About this item:
1,184 Views | 1,233 Downloads
Author Notes:
Correspondence should be addressed to Aimee P. Reiss, aimee.reiss@emory.edu
Academic Editor: Agnès Roby-Brami
Subject:
Research Funding:
Portions of this work were funded by NIH Grant HD37606 from the National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research and the National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Stroke.
Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy (CIMT): Current Perspectives and Future Directions
Abstract:
Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) has gained considerable popularity as a treatment technique for upper extremity rehabilitation among patients with mild-to-moderate stroke. While substantial evidence has emerged to support its applicability, issues remain unanswered regarding the best and most practical approach. Following the establishment of what can be called the “signature” CIMT approach characterized by intense clinic/laboratory-based practice, several distributed forms of training, collectively known as modified constraint therapy (mCIMT), have emerged. There is a need to examine the strengths and limitations of such approaches, and based upon such information, develop the components of a study that would compare the signature approach to the best elements of mCIMT, referred to here as “alternative” CIMT. Based upon a PEDro review of literature, limitations in mCIMT studies for meeting criteria were identified and discussed. A suggestion for a “first effort” at a comparative study that would both address such limitations while taking practical considerations into account is provided.
Copyright information:
© 2012 Aimee P. Reiss et al.
This is an Open Access work distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
