Deans' stroke musings: Forced Use of the Upper Extremity in Chronic Stroke Patients : Results From a Single-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Sunday, April 6, 2025

Forced Use of the Upper Extremity in Chronic Stroke Patients : Results From a Single-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

I would have totally rebelled against this since I wouldn't be able to eat, dress or go to the bathroom. It is truly only meant for those with some movement in fingers and arm. Spasticity prevents all that for me. My first need is getting spasticity cured!

Forced Use of the Upper Extremity in Chronic Stroke Patients : Results From a Single-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Johanna H. van der Lee, MD; Robert C. Wagenaar, PhD; Gustaaf J. Lankhorst, MD, PhD; Tanneke W. Vogelaar, PT; Walter L. Deville ´, MD; Lex M. Bouter, PhD

Background and Purpose

Of all stroke survivors, 30% to 66% are unable to use their affected arm in performing activities of daily living. Although forced use therapy appears to improve arm function in chronic stroke patients, there is no conclusive evidence. This study evaluates the effectiveness of forced use therapy.

Methods

In an observer-blinded randomized clinical trial, 66 chronic stroke patients were allocated to either forced use therapy (immobilization of the unaffected arm combined with intensive training) or a reference therapy of equally intensive bimanual training, based on Neuro-Developmental Treatment, (Also known as Bobath), for a period of 2 weeks. Outcomes were evaluated on the basis of the Rehabilitation Activities Profile (activities), the Action Research Arm (ARA) test (dexterity), the upper extremity section of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment scale, the Motor Activity Log (MAL), and a Problem Score. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was determined at the onset of the study.

Hopefully you aren't using it - NDT(Bobath) anymore in stroke rehab when it should have been shitcanned since 2003? Physiotherapy Based on the Bobath Concept for Adults with Post-Stroke Hemiplegia: A Review of Effectiveness Studies 2003)

Results

One week after the last treatment session, a significant difference in effectiveness in favor of the forced use group compared with the bimanual group (corrected for baseline differences) was found for the ARA score (3.0 points; 95% CI, 1.3 to 4.8; MCID, 5.7 points) and the MAL amount of use score (0.52 points; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.93; MCID, 0.50). The other parameters revealed no significant differential effects. One-year follow-up effects were observed only for the ARA. The differences in treatment effect for the ARA and the MAL amount of use scores were clinically relevant for patients with sensory disorders and hemineglect, respectively.

Conclusions

The present study showed a small but lasting effect of forced use therapy on the dexterity of the affected arm (ARA) and a temporary clinically relevant effect on the amount of use of the affected arm during activities of daily living (MAL amount of use). The effect of forced use therapy was clinically relevant in the subgroups of patients with sensory disorders and hemineglect, respectively. (Stroke. 1999;30:2369-2375.