Rhythmic facilitation of gait training in hemiparetic stroke rehabilitation
Abstract
Experimental and control groups of 10 hemiparetic stroke patients each underwent a 6 week, twice daily gait training program. The control group participated in a conventional physical therapy gait program. The experimental group trained in the same basic program with the addition of rhythmic auditory stimulation (RAS). Patients entered the study as soon as they could complete 5 strides with hand-held assistance. The training program had to be completed within 3 months of the patients' stroke. In the experimental group RAS was used as a timekeeper to synchronize step patterns and gradually entrain higher stride frequencies. Study groups were equated by gender, lesion site, and age. Motor function was assessed at pretest using Barthel, Fugl-Meyer, and Berg Scales. Walking patterns were assessed during pre- and post-test without RAS present. Pre- vs post-test measures revealed a statistically significant (P<0.05) increase in velocity (164% vs 107%), stride length (88% vs 34%), and reduction in EMG amplitude variability of the gastrocnemius muscle (69% vs 33%) for the RAS-training group compared to the control group. The difference in stride symmetry improvement (32% in the RAS-group vs 16% in the control group) was statistically not significant. The data offer evidence that RAS is an efficient tool to enhance efforts in gait rehabilitation with acute stroke patients.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is insufficient evidence for the superiority of any particular other approach on mobility.
“Based on van Tulder's BES rule, there was strong evidence in favor of other approaches; however, because the other intervention was quite different in each study except for Thaut et al 55 and Thaut et al, 49 we suggest that there is insufficient evidence for the superiority of any other particular approach.”
From The Effectiveness of the Bobath Concept in Stroke Rehabilitation: What is the Evidence? (2009) · cites this paper as [55]
Based on van Tulder's BES rule, there was strong evidence in favor of other approaches on mobility.
“Based on van Tulder's BES rule, there was strong evidence in favor of other approaches; however, because the other intervention was quite different in each study except for Thaut et al 55 and Thaut et al, 49 we suggest that there is insufficient evidence for the superiority of any other particular approach.”
From The Effectiveness of the Bobath Concept in Stroke Rehabilitation: What is the Evidence? (2009) · cites this paper as [55]
Only 7 studies in the review outlined the content of the Bobath Concept in more detail referring to specifically trained therapists who selected interventions from specifically designed treatment protocols.
“There was a lack of description of the actual content of Bobath therapy; only 7 studies outlined the content of the Bobath Concept in more detail referring to specifically trained therapists, who selected interventions from specifically designed treatment protocols.39,43,46 -48,53,55”
From The Effectiveness of the Bobath Concept in Stroke Rehabilitation: What is the Evidence? (2009) · cites this paper as [55]
Not all studies in the review are true comparative studies between approaches; 4 studies reported comparison of alternative approaches as an adjunct to Bobath therapy.
“A further consideration is the fact that not all studies are true comparative studies between approaches; 4 studies in this review reported comparison of alternative approaches as an adjunct to Bobath therapy (treadmill training, 38 Rhythmic Auditory Stimulation, 49,55 and independent standing practice 47 ).”
From The Effectiveness of the Bobath Concept in Stroke Rehabilitation: What is the Evidence? (2009) · cites this paper as [55]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 25 · Cited by 429
- Authors
- Thaut, M. H., McIntosh, G. C., & Rice, R. R.
- Affiliations
- Colorado State University (US)
- Poudre Valley Hospital (US)
- Corresponding author
- Thaut, M.H
- ORCID
- Thaut, M.H
- Venue
- Journal of the Neurological Sciences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1997-10
- Volume
- 151
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 207-212
- ISSN
- 0022-510X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2171444589
- Cited by
- 429
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 25
- FWCI
- 2.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the Neurological Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Poudre Valley Hospital Foundation
- National Institutes of Health
- National Center for Research Resources (RR 07127-20, RR 07127-23)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Music Therapy and Health
- Keywords
- rhythmic auditory stimulation, gait training, stroke rehabilitation, hemiparesis, walking speed, stride length, motor entrainment, acute stroke
- MeSH terms
- Acoustic Stimulation, Aged, Cerebrovascular Disorders, Electromyography, Female, Gait, Hemiplegia, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Muscle, Skeletal
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
