Cited by 84Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersMotor Control and Adaptation

Can physiotherapy after stroke based on the Bobath concept result in improved quality of movement compared to the motor relearning programme

Langhammer, Birgitta, Stanghelle, Johan K.·2011·Physiotherapy Research International

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The primary aim of the present study was to investigate, based on data from our study in 2000, whether the Bobath approach enhanced quality of movement better than the Motor Relearning Programme (MRP) during rehabilitation of stroke patients. METHODS: A randomized controlled stratified trial of acute stroke patients. The patients were treated according to Motor Relearning Programme and Bobath approach and assessed with Motor Assessment Scale, Sødring Motor Evaluation Scale, Nottingham Health Profile and the Barthel Index. A triangulation of the test scores was made in reference to the Movement Quality Model and biomechanical, physiological, psycho-socio-cultural, and existential themes. RESULTS: The items arm (p = 0.02-0.04) sitting (p = 0.04) and hand (p = 0.01-0.03) were significantly better in the Motor Relearning Programme group than in the Bobath group, in both Sødring Motor Evaluation Scale and Motor Assessment Scale. Leg function, balance, transfer, walking and stair climbing did not differ between the groups. The Movement Quality Model and the movement qualities biomechanical, physiological and psycho-socio-cultural showed higher scoring in the Motor Relearning Programme group, indicating better quality of movement in all items. Regression models established the relationship with significant models of motor performance and self reported physical mobility (adjusted R(2) 0.30-0.68, p < 0.0001), energy (adjusted R(2) 0.13-0.14, p = 0.03-0.04, emotion (adjusted R(2) 0.30-0.38, p < 0.0001) and social interaction (arm function, adjusted R(2) 0.25, p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: These analyses confirm that task oriented exercises of the Motor Relearning Programme type are preferable regarding quality of movement in the acute rehabilitation of patients with stroke.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pri.474

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Langhammer, B., & Stanghelle, J. K.
Affiliations
Sunnaas sykehus (NO)
Corresponding author
Stanghelle, Johan K.
Venue
Physiotherapy Research International
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-05-24
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
69-80
ISSN
  • 1358-2267 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2865
OpenAlex
W2006492968
Cited by
84
References
34
Citations by year
2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 8
FWCI
4.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Physiotherapy Research International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
World Health Organization
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Cerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
stroke rehabilitation, Bobath approach, movement quality, task-oriented training, upper limb function, hand function, sitting, energy expenditure, emotional well-being, social interaction
MeSH terms
Stroke Rehabilitation, Biomechanical Phenomena, Disability Evaluation, Female, Humans, Male, Motor Activity, Movement, Psychology, Regression Analysis, Severity of Illness Index, Treatment Outcome, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Stroke, Physical Therapy Modalities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review