Effect of mirror therapy on hand of children with cerebral oalsy

The effectiveness of motor learning based mirror therapy on the hand function of 7 to 12-year-old children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

IRCT

Registry ID

IRCT20200224046604N1

Enrollment

Registered

2020-03-15

Start date

2020-04-03

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2020-03-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

cerebral palsy. Hemiplegia and hemiparesis

Interventions

Intervention 1: Intervention group: Motor learning based mirror therapy that is designed based on the principles of motor learning including behavior shaping, types and grading of the tasks and types

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

7 Years to 12 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Diagnosis of partial cerebral palsy Based on the MACS grading scale, participants have the hand function ability to rank 1 to 3. Having at least intelligence 70 based on the Raven's Colored Progressive Matrices

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Health problems unrelated to cerebral palsy Treatment-resistant seizures Visual problems that interfere with the intervention or test. Muscle tone above 3.5 (mean for elbow and wrist joint movements) based on modified Ashworth Scale

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Hand function. Timepoint: Before the intervention, after the intervention, one month after the post-test. Method of measurement: Bruininks-Oseretsky test of motor proficiency, Jebsen–Taylor Hand Function Test.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Grasp strength. Timepoint: Before the intervention, after the intervention, one month after the post-test. Method of measurement: Vigorimeter.;Two-point discrimination. Timepoint: Before the intervention, after the intervention, one month after the post-test. Method of measurement: Two-point discrimination scale.;Active and passive range of motion. Timepoint: Before the intervention, after the intervention, one month after the post-test. Method of measurement: Goniometry.;Parent perception. Timepoint: Before the intervention, after the intervention, one month after the post-test. Method of measurement: Caregiver Functional Use Survey (CFUS).;Visual motor coordination. Timepoint: Caregiver Functional Use Survey (CFUS). Method of measurement: Bruininks-Oseretsky test of motor proficiency.	—

Measure

Time frame

Grasp strength. Timepoint: Before the intervention, after the intervention, one month after the post-test. Method of measurement: Vigorimeter.;Two-point discrimination. Timepoint: Before the intervention, after the intervention, one month after the post-test. Method of measurement: Two-point discrimination scale.;Active and passive range of motion. Timepoint: Before the intervention, after the intervention, one month after the post-test. Method of measurement: Goniometry.;Parent perception. Timepoint: Before the intervention, after the intervention, one month after the post-test. Method of measurement: Caregiver Functional Use Survey (CFUS).;Visual motor coordination. Timepoint: Caregiver Functional Use Survey (CFUS). Method of measurement: Bruininks-Oseretsky test of motor proficiency.

—

Countries

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Contacts

Public ContactHossein Sourtiji

Esfahan University of Medical Sciences

sourtiji@rehab.mui.ac.ir+98 31 3792 5049

Outcome results

None listed

Source: IRCT (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026