Effectiveness of Modified Constraint-induced Movement Therapy and Self-regulation Learning for Children With Hemiplegic Cerebral Palsy
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Cerebral Palsy
- Sponsor
- University of Western Sydney
- Enrollment
- 10
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Change in Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency
- Status
- Completed
- Last Updated
- 9 years ago
Overview
Brief Summary
This study examines the effect of combining modified constraint-induced movement therapy (mCIMT) and self-regulation (SR) in promoting upper limb function of children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy (CP) studying in a school-based setting.
Detailed Description
Children diagnosed with hemiplegic CP are involved. A within-subject design is used with children acting as their own controls. The study is scheduled at three-week intervals. All children undergo conventional occupational therapy (OT) and modified constraint-induced movement therapy plus self-regulation (mCIMT + SR) program in a random order. Both programs last for three weeks. Each program is followed by a three-week no-treatment period to measure the carry-over effect. The OT program consists of training on unimanual and bimanual tasks for 1 to 2 hours a week with daily home exercise. The mCIMT + SR program involves restraint of the unaffected upper limb of children using a cotton sling for 6 hours per day for 15 days. A one-hour structured task practice with the use of SR is provided during each 6-hour restraint. The Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, the Jebsen-Taylor Test of Hand Function, the Caregiver Functional Use Survey, a hand dynamometer, pinch gauge, and modified Ashworth scale are used for evaluation. All children are assessed for five times at 3-week interval: once before and twice after the conventional OT; and twice after the mCIMT + SR at 1 week and at 3 weeks. Before and after the three-week intervention, the children participate in event-related potentials (ERP) sessions with a choice reaction task. Event-related potentials (ERP) technique is used to capture the changes in neural mechanism after intervention.
Investigators
Karen Liu
Associate Professor
University of Western Sydney
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •children with diagnosis of hemiplegic CP,
- •6-18 years of age studying at local special school for students with physical handicap (PH),
- •intelligence ranging from normal to mild grade mental retardation,
- •the ability to extend the wrist at least 20° and the metacarpophalangeal joint 10° from full flexion, and
- •no balance problems sufficient to compromise safety.
Exclusion Criteria
- •any health problems that were not associated with CP, and
- •severe muscle tone with modified Ashworth scale scored greater than 3.
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Change in Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency
Time Frame: Assessment 1 (before intervention 1); Assessment 2 (after intervention 1); Assessment 3 (3 weeks after no treatment period and before intervention 2); Assessment 4 (after intervention 2); Assessment 5 (3 weeks after no treatment) (refer to description)
Subtest 5 ((upper-limb coordination) and subtext 8 (speed and dexterity), testing the upper limb function are used. Time frame: Assessment 1 (within two days before intervention 1); Assessment 2 (within two days after the three-week intervention 1); Assessment 3 (3 weeks after no treatment period and before intervention 2); Assessment 4 (two days after the three-week intervention 2); Assessment 5 (3 weeks after no treatment)
Change in Jebsen-Taylor Test of Hand Funcion
Time Frame: Assessment 1 (before intervention 1); Assessment 2 (after intervention 1); Assessment 3 (3 weeks after no treatment period and before intervention 2); Assessment 4 (after intervention 2); Assessment 5 (3 weeks after no treatment) (refer to description)
It assesses hand function using seven unimanual tasks: writing, turning cards over, picking up small commonly encountered objects, simulated eating, stacking checker, and moving light and heavy cans. Time frame: Assessment 1 (within two days before intervention 1); Assessment 2 (within two days after the three-week intervention 1); Assessment 3 (3 weeks after no treatment period and before intervention 2); Assessment 4 (two days after the three-week intervention 2); Assessment 5 (3 weeks after no treatment)
Secondary Outcomes
- Change in Grip strength(Assessment 1 (before intervention 1); Assessment 2 (after intervention 1); Assessment 3 (3 weeks after no treatment period and before intervention 2); Assessment 4 (after intervention 2); Assessment 5 (3 weeks after no treatment) (refer to description))
- Change in Caregiver Functional Use Survey(Assessment 1 (before intervention 1); Assessment 2 (after intervention 1); Assessment 3 (3 weeks after no treatment period and before intervention 2); Assessment 4 (after intervention 2); Assessment 5 (3 weeks after no treatment) (refer to description))
- Change in Pinch strength(Assessment 1 (before intervention 1); Assessment 2 (after intervention 1); Assessment 3 (3 weeks after no treatment period and before intervention 2); Assessment 4 (after intervention 2); Assessment 5 (3 weeks after no treatment) (refer to description))
- Change in Modified Ashworth scale(Assessment 1 (before intervention 1); Assessment 2 (after intervention 1); Assessment 3 (3 weeks after no treatment period and before intervention 2); Assessment 4 (after intervention 2); Assessment 5 (3 weeks after no treatment) (refer to description))