervention measurements included clinical and biomechanical gait parameters. RESULTS: Comparisons within (pre- vs. post) and between treatments (experimental vs. control) indicated no significant change in any gait variable. Nevertheless, the verbal reports of most participants alluded to satisfaction with the intervention and to an increase in self-confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lack of evidence for the effectiveness of group-based motor imagery practice in improving gait among individuals with chronic hemiparesis, the contrast between the measured negative outcomes and the positive verbal reports merits further inquiry.