Cited by 76Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

Effectiveness of the Bobath concept in the treatment of stroke:A systematic review

Díaz-Arribas, María J., Martín-Casas, Patricia, Cano-de-la-Cuerda, Roberto, Plaza-Manzano, Gustavo·2020·Disability and Rehabilitation

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of the Bobath concept in sensorimotor rehabilitation after stroke.Materials and methods: A systematic literature review was conducted on the Bobath concept from the first publication available to January 2018, consulting PUBMED, CENTRAL, CINAHL and PEDro databases. Fifteen clinical trials were selected in two consecutive screenings. Two independent researchers rated the studies according to the PEDro scale from which a best evidence synthesis was derived to determine the strength of the evidence.Results: The Bobath concept is not more effective than other approaches used in post-stroke rehabilitation. There is moderate evidence for the superiority of other therapeutic approaches such as forced use of the affected upper limb and constraint-induced movement therapy for motor control of the upper limb.Conclusions: The Bobath concept is not superior to other approaches for regaining mobility, motor control of the lower limb and gait, balance and activities of daily living of patients after stroke. There is moderate evidence regarding the superior results of other approaches in terms of the motor control and dexterity of the upper limb. Due to the limitations concerning the methodological quality of the studies, further well-designed studies are needed.Implications for rehabilitationThe Bobath concept is not superior to other approaches for patients after stroke.The treatments that incorporate overuse of the affected upper limb via intensive treatments with high-repetitions with or without robotic aids present greater effectiveness in the motor control of the upper limb and dexterity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09638288.2019.1590865

Cites

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.

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?

  • One systematic review published in 2019 confirmed that overall the Bobath concept is not as beneficial as other therapies.

    “One systematic review was published in 2019,[35] and they confirmed that overall the Bobath concept is not as beneficial as other therapies.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 91 · Cited by 76

Authors
Díaz-Arribas, M. J., Martín-Casas, P., Cano-de-la-Cuerda, R., & Plaza-Manzano, G.
Affiliations
  • Department of Radiology, Rehabilitation and Physiotherapy, Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain;
  • Departament of Physiotherapy, Occupational Therapy, Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Rey Juan Carlos University, Alcorcón, Spain
Venue
Disability and Rehabilitation
Published
2019-04-24
Volume
42
Issue
12
Pages
1636-1649
ISSN
  • 0963-8288 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5165
OpenAlex
W2940997317
Cited by
76
References
91
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Disability and Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Cerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
Keywords
Bobath concept, stroke rehabilitation, sensorimotor rehabilitation, constraint-induced movement therapy, upper limb motor control, upper limb dexterity, gait, balance, activities of daily living, robot-assisted therapy, motor recovery
MeSH terms
Neurological Rehabilitation, Stroke Rehabilitation, Humans, Gait Disorders, Neurologic, Stroke

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