title: Study to assess the effectiveness of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke subjects: A randomized controlled trial.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of modified constraint induced movement therapy (m-CIMT) in stroke subjects.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of forty sub-acute stroke subjects were randomly assigned to either a m-CIMT (n = 20) or in a control group (n = 20). The m-CIMT group (14 men, 6 women; mean age = 55.2 years) consisted of structured 2 h therapy sessions emphasizing affected arm use, occurring 5 times/week for 2 weeks. A mitt was used to restrain the unaffected arm for 10 h/day for 2 week. The control group (11 men, 9 women; mean age = 56.4 years) consisted of conventional rehabilitation for time-matched exercise program. The outcome measures were evaluated at pre- and post-intervention by using the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) and Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA) of motor recovery after stroke.
  
  
  RESULTS
  After intervention significant effects were observed in m-CIMT group on WMFT (pre-test and post-test score was 28.04 ± 6.58, 13.59 ± 2.86; P =0.003). Similarly on FMA (pre- and post-test score was 31.15 ± 6.37, 55.7 ± 6.4; P = 0.00).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  There is a significant improvem ent in upper extremity function so it indicates that m-CIMT is effective in improving the motor function of the affected arm in stroke subjects. However, its long-term effect has not proved since there was no follow-up after intervention.
authors: Department of Physiotherapy, Sikkim Manipal Institute of Medical Sciences, Sikkim Manipal University, Sikkim, India.
authors: Priyanka
authors: P
authors: Singh
authors: Bijayeta
authors: B
authors: Pradhan
keywords: Constraint induced movement therapy; exercise; rehabilitation; stroke
references: Trends Cogn Sci. 2000 Nov 1;4(11):423-431
references: 11058820
references: Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007 Jan-Feb;21(1):14-24
references: 17172550
references: Phys Ther. 2007 Sep;87(9):1212-23
references: 17609329
references: Lancet Neurol. 2008 Jan;7(1):33-40
references: 18077218
references: Osteoporos Int. 2007 Sep;18(9):1243-52
references: 17401512
references: Stroke. 2005 Jun;36(6):1172-7
references: 15890987
references: J Rehabil Res Dev. 2001 Sep-Oct;38(5):583-90
references: 11732835
references: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 Jan;85(1):14-8
references: 14970962
references: Stroke. 1994 Feb;25(2):514-7
references: 8303767
references: Stroke. 2004 Nov;35(11 Suppl 1):2699-701
references: 15375308
references: Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2005 Mar;19(1):27-32
references: 15673841
references: Clin Rehabil. 2002 Feb;16(1):55-60
references: 11837526
references: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993 Apr;74(4):347-54
references: 8466415
references: J Neurophysiol. 1998 Dec;80(6):3321-5
references: 9862925
references: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Oct;83(10):1374-7
references: 12370871
references: Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Nov;81(11):870-5
references: 12394999
references: J Adv Nurs. 2007 Dec;60(6):577-94
references: 18039245
references: Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2002 Sep;16(3):290-5
references: 12234091
references: JAMA. 2006 Nov 1;296(17):2095-104
references: 17077374
references: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Feb;83(2):286-90
references: 11833037
references: Stroke. 1999 Nov;30(11):2369-75
references: 10548673
references: J Neurophysiol. 1996 May;75(5):2144-9
references: 8734610
references: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001 Jun;82(6):750-5
references: 11387578
references: Phys Ther. 1999 Sep;79(9):847-53
references: 10479785
references: Exp Neurol. 1989 May;104(2):125-32
references: 2707361
references: Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006 Aug;87(8):1052-8
references: 16876549
references: Somatosens Mot Res. 1998;15(3):173-89
references: 9874517
references: J Neurophysiol. 1998 Feb;79(2):1117-23
references: 9463469
references: Stroke. 2000 Jun;31(6):1210-6
references: 10835434
references: Aust J Physiother. 2005;51(4):221-31
references: 16321129