A comparetive study on the effects of mirror therapy and bilateral arm training  on hand function of chronichemiparetic patients

How to Cite:mona siminghalamMohammad Amoozadeh KhaliliMona SiminghalamAfshin SamaeiA comparetive study on the effects of mirror therapy and bilateral arm training on hand function of chronichemiparetic patients.koomesh.17(3):e151205.

Abstract

Introduction: Upper limb chronic hemiparesis is one of the most important factors creating functional disability in stroke patients and therefore several alternative treatments have been proposed with the aim of early restoring upper limb function. Mirror therapy is one of these treatments and the effect of this method has not been evaluated yet in compare with the other methods. Therefore, in this study we compared this method with the effect of bilateral arm training in chronic hemiparetic patients on hand function. Materials and methods: In this randomized double blind clinical trial, 24 stroke patients were selected by systematic sampling and were placed in two groups of bilateral arm training (12 patients) and mirror therapy (12 patients). Treatment programs consisted of 15 sessions (5 days per week), including 30-minute bimanual training program with mirror for the mirror therapy group and 30 minutes bimanual exercises without mirror for the bilateral arm training group. Patients were assessed by Fuglmayer test for hand function, Box & Block test of dexterity for fine movements of upper extremity and Jamar Dynamometer for the power of the upper extremity before and after treatment and after one month follow up period after treatment. Results: Data showed that the mean scores obtained from the mirror therapy group immediately after therapy and after the follow up period for hand function and fine movements and power variables were significantly higher than those obtained from the bilateral arm training group (P> 0.05). Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that mirror therapy may be more effective method for improving hand functions in stroke patients during the chronic phase of recovery

Keywords

References

1.
Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott MH. Motor control: translating research into clinical practice: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007.
2.
Haley WE, Allen JY, Grant JS, Clay OJ, Perkins M, Roth DL. Problems and benefits reported by stroke family caregivers results from a prospective epidemiological study. Stroke 2009; 40: 2129-33.
3.
Stewart KC, Cauraugh JH, Summers JJ. Bilateral movement training and stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurol Sci 2006; 244: 89-95.
4.
Pang MY, Eng JJ. Muscle strength is a determinant of bone mineral content in the hemiparetic upper extremity: implications for stroke rehabilitation. Bone 2005; 37: 103-111.
5.
Samuelkamaleshkumar S, Reethajanetsureka S, Pauljebaraj P, Benshamir B, Padankatti SM, David JA. Mirror therapy enhances motor performance in the paretic upper limb after stroke: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2014; 95: 2000-2005.
6.
Ramachandran VS, Rogers-Ramachandran D, Cobb S. Touching the phantom limb. Nature 1995; 377: 489-490.
7.
Ezendam D, Bongers RM, Jannink MJ. Systematic review of the effectiveness of mirror therapy in upper extremity function. Disabil Rehabil 2009; 31: 2135-2149.
8.
Rothgangel AS, Braun SM, Beurskens AJ, Seitz RJ, Wade DT. The clinical aspects of mirror therapy in rehabilitation: a systematic review of the literature. Intern J Rehabil Res 2011; 34: 1-13.
9.
Altschuler EL, Wisdom SB, Stone L, Foster C, Galasko D, Llewellyn DME, Ramachandran VS. Rehabilitation of hemiparesis after stroke with a mirror. The Lancet 1999; 353: 2035-2036.
10.
Lee MM, Cho H-y, Song CH. The mirror therapy program enhances upper-limb motor recovery and motor function in acute stroke patients. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2012; 91: 689-700.
11.
Kim H, Lee G, Song C. Effect of functional electrical stimulation with mirror therapy on upper extremity motor function in poststroke patients. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2014; 23: 655-661.
12.
Duncan PW, Propst M, Nelson SG. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor recovery following cerebrovascular accident. Phys Ther 1983; 63: 1606-1610.
13.
Bellace JV, Healy D, Besser MP, Byron T, Hohman L. Validity of the dexter evaluation system's jamar dynamometer attachment for assessment of hand grip strength in a normal population. J Hand Ther 2000; 13: 46-51.
14.
Desrosiers J, Bravo G, Hebert R, Dutil E, Mercier L. Validation of the box and block test as a measure of dexterity of elderly people: reliability, validity, and norms studies. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994; 75: 751-755.
15.
Stevens JA, Stoykov ME. Using motor imagery in the rehabilitation of hemiparesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003; 84: 1090-1092.
16.
Sathian K, Greenspan AI, Wolf SL. Doing it with mirrors: a case study of a novel approach to neurorehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2000; 14: 73-76.
17.
Stevens JA, Stoykov ME. Simulation of bilateral movement training through mirror reflection: a case report demonstrating an occupational therapy technique for hemiparesis. Top Stroke Rehabil 2004; 11: 59-66.
18.
Kelly C, Foxe JJ, Garavan H. Patterns of normal human brain plasticity after practice and their implications for neurorehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006; 87: 20-29.
19.
Rioult-Pedotti M-S, Donoghue JP. The nature and mechanisms of plasticity. S Boniface & U Ziemann (Eds), Plasticity in the human nervous system 2003: 1-25.
20.
Ertelt D, Small S, Solodkin A, Dettmers C, McNamara A, Binkofski F, Buccino G. Action observation has a positive impact on rehabilitation of motor deficits after stroke. Neuroimage 2007; 36: T164-T173.

comments