3.8 Article

HandTutorTM Enhanced Hand Rehabilitation after Stroke - A Pilot Study

Journal

PHYSIOTHERAPY RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
Volume 16, Issue 4, Pages 191-200

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pri.485

Keywords

augmented feedback; hand; rehabilitation; stroke

Categories

Funding

  1. Meditouch Ltd.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Purpose. This study assessed the potential therapeutic benefit of using HandTutor (TM) in combination with traditional rehabilitation in a post-stroke sub-acute population. The study compares an experimental group receiving traditional therapy combined with HandTutor (TM) treatment, against a control group receiving only traditional therapy. Method. An assessor-blinded, randomized controlled pilot trial, was conducted in the Reuth rehabilitation unit in Israel. Thirty-one stroke patients in the sub-acute phase, were randomly assigned to one of the two groups (experimental or control) in sets of three. The experimental group (n = 16) underwent a hand rehabilitation programme using the HandTutor (TM) combined with traditional therapy. The control group (n = 15) received only traditional therapy. The treatment schedules for both groups were of similar duration and frequency. Improvements were evaluated using three indicators: 1) The Brunnstrom-Fugl-Meyer (FM) test, 2) the Box and Blocks (B&B) test and 3) improvement parameters as determined by the HandTutor (TM) software. Results. Following 15 consecutive treatment sessions, a significant improvement was observed within the experimental group (95% confidence intervals) compared with the control group: B&B p = 0.015; FM p = 0.041, HandTutor (TM) performance accuracy on x axis and performance accuracy on y axis p < 0.0003. Conclusion. The results from this pilot study support further investigation of the use of the HandTutor (TM) in combination with traditional occupational therapy and physiotherapy during post stroke hand function rehabilitation. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available