2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jht.2019.12.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modified constraint-induced movement therapy during hospitalization in children with perinatal brachial plexus palsy: A randomized controlled trial

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…They concluded that after six months of systematic therapy, the AROM was close to normal, and the patient achieved Grade 5 muscle power [ 18 ]. In their study, Eren et al discovered that mCIMT promotes more functional improvements than traditional rehabilitation programs and improves forearm supination and elbow flexion AROMs, forearm supination function, gross motor abilities, and handgrip strength of the afflicted limb [ 19 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They concluded that after six months of systematic therapy, the AROM was close to normal, and the patient achieved Grade 5 muscle power [ 18 ]. In their study, Eren et al discovered that mCIMT promotes more functional improvements than traditional rehabilitation programs and improves forearm supination and elbow flexion AROMs, forearm supination function, gross motor abilities, and handgrip strength of the afflicted limb [ 19 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[ 34 ] In a randomized controlled study of 39 patients by Eren et al, it was concluded that mCIMT was effective in improving functional status and was recommended for use in routine clinical practice. [ 35 ]…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It should be performed six or seven days a week, while the splint that restricts the healthy limb should remain for several hours a day (e.g. for six hours as indicated by Eren) [12] . More clinical studies are needed for safe conclusions regarding the efficacy of a particular method.…”
Section: Discussion-conclusionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results showed significant improvement in both groups, with a remarkable superiority of the intervention group in restoring the function and mobility of the affected upper limb (Mallet scale measurements before and after the intervention: abduction from 3.06 ± 0.59 to 4.26 ± 0.45, p = .001, external rotation from 2.66 ± 0.48 to 4.06 ± 0.25, p = .001, hand to neck from 2.40 ± 0.50 to 3.93 ± 0.59, p < .001, hand to spine from 2.40 ± 0.50 to 4.13 ± 0.35, p < .001, hand to mouth from 2.73 ± 0.79 to 4.26 ± 0.45, p < .001). The recent single blind randomized study by Eren et al [12] aims to compare the effect of CIMT and conventional physiotherapy on the function of the affected upper limb. The 39 patients who participated were divided into two groups.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%