The Effect of Modified Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy on Spasticity and Motor Function of the Affected Arm in Patients with Chronic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore the effect of modified constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) in a real-world clinical setting on spasticity and functional use of the affected arm and hand in patients with spastic chronic hemiplegia. METHOD: A prospective consecutive quasi-experimental study design was used. Twenty patients with spastic hemiplegia (aged 22-67 years) were tested before and after 2-week modified CIMT in an outpatient rehabilitation clinic and at 6 months. The Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), active range of motion (AROM), grip strength, Motor Activity Log (MAL), Sollerman hand function test, and Box and Block Test (BBT) were used as outcome measures. RESULTS: Reductions (p<0.05-0.001) in spasticity (MAS) were seen both after the 2-week training period and at 6-month follow-up. Improvements were also seen in AROM (median change of elbow extension 5°, dorsiflexion of hand 10°), grip strength (20 Newton), and functional use after the 2-week training period (MAL: 1 point; Sollerman test: 8 points; BBT: 4 blocks). The improvements persisted at 6-month follow-up, except for scores on the Sollerman hand function test, which improved further. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that modified CIMT in an outpatient clinic may reduce spasticity and increase functional use of the affected arm in spastic chronic hemiplegia, with improvements persisting at 6 months.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".