Brain Damage, Cerebral Palsy, Traumatic Brain Damage
Conditions
Keywords
brain damage, constraint induced movement therapy, kinematic, function, outcome, Quality of life
Brief summary
This research centers on the comparison of the immediate efficacy (right after therapy) and the maintained efficacy (3 months and 6 months) between Modified Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy (mCIMT) group and control group at different age.
Detailed description
Modified Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy is one of the most recent treatments for children with Brain damage. This well-designed and follow-up RCT study compared home-based CIT with a control intervention (traditional rehabilitation, TR) by combining kinematic analysis and clinical evaluation, which is possible to examine whether functional improvement is accompanied by a change in motor control. We hypothesized that home-based CIT would induce better motor control strategies (shorter RT, MT, lesser MUs, MGA, and PMGA, and larger peak velocity (PV)) for greater functional gains than TR. Furthermore, the beneficial effects would be maintained at 3 and 6 months of follow-up. Findings of this study allow clinicians to understand the underlying motor control changes for functional improvement after home-based CIT.
Interventions
Home based CIT 1. Restriction of the less affected limb 2. Intensive practice using affected limb 3. Positive experience 4. Functional task (task)
Sponsors
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
4 Years to 15 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
1. Development learned-nonuse 2. Age range 4y/o-15y/o 3. Wrist ext 10˚, MP j't ext 10˚ in affected U/E 4. Can fallow up the simple instruction 5. Modified Ashworth Scale ≦2 6. Pediatric Motor Activity Log ≦2.5 (average)
Exclusion criteria
1. Related muscle skeleton surgery 2. Selective dorsal rhizotomy 3. Botulinum toxin in 6 months 4. Visual perception impaired 5. Hearing perception impaired 6. Balance ability impaired (in constrained)
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (BOTMP) | 4 weeks (post-treatment), 12 week, 24 week | All children underwent a series of upper limb assessments, including kinematic analysis and functional measures (primary and secondary outcomes), before the start of the intervention (pretreatment). An occupational therapist blinded to group assignment was trained to administer these measures. All participants underwent these assessments at 4 weeks immediately after intervention (post-treatment), and at 12-week follow-up and 24-week follow-up. |
| Peabody Development Motor Scales, subtest fine motor (PDMS-Ⅱ) | 4 weeks (post-treatment), 12 week, 24 week | — |
| Kinematic analysis | 4 weeks (post-treatment), 12 week, 24 week | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Pediatric Motor Activity Log ( PMAL ) | 4 weeks (post-treatment), 12 week, 24 week | All children underwent a series of upper limb assessments, including kinematic analysis and functional measures (primary and secondary outcomes), before the start of the intervention (pretreatment). An occupational therapist blinded to group assignment was trained to administer these measures. All participants underwent these assessments at 4 weeks immediately after intervention (post-treatment), and at 12-week follow-up and 24-week follow-up. |
| Pediatric Functional Independence Measure ( WeeFIM ) | 4 weeks (post-treatment), 12 week, 24 week | — |
| Cerebral palsy quality of life (CPQoL) | 4 weeks (post-treatment), 12 week, 24 week | — |
Countries
Taiwan
Outcome results
None listed