Abstract: Background: The effectiveness of mirror therapy
(MT) has been investigated in acute hemiplegia. The present study
examines whether MT, given during chronic stroke, was more
effective in promoting motor recovery of the lower extremity and
walking speed than standard rehabilitation alone. Methods: The study
enrolled 30 patients with chronic stroke. Fifteen patients each were
assigned to the treatment group and the control group. All patients
received a conventional rehabilitation program for a 4-week period.
In addition to this rehabilitation program, patients in the treatment
group received mirror therapy for 4 weeks, 5 days a week. Main
measures: Passive ankle joint dorsiflexion range of motion, gait
speed, Brunnstrom stages of motor recovery, plantar flexor muscle
tone by Modified Ashworth Scale. Results: No significant difference
was found in the outcome measures among groups before treatment.
When compared with standard rehabilitation, mirror therapy
improved Ankle ROM, Brunnstrom stages and waking speed
(p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences between
two groups on MAS (P > 0.05).Conclusion: Mirror therapy combined
with a conventional stroke rehabilitation program enhances lowerextremity
motor recovery and walking speed in chronic stroke
patients.
Abstract: Previous studies have shown that there are arguments
regarding the reliability and validity of the Ashworth and Modified
Ashworth Scale towards evaluating patients diagnosed with upper
limb disorders. These evaluations depended on the raters’ experiences.
This initiated us to develop an upper limb disorder part-task trainer
that is able to simulate consistent upper limb disorders, such as
spasticity and rigidity signs, based on the Modified Ashworth Scale to
improve the variability occurring between raters and intra-raters
themselves. By providing consistent signs, novice therapists would be
able to increase training frequency and exposure towards various
levels of signs. A total of 22 physiotherapists and occupational
therapists participated in the study. The majority of the therapists
agreed that with current therapy education, they still face problems
with inter-raters and intra-raters variability (strongly agree 54%; n =
12/22, agree 27%; n = 6/22) in evaluating patients’ conditions. The
therapists strongly agreed (72%; n = 16/22) that therapy trainees
needed to increase their frequency of training; therefore believe that
our initiative to develop an upper limb disorder training tool will help
in improving the clinical education field (strongly agree and agree
63%; n = 14/22).