اثر محدودیت درمانی اجباری در بهبود عملکرد دست بیماران سکته مغزی: مرور ادغام یافته

شفیعی, زهرا; رصافیانی, مهدی; رضائی, مهدی

doi:10.22037/jrm.2013.1100117

اثر محدودیت درمانی اجباری در بهبود عملکرد دست بیماران سکته مغزی: مرور ادغام یافته

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

¹ دانشجوی کارشناس ارشد آموزش پزشکی، دانشکده آموزش پزشکی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شهید بهشتی تهران ، ایران

² دکترای کاردرمانی، عضو هیئت علمی و مدیر گروه کاردرمانی دانشگاه علوم بهزیستی و توانبخشی

³ دانشجوی دکترای کاردرمانی، عضو هیئت علمی گروه آموزش کاردرمانی دانشکده علوم توانبخشی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شهید بهشتی

10.22037/jrm.2013.1100117

چکیده

مقدمه و اهداف
هدف از محدودیت اجباری، پیشرفت استفاده از اندامی است که به دنبال سکته مغزی دچار اختلال عملکردی شده است. در محدودیت اجباری برای درمان اندام فوقانی، اندام کمتر آسیب دیده برای چندین ساعت در روز به مدت 2 هفته متوالی محدود می شود. هدف از این مطالعه بررسی اثر محدودیت اجباری در بهبود عملکرد دست بیماران سکته مغزی با استفاده از مرور مقالات چاپ شده در بین سالهای 2000 تا 2013 است.
مواد و روش ها
روش مرور ادغام یافته برای بررسی مطالعاتی که در زمینه اثر بخشی محدودیت درمانی اجباری در بهبود عملکرد دست بیماران سکته مغزی در بین سالهای 2000 تا 2013 صورت گرفته انجام شد. در این مرور سایت های ایرانی SID و Magiran و سایت های خارجیPedro- OT BibSys- OT seeker- OTDbase- Science direct- Pub med- Elsevier مورد بررسی قرار گرفتند و برای آنالیز محتوای مقالات از رویکرد کیفی استفاده شد.
نتیجه گیری
بالغ بر 268 مقاله در زمینه سکته مغزی و عملکرد اندام فوقانی یافت شد. 200 مقاله به دلیل عدم همخوانی موضوعی و پرداختن به روشهای مختلف بهبود عملکرد اندام فوقانی مانند: دارویی ، فیزیوتراپی و رویکردهای کاردرمانی حذف شد. 68 مقاله باقی مانده در زمینه بهبود عملکرد دست بیماران سکته مغزی بودند که از این تعداد، 43 مقاله اختصاصاً به بررسی حرکت درمانی ناشی از محدودیت پرداخته بودند از بین آنها 9 مقاله به دلیل انجام محدودیت درمانی در بیمارانی غیر از سکته مغزی مانند فلج مغزی، ضربه های مغزی و انجام آزمایش روی موش آزمایشگاهی از مطالعه خارج شدند. نهایتاً 36 مقاله با توجه به معیار های ورود انتخاب شدند.
این مرور با تجمیع نتایج مطالعات انجام شده نشان داد که محدودیت درمانی در همه مراحل حاد، تحت حاد و مزمن بیماری با پیش فرض وجود حرکات اکستنشن اکتیو در انگشتان و مچ و حرکات پسیو حداقل 90 درجه فلکشن و ابداکشن در شانه و 45 درجه چرخش خارجی شانه و 45 درجه سوپینیشن و پرونیشن در ساعد و داشتن عملکرد شناختی مناسب(ارزیابی عملکرد شناختی MMSE=20 to 24 ) قابل اجراست و نسبت به درمانهای روتین توانبخشی در بهبود توانایی های عملکردی اندام فوقانی بیماران سکته مغزی و غلبه بر سندرم عدم استفاده آموخته شده موثرتر است. ولی تاثیر آن در کینماتیک حرکات و کیفیت زندگی نیاز به بررسی های بیشتری دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Effects of Constraint- Induced Movement Therapy (CIMT) on improvement of upper-limb and hand function in stroke patients: an integrative review

نویسندگان [English]

Zahra shafiee ¹
Mehdi Rassafiani ²
Mehdee Rezaee ³

¹ MSc of Medical Education, Shahid Beheshti University Of Medical Sciences. Tehran. IranIran

² Assistant Professor Director of the Research Committee IROTA Delegate to WFOT (First Alter) Department of Occupational Therapy, The University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences ,Tehran, Iran

³ Member Of Occupational Therapy Department, Faculty Of Rehabilitation Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University Of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

Background and Aim: The aim of constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) is improving use of the upper limb that is functionally impaired after stroke. In CIMT to treat the use of upper limb impairment, application of the less severely affected arm is restricted for many hours each weekday over 2 consecutive weeks. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of constraint-induced movement therapy on improvement of upper limb and hand function in stroke patients by integrative review of published articles since 2000- 2013.
Materials and Methods: An integrative review of published articles regarding the effectiveness of constraint- induced movement therapy in promotion of hand function in stroke patients since 2000- 2013 was used in this study. We reviewed Iranian databases such as SID and MagIran and foreign databases such as Pedro, OT Bib Sys, OT seeker, OTD base, Sciencedirect, Pubmed, Elsevier. We used a qualitative approach for content analysis.
Results: Over 268 papers were found regarding stroke and upper limb function, 200 articles of those used different ways to improve upper limb function, such as medication, physiotherapy, occupational therapy approaches and were rejected, the remained 68 articles were dedicated to the study of constraint- induced movement therapy. Among these articles, 43 papers were about the effects of constraint induced movement therapy on development of upper extremity. 9 articles were excluded due to using of Constraint Induced Movement Therapy on head injury patients and lab rat. Finally, 36 articles were selected according to the criteria of entry.
Conclusion: The aggregate results of a review of studies showed that constraint induced movement therapy improves function of upper extremity at every stages of stroke (acute, sub acute and chronic) with a prerequisite of having active extension of wrist and finger, passive 90 ° flexion and abduction and 45°external rotation of the shoulder, 45° pronation and supination and having good cognitive function (MMSE =20 to 24). This method is more effective than traditional rehabilitation method in improving upper extremity functional abilities of stroke patients and overcoming the learned nonuse syndrome. But its impact on quality of life and movement kinematics requires further investigations.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

Stroke
Hand function
constraint-induced movement therapy
integrative review

مراجع

Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8(8):741-54.

2. Morris JH, van Wijck F, Joice S, Ogston SA, Cole I, MacWalter RS. A comparison of bilateral and unilateral upper-limb task training in early poststroke rehabilitation: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89(7):1237-45.

3. Suputtitada A, Suwanwela NC, Tumvitee S. Tumvitee, Effectiveness of constraint-induced movement therapy in chronic stroke patients. J Med Assoc Thai. 2004;87(12):1482-90.

4. Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA, Cook EW 3rd, Fleming WC, Nepomuceno CS, Connell JS, Crago JE.

Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74(4):347-54.

5. Dahl A, et al. Short-and long-term outcome of constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke: a randomized controlled feasibility trial. Clin Rehabil. 2008;22(5):436-47.

6. Page SJ, Levine P, Leonard A, Szaflarski JP, Kissela BM. Modified constraint-induced therapy in chronic stroke: results of a single-blinded randomized controlled trial.Phys Ther. 2008;88(3):333-40.

7. Wolf SL. Revisiting constraint-induced movement therapy: are we too smitten with the mitten? Is all nonuse “learned”? and other quandaries. Physical Therapy, 2007; 87(9): 1212-1223.

8. Broome, ME. Integrative literature reviews for the development of concepts. Concept development in nursing: foundations, techniques and applications. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Company, 2000: p. 231-50.

9. Pendelton H M, Schultz Krohn W. Pedretti’s occupational therapy practice skills for physical dysfunction, sixth edition, Elsevier science Division 2006. chapter30.

10. Levy CE, et al. Functional MRI evidence of cortical reorganization in upper-limb stroke hemiplegia treated with constraint-induced movement therapy. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;80(1):4-12.

11. Peurala, SH, et al. Effectiveness of constraint-induced movement therapy on activity and participation after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Rehabil. 2012;26(3):209-23.

12. McIntyre A, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of constraint-induced movement therapy in the hemiparetic upper extremity more than six months post stroke. Topics in stroke rehabilitation, 2012; 19(6): 499-513.

13. Stevenson T, et al. Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Compared to Dose-Matched Interventions for Upper-Limb Dysfunction in Adult Survivors of Stroke: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis. Physiotherapy Canada, 2012;64(4): 397-413.

14. Nijland R, et al. Constraint‐induced movement therapy for the upper paretic limb in acute or sub‐acute stroke: a systematic review. International Journal of Stroke, 2011;6(5): 425-433.

15. Hakkennes S. Keating JL. Constraint-induced movement therapy following stroke: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Aust J Physiother. 2005;51(4):221-31.

16. Bonaiuti, DL, Rebasti P, Sioli. The constraint induced movement therapy: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials on the adult stroke patients. Eura Medicophys. 2007;43(2):139-46.

17. Corbetta D, et al. Constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2010;46(4):537-44.

18. Bjorklund A, Fecht A. The effectiveness of constraint-induced therapy as a stroke intervention: a meta-analysis. Occup Ther Health Care. 2006;20(2):31-49

19. Shi, YX, et al. Modified constraint-induced movement therapy versus traditional rehabilitation in patients with upper-extremity dysfunction after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(6):972-82

20. Wu CY, Chen CL, Tang SF, Lin KC, Huang YY. Kinematic and clinical analyses of upper-extremity movements after constraint-induced movement therapy in patients with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(8):964-70.

21. Boake, C., et al., Constraint-induced movement therapy during early stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007;21(1):14-24.

22. Wu CY, Lin KC, Chen HC, Chen IH, Hong WH. Effects of modified constraint-induced movement therapy on movement kinematics and daily function in patients with stroke: a kinematic study of motor control mechanisms. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007;21(5):460-6.

23. Treger I, Aidinof L, Lehrer H, Kalichman L. Modified constraint-induced movement therapy improved upper limb function in subacute poststroke patients: a small-scale clinical trial. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2012;19(4):287-93

24. Brunner IC, Skouen JS, Strand LI. Is modified constraint-induced movement therapy more effective than bimanual training in improving arm motor function in the subacute phase post stroke? A randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil. 2012;26(12):1078-86.

25. Hayner K, Gibson G, Giles GM. Comparison of constraint-induced movement therapy and bilateral treatment of equal intensity in people with chronic upper-extremity dysfunction after cerebrovascular accident. Am J Occup Ther. 2010;64(4):528-39.

26. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Thompson PA, Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris D, Blanton S, Nichols-Larsen D, Clark PC. Retention of upper limb function in stroke survivors who have received constraint-induced movement therapy: the EXCITE randomised trial. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7(1):33-40.

27. Zhong-ling G., Effects of constraint induced movement therapy (CIMT) on upper limb functional recovery improvement in patients with hemiplegic stroke. Medical Journal of Chinese People's Health, 2011. 16: p. 006.

28. Askim T. Indredavik B. Outcomes 12 months after a constraint induced movement therapy program were maintained for an additional year. Aust J Physiother. 2008;54(2):141.

29. Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Hahn M. Does the application of constraint-induced movement therapy during acute rehabilitation reduce arm impairment after ischemic stroke? Stroke. 2000;31(12):2984-8.

30. McCall M, McEwen S, Colantonio A, Streiner D, Dawson DR. Modified constraint-induced movement therapy for elderly clients with subacute stroke. Am J Occup Ther. 2011;65(4):409-18.

31. Bonifer NM, Anderson KM, Arciniegas DB. Constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke: efficacy for patients with minimal upper-extremity motor ability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(9):1867-73.

32. Leung DP, Ng AK, Fong KN. Effect of small group treatment of the modified constraint induced movement therapy for clients with chronic stroke in a community setting. Hum Mov Sci. 2009;28(6):798-808.

33. Huang YH, Wu CY, Lin KC, Hsieh YW, Snow WM, Wang TN.Determinants of Change in Stroke-Specific Quality of Life After Distributed Constraint-Induced Therapy. Am J Occup Ther. 2013;67(1):54-63

34. Kitago T, Liang J, Huang VS, Hayes S, Simon P, Tenteromano L, Lazar RM, Marshall RS, Mazzoni P, Lennihan L, Krakauer JW.Improvement After Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Recovery of Normal Motor Control or Task-Specific Compensation? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013;27(2):99-109.35.

35. Könönen M, Tarkka IM, Niskanen E, Pihlajamäki M, Mervaala E, Pitkänen K, Vanninen R. Functional MRI and motor behavioral changes obtained with constraint‐induced movement therapy in chronic stroke. Eur J Neurol. 2012;19(4):578-86.

36. Kalantary M, Shafiee Z. The effects of simultaneous use of task-oriented training and constraint-induced movement therapy on upper limb motor performance in hemiplegic adult patients. J Res Rehabil Sci 2013; 9(2): 253-65. [In Persian]

37. Abdolvahab M, Ghorbani H, Olyaei GR. The time effects of constraint-induced therapy on functions, coordination and movements of upper extremity of adult patients With hemiplegia. mrj 2008, 2(2): 13-19. [In Persian]

38. Wu Cy, et al. Pilot trial of distributed constraint-induced therapy with trunk restraint to improve poststroke reach to grasp and trunk kinematics. Neurorehabilitation and neural repair. 2012; 26(3): 247-255.

39. Gillot AJ, Holder-Walls A, Kurtz JR, Varley NC. Perceptions and experiences of two survivors of stroke who participated in constraint-induced movement therapy home programs. Am J Occup Ther. 2003;57(2):168-76.

40. Rowe VT, Blanton S, Wolf SL.Long-term follow-up after constraint-induced therapy: A case report of a chronic stroke survivor. Am J Occup Ther. 2009;63(3):317-22.

41. Ro T, Noser E, Boake C, Johnson R, Gaber M, Speroni A, Bernstein M, et al. Functional reorganization and recovery after constraint-induced movement therapy in subacute stroke: case reports. Neurocase. 2006;12(1):50-60.

42. Nijland R, van Wegen E, van der Krogt H, Bakker C, Buma F, Klomp A, et al.Characterizing the Protocol for Early Modified Constraint‐induced Movement Therapy in the EXPLICIT‐Stroke Trial. Physiother Res Int. 2013;18(1):1-15.

43. Taub E, Uswatte G, Elbert T. New treatments in neurorehabiliation founded on basic research. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2002;3(3):228-36.

44. Wolf SL, Lecraw DE, Barton LA, Jann BB. Forced use of hemiplegic upper extremities to reverse the effect of learned nonuse among chronic stroke and head-injured patients. Exp Neurol. 1989;104(2):125-32.

45. Fritz SL, Light KE, Patterson TS, Behrman AL, Davis SB. Active finger extension predicts outcomes after constraint-induced movement therapy for individuals with hemiparesis after stroke. Stroke. 2005;36(6):1172-7.

46. Meagher C (2011) Development and pilot evaluation of a web-supported programme of Constraint Induced Therapy following stroke, Available at: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/272682 (Accessed: 2012).

47. Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Blanton S, Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris D, et al.Methods for a multisite randomized trial to investigate the effect of constraint-induced movement therapy in improving upper extremity function among adults recovering from a cerebrovascular stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2003;17(3):137-52.

48. Rowe VT, Blanton S, Wolf SL. Wolf, Long-term follow-up after constraint-induced therapy: A case report of a chronic stroke survivor. Am J Occup Ther. 2009;63(3):317-22.

49. Gillot AJ, Holder-Walls A, Kurtz JR, Varley NC. Perceptions and experiences of two survivors of stroke who participated in constraint-induced movement therapy home programs. Am J Occup Ther. 2003;57(2):168-76.