This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Langhammer, B. Articles by Stanghelle, J. K Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Langhammer, B. Articles by Stanghelle, J. K Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Stroke Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Bobath or Motor Relearning Programme? A follow-up one and four years post stroke

Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo University College, Nesoddtangen, Norway

Johan K Stanghelle

Sunnaas Rehabilitation Hospital, Nesoddtangen, Norway

Objective: The purpose of this follow-up one and four years post stroke was to find out whether the initial physiotherapy approach had had any long-term effects on mortality, motor function, postural control, activities of daily living, life quality, follow-up from community services and living conditions.

Design: A randomized controlled trial of first time ever stroke patients. Group 1 (n = 33) and group 2 (n = 28) had initial physiotherapy according to the Motor Relearning Programme and Bobath, respectively.

Main outcome measures: The Motor Assessment Scale (MAS), the Sødring Motor Evaluation Scale (SMES), the Barthel ADL Index, the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) and Berg Balance Scale were used. The following parameters were also registered: incidence of new strokes, other diseases, use of assistive devices, the patient's accommodation and use of services from the community.

Results: The mortality rates were similar in the two groups. In both groups the motor function, postural control and ADL had decreased rapidly, leaving many of the patients dependent and with a high risk of falling. Life quality had increased compared to the acute stage, but was still low in comparison with healthy persons. Patients in both groups lived at home, but were dependent on help from relatives and community services. Physiotherapy as follow-up service was seldom used. The initial physiotherapy approach did not seem to have a major in‘uence on the patients' ability to cope in the long term.

Conclusion: This follow-up at one and four years post stroke showed no major in‘uence of two different initial physiotherapy regimens on long-term function. The study confirmed a rapid deterioration of ADL and motor function and an increased dependence on relatives. The study reveals a gap between the intense treatment in the acute phase and little or no follow-up of physiotherapy treatment or other rehabilitation activities later.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 17, No. 7, 731-734 (2003)
DOI: 10.1191/0269215503cr670oa


CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Rijntjes, K. Haevernick, A. Barzel, H. van den Bussche, G. Ketels, and C. Weiller Repeat Therapy for Chronic Motor Stroke: A Pilot Study for Feasibility and Efficacy Neurorehabil Neural Repair, March 1, 2009; 23(3): 275 - 280. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. O Seidl, R. Nusser-Muller-Busch, W. Hollweg, M. Westhofen, and A. Ernst Pilot study of a neurophysiological dysphagia therapy for neurological patients Clinical Rehabilitation, August 1, 2007; 21(8): 686 - 697. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. Langhammer, B. Lindmark, and J. K. Stanghelle Stroke patients and long-term training: is it worthwhile? A randomized comparison of two different training strategies after rehabilitation Clinical Rehabilitation, June 1, 2007; 21(6): 495 - 510. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R P. Van Peppen, G Kwakkel, S Wood-Dauphinee, H J. Hendriks, P. J Van der Wees, and J Dekker The impact of physical therapy on functional outcomes after stroke: what's the evidence? Clinical Rehabilitation, August 1, 2004; 18(8): 833 - 862. [Abstract] [PDF]