| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
III STEP Series |
SL Wolf, PT, PhD, FAPTA, FAHA, is Professor, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine and Department of Medicine and Cell Biology, Emory University School of Medicine, 1441 Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322 (USA); and Professor of Health and Elder Care, Nell Hodgson Woodruff School of Nursing, Rehabilitation Research and Development Center, Atlanta VA Medical Center
Address all correspondence to Dr Wolf at: swolf{at}emory.edu
Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) has gained considerable popularity as a valuable treatment for a hemiparetic upper extremity. This approach is compatible with the emerging notion that task-oriented or functionally oriented retraining of the impaired limb provides evidence to support its utility. This article first provides a historical perspective on the development of CIMT. An overview model of how learned nonuse of the hemiparetic limb occurs and can be overcome with CIMT is discussed, and then a more detailed model that incorporates critical issues requiring considerably more basic and applied scientific exploration is described. Among the issues considered are the extent to which hemiparetic limb nonuse and subsequent modes of delivery to overcome it are governed by structure-function deficits rather than being attributable primarily to behavioral phenomena; the relative importance of the intensity of training; the need to better balance unimanual and bimanual upper-extremity task practice; the role of psychosocial and cultural factors in fostering patient compliance; the optimization of modes of delivery; and the reevaluation of the constellation of components contributing to successful outcomes with this treatment. Finally, the strengths, uncertainties, and limitations associated with CIMT are examined.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  H.-h. Huang, L. Fetters, J. Hale, and A. McBride Bound for Success: A Systematic Review of Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy in Children With Cerebral Palsy Supports Improved Arm and Hand Use Physical Therapy, November 1, 2009; 89(11): 1126 - 1141. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. L. Wolf On "Effects of forced use on arm function in the subacute phase..." Hammer AM, Lindmark B. Phys Ther. 2009;89:526-539. Physical Therapy, September 1, 2009; 89(9): 993 - 995. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K.-c. Lin, Y.-f. Chang, C.-y. Wu, and Y.-a. Chen Effects of Constraint-Induced Therapy Versus Bilateral Arm Training on Motor Performance, Daily Functions, and Quality of Life in Stroke Survivors Neurorehabil Neural Repair, June 1, 2009; 23(5): 441 - 448. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Charles Invited Commentary Physical Therapy, June 1, 2009; 89(6): 542 - 544. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. Hammer and B. Lindmark Effects of Forced Use on Arm Function in the Subacute Phase After Stroke: A Randomized, Clinical Pilot Study Physical Therapy, June 1, 2009; 89(6): 526 - 539. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K.-c. Lin, Y.-h. Huang, Y.-w. Hsieh, and C.-y. Wu Potential Predictors of Motor and Functional Outcomes After Distributed Constraint-Induced Therapy for Patients With Stroke Neurorehabil Neural Repair, May 1, 2009; 23(4): 336 - 342. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Page and P. Levine Author Response Physical Therapy, May 1, 2008; 88(5): 684 - 688. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. L Behrman and P. Plummer-D'Amato "What's in a Name?" Revisited Physical Therapy, January 1, 2008; 88(1): 6 - 9. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
