I'm thinking that NO one in stroke knows anything about previous research, I blame the mentors and senior researchers for allowing this. A database would solve this lack of knowledge of previous research.
Combined arm stretch positioning and neuromuscular electrical stimulation during rehabilitation does not improve range of motion, shoulder pain or function in patients after stroke: a randomised trial Nov. 2013
The latest here. Why the fuck was it done?
Stretching and splinting interventions for poststroke spasticity, hand function, and functional tasks: A systematic review
American Journal of Occupational Therapy , Volume 74(5) , Pgs. 7405205050.
NARIC Accession Number: J84525. What's this?
ISSN: 0272-9490.
Author(s): Kerr, Lindsey ; Jewell, Vanessa D. ; Jensen, Lou.
Publication Year: 2020.
Number of Pages: 15.
Abstract: Study examined the evidence for the effectiveness of stretching interventions, including splinting, on reducing upper-extremity spasticity, increasing hand function, and improving functional tasks for adults with poststroke spasticity. MEDLINE, CINAHL, OTseeker, AgeLine, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies published from 2004 to January 2017. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, articles describing Level I, II, or III studies of adult participants with upper-extremity spasticity who received a stretching intervention were selected. Eleven articles describing 6 Level I and 5 Level III studies met inclusion criteria. Analysis of themes identified four primary intervention types: (1) static splinting, (2) dynamic splinting, (3) manual stretching, and (4) stretching devices. For reducing upper-extremity spasticity, low strength of evidence was found to support the use of static splinting, strong strength of evidence was found for the use of stretching devices, and low strength of evidence was found to support the use of dynamic splinting; no evidence was found for manual stretching to address spasticity. For increasing hand function, moderate strength of evidence was found to support the use of static splinting, dynamic splinting, and manual stretching, and low strength of evidence was found for the use of stretching devices. For improving functional tasks, moderate strength of evidence was found to support the use of static splinting, dynamic splinting, and manual stretching, and low strength of evidence was found for the use of stretching devices.
Descriptor Terms: DAILY LIVING, DEVICES, INTERVENTION, LIMBS, LITERATURE REVIEWS, MOTOR SKILLS, OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, SPASTICITY, STROKE.
Can this document be ordered through NARIC's document delivery service*?: Y.
Get this Document: https://ajot.aota.org/article.aspx?articleid=2765604.
Citation: Kerr, Lindsey , Jewell, Vanessa D. , Jensen, Lou. (2020). Stretching and splinting interventions for poststroke spasticity, hand function, and functional tasks: A systematic review. American Journal of Occupational Therapy , 74(5), Pgs. 7405205050. Retrieved 10/14/2020, from REHABDATA database.
NARIC Accession Number: J84525. What's this?
ISSN: 0272-9490.
Author(s): Kerr, Lindsey ; Jewell, Vanessa D. ; Jensen, Lou.
Publication Year: 2020.
Number of Pages: 15.
Abstract: Study examined the evidence for the effectiveness of stretching interventions, including splinting, on reducing upper-extremity spasticity, increasing hand function, and improving functional tasks for adults with poststroke spasticity. MEDLINE, CINAHL, OTseeker, AgeLine, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies published from 2004 to January 2017. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, articles describing Level I, II, or III studies of adult participants with upper-extremity spasticity who received a stretching intervention were selected. Eleven articles describing 6 Level I and 5 Level III studies met inclusion criteria. Analysis of themes identified four primary intervention types: (1) static splinting, (2) dynamic splinting, (3) manual stretching, and (4) stretching devices. For reducing upper-extremity spasticity, low strength of evidence was found to support the use of static splinting, strong strength of evidence was found for the use of stretching devices, and low strength of evidence was found to support the use of dynamic splinting; no evidence was found for manual stretching to address spasticity. For increasing hand function, moderate strength of evidence was found to support the use of static splinting, dynamic splinting, and manual stretching, and low strength of evidence was found for the use of stretching devices. For improving functional tasks, moderate strength of evidence was found to support the use of static splinting, dynamic splinting, and manual stretching, and low strength of evidence was found for the use of stretching devices.
Descriptor Terms: DAILY LIVING, DEVICES, INTERVENTION, LIMBS, LITERATURE REVIEWS, MOTOR SKILLS, OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, SPASTICITY, STROKE.
Can this document be ordered through NARIC's document delivery service*?: Y.
Get this Document: https://ajot.aota.org/article.aspx?articleid=2765604.
Citation: Kerr, Lindsey , Jewell, Vanessa D. , Jensen, Lou. (2020). Stretching and splinting interventions for poststroke spasticity, hand function, and functional tasks: A systematic review. American Journal of Occupational Therapy , 74(5), Pgs. 7405205050. Retrieved 10/14/2020, from REHABDATA database.
No comments:
Post a Comment