Hand rehabilitation secondary to Traumatic Brain Injury: A Case Report Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background & AimTraumatic brain injury (TBI) is a complex neurological condition caused by mechanical trauma to the brain, leading to varying degrees of dysfunction. It commonly results in upper limb impairments and reduced independence in daily activities, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa where incidence is high. Occupational therapy plays a key role in TBI rehabilitation through multi-modal, client-centered interventions. This case report aims to demonstrate the effectiveness of OT in improving hand function and community reintegration in a TBI survivor. Methodology & Data AnalysisA single-subject case study was conducted on a Traumatic Brain Injury patient (58 yrs) with right hand incoordination. Occupational therapy intervention involved ADL retraining, motor and sensory re-education, and use of assistive devices like a splint and adapted spoon. Handwriting and coordination were improved through functional tasks. Community reintegration activities and family education supported long-term recovery. Quantitative data will be collected through limb measurements, pain scores, and functional assessments such as Nine Hole Peg Test, Block and Box Test, and Canadian Occupational Performance Measurement (COPM) ResultAfter nine treatment sessions, the patient demonstrated notable improvement in hand coordination (Nine-Hole Peg Test: 51.1 s to 34.6 s; Box and Block Test: 40 to 45 blocks) and enhanced ADL independence. He successfully resumed occupational and social activities, including safe motorcycle riding and farming, facilitated by adaptive device use. ConclusionThis case emphasizes the importance of client-centered, task-oriented occupational therapy in restoring fine and gross motor function and promoting community reintegration after TBI. A holistic and adaptive OT approach can enhance independence, social participation, and quality of life for individuals with neurological injuries
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".