Activity-Based Therapies

被引：49

作者：

Dromerick A.W. ^{[1
,3
]}

Lum P.S. ^{[2
,3
]}

Hidler J. ^{[2
,3
]}

机构：

[1] Departments of Rehabilitation Medicine and Neurology, Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC

[2] Department of Biomedical Engineering, Catholic University, Washington, DC

[3] National Rehabilitation Hospital, Washington, DC

来源：

NeuroRX | 2006年 / 3卷 / 4期

关键词：

cerebrovascular accident; clinical trials; Rehabilitation; review; spinal cord injuries;

D O I：

10.1016/j.nurx.2006.07.004

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Therapeutic activity is a mainstay of clinical neurorehabilitation, but is typically unstructured and directed at compensation rather than restoration of central nervous system function. Newer activity-based therapies (ABTs) are in early stages of development and testing. The ABTs attempt to restore function via standardized therapeutic activity based on principles of experimental psychology, exercise physiology, and neuroscience. Three of the best developed ABTs are constraint-induced therapy, robotic therapy directed at the hemiplegic arm, and treadmill training techniques aimed at improving gait in persons with stroke and spinal cord injury. These treatments appear effective in improving arm function and gait, but they have not yet been clearly demonstrated to be more effective than equal amounts of traditional techniques. Resistance training is clearly demonstrated to improve strength in persons with stroke and brain injury, and most studies show that it does not increase hypertonia. Clinical trials of ABTs face several methodological challenges. These challenges include defining dosage, standardizing treatment parameters across subjects and within treatment sessions, and determining what constitutes clinically significant treatment effects. The long-term goal is to develop prescriptive ABT, where specific activities are proven to treat specific motor system disorders. Activity-based therapies are not a cure, but are likely to play an important role in future treatment cocktails for stroke and spinal cord injury. © 2006 The American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics, Inc.

引用

页码：428 / 438

页数：10

共 87 条

[31]

Dromerick A.W., Evidence-based rehabilitation. The case for and against constraint-induced movement therapy, J Rehabil Res Dev, 40, (2003)

[32]

van der Lee J.H., Wagenaar R.C., Lankhorst G.J., Vogelaar T.W., Deville W.L., Bouter L.M., Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients, Stroke, 30, pp. 2369-2375, (1999)

[33]

Page S.J., Sisto S., Levine P., McGrath R.E., Efficacy of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial, Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 85, pp. 14-18, (2004)

[34]

Parry R.H., Lincoln N.B., Vass C.D., Effect of severity of arm impairment on response to additional physiotherapy early after stroke, Clin Rehabil, 13, pp. 187-198, (1999)

[35]

Hesse S., Schmidt H., Werner C., Bardeleben A., Upper and lower extremity robotic devices for rehabilitation and for studying motor control, Curr Opin Neurol, 16, pp. 705-710, (2003)

[36]

Krebs H.I., Hogan N., Aisen M.L., Volpe B.T., Robot-aided neurorehabilitation, IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng, 6, pp. 75-87, (1998)

[37]

Volpe B.T., Ferraro M., Lynch D., Et al., Robotics and other devices in the treatment of patients recovering from stroke, Curr Atheroscler Rep, 6, pp. 314-319, (2004)

[38]

Ferraro M., Palazzolo J.J., Krol J., Krebs H.I., Hogan N., Volpe B.T., Robot-aided sensorimotor arm training improves outcome in patients with chronic stroke, Neurology, 61, pp. 1604-1607, (2003)

[39]

Fasoli S.E., Krebs H.I., Stein J., Frontera W.R., Hogan N., Effects of robotic therapy on motor impairment and recovery in chronic stroke, Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 84, pp. 477-482, (2003)

[40]

Reinkensmeyer D.J., Dewald J.P., Rymer W.Z., Guidance-based quantification of arm impairment following brain injury: a pilot study, IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng, 7, pp. 1-11, (1999)

← 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 →