Opinions of Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Among Therapists in Southwestern Ohio

Abstract Objective: To determine the opinions of therapists about constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT). Method: A convenience sample of 92 therapists with at least 1 year of clinical experience working in outpatient and inpatient hospital and clinical neurorehabilitation settings was surveyed. Subjects completed a self-report questionnaire discerning their opinions of CIMT during their clinical staff meetings. The questionnaire described CIMT to participants using excerpts from a recently published trial of CIMT. Subjects then responded to various statements concerning their opinions of the protocol and supplied the rationale for their opinions. Results: Seventy-five percent of participants reported that it would be very difficult or difficult to administer CIMT in their clinics, and 83% felt that most clinics would not have the resources to implement CIMT. Additionally, more than 61% of respondents stated that managed care payers were either somewhat unlikely or very unlikely to reimburse for CIMT, and no respondent believed that it was very likely that managed care would fund CIMT. Most respondents felt that patients would experience great difficulty with the clinical session and restrictive device durations. There were 78.3% of participants who were not aware that an efficacious modified CIMT regimen was available that could overcome the aforementioned challenges. Conclusions: Findings were consistent with CIMT trials and surveys regarding client compliance difficulties and therapist misgivings. Findings argue for continued refinement of modified CIMT regimens as well as greater educational efforts regarding CIMT for therapists.

[1]  J. Sim,et al.  Associations Between Physical Examination and Self-Reported Physical Function in Older Community-Dwelling Adults With Knee Pain , 2008, Physical Therapy.

[2]  J. H. van der Lee,et al.  Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients: results from a single-blind randomized clinical trial. , 1999, Stroke.

[3]  S. Wolf,et al.  An application of upper-extremity constraint-induced movement therapy in a patient with subacute stroke. , 1999, Physical therapy.

[4]  Peter Levine,et al.  Stroke patients' and therapists' opinions of constraint-induced movement therapy , 2002, Clinical rehabilitation.

[5]  Mary Y. Harley,et al.  A Novel Functional Electrical Stimulation Treatment for Recovery of Hand Function in Hemiplegia: 12-Week Pilot Study , 2009, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[6]  S. Hakkennes,et al.  Constraint-induced movement therapy following stroke: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. , 2005, The Australian journal of physiotherapy.

[7]  J. Szaflarski,et al.  Modified Constraint-Induced Therapy in Chronic Stroke: Results of a Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial , 2008, Physical Therapy.

[8]  Dale Corbett,et al.  Can forced-use therapy be clinically applied after stroke? An exploratory randomized controlled trial. , 2004, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[9]  Peter Levine,et al.  Modified Constraint-Induced Therapy after Subacute Stroke: A Preliminary Study , 2002, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[10]  M. Fuhrer Overview of Clinical Trials in Medical Rehabilitation: Impetuses, Challenges, and Needed Future Directions , 2003, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[11]  S. Page,et al.  Mental Practice in Chronic Stroke: Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial , 2007, Stroke.

[12]  Peter Levine,et al.  Modified Constraint-Induced Therapy in Acute Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study , 2005, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[13]  C. Winstein,et al.  Six hours in the laboratory: a quantification of practice time during constraint-induced therapy (CIT) , 2007, Clinical rehabilitation.

[14]  R. Siegert,et al.  Constraint-induced movement therapy: time for a little restraint? , 2004, Clinical rehabilitation.

[15]  C. Winstein,et al.  A randomized controlled comparison of upper-extremity rehabilitation strategies in acute stroke: A pilot study of immediate and long-term outcomes. , 2004, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[16]  D. Mozaffarian,et al.  Heart disease and stroke statistics--2011 update: a report from the American Heart Association. , 2011, Circulation.

[17]  G. Alon,et al.  Functional Electrical Stimulation Enhancement of Upper Extremity Functional Recovery During Stroke Rehabilitation: A Pilot Study , 2007, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.