Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the feasibility and efficacy of a programme combining imagery and occupational therapy with a programme of therapy only. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled case series. SETTING: Subacute outpatient clinic. SUBJECTS: Thirteen consecutively admitted patients between four weeks and one year post stroke exhibiting stable motor deficits in their affected upper limbs. INTERVENTION: All patients received an hour of therapy three times a week for six weeks administered by the same physical and occupational therapists. During the same period, eight patients participated in 10-minute guided imagery sessions after each therapy session, as well as practising imagery at home twice each week. Five patients participated in a control intervention consisting of exposure to stroke information. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Motor Recovery (Fugl-Meyer) and Action Research Arm Test (ARA). RESULTS: After intervention, Fugl-Meyer and ARA scores of patients in the therapy only group remained virtually the same; therapy plus imagery group scores improved by 13.8 and 16.4 points, respectively, on the Fugl-Meyer and ARA. CONCLUSIONS: Imagery is a clinically feasible, cost-effective complement to therapy that may improve outcomes more than participation in therapy only.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Page et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: