Cited by 43Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention

Does physiotherapy based on the Bobath concept, in conjunction with a task practice, achieve greater improvement in walking ability in people with stroke compared to physiotherapy focused on structured task practice alone?:A pilot randomized controlled trial

Brock, Kim, Haase, Gerlinde, Rothacher, Gerhard, Cotton, Susan·2011·Clinical Rehabilitation

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term effects of two physiotherapy approaches for improving ability to walk in different environments following stroke: (i) interventions based on the Bobath concept, in conjunction with task practice, compared to (ii) structured task practice alone. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Two rehabilitation centres Participants: Twenty-six participants between four and 20 weeks post-stroke, able to walk with supervision indoors. INTERVENTIONS: Both groups received six one-hour physiotherapy sessions over a two-week period. One group received physiotherapy based on the Bobath concept, including one hour of structured task practice. The other group received six hours of structured task practice. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was an adapted six-minute walk test, incorporating a step, ramp and uneven surface. Secondary measures were gait velocity and the Berg Balance Scale. Measures were assessed before and after the intervention period. RESULTS: Following the intervention, there was no significant difference in improvement between the two groups for the adapted six-minute walk test (89.9 (standard deviation (SD) 73.1) m Bobath versus 41 (40.7) m task practice, P = 0.07). However, walking velocity showed significantly greater increases in the Bobath group (26.2 (SD 17.2) m/min versus 9.9 (SD = 12.9) m/min, P = 0.01). No significant differences between groups were recorded for the Berg Balance Scale (P = 0.2). CONCLUSION: This pilot study indicates short-term benefit for using interventions based on the Bobath concept for improving walking velocity in people with stroke. A sample size of 32 participants per group is required for a definitive study.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0269215511406557

Cites

24 of 24 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
Brock, K., Haase, G., Rothacher, G., & Cotton, S.
Affiliations
  • St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne (AU)
  • Kliniken Schmieder (DE)
  • ORYGEN Youth Health, Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia
Corresponding author
Brock, Kim
Venue
Clinical Rehabilitation
Published
2011-07-25
Volume
25
Issue
10
Pages
903-912
ISSN
  • 0269-2155 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0873
OpenAlex
W2153963338
Cited by
43
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 2
FWCI
3.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Keywords
stroke, Bobath concept, task practice, gait rehabilitation, walking speed, 6-minute walk test, balance, post-stroke gait, physiotherapy intervention
MeSH terms
Stroke Rehabilitation, Female, Gait, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Single-Blind Method, Walking, 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