Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2015 Oct 8;2015(10):CD004433.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004433.pub3.

Constraint-induced movement therapy for upper extremities in people with stroke

Davide Corbetta  1 , Valeria Sirtori, Greta Castellini, Lorenzo Moja, Roberto Gatti
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Constraint-induced movement therapy for upper extremities in people with stroke

Davide Corbetta et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: In people who have had a stroke, upper limb paresis affects many activities of daily life. Reducing disability is therefore a major aim of rehabilitative interventions. Despite preserving or recovering movement ability after stroke, sometimes people do not fully realise this ability in their everyday activities. Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) is an approach to stroke rehabilitation that involves the forced use and massed practice of the affected arm by restraining the unaffected arm. This has been proposed as a useful tool for recovering abilities in everyday activities.

Objectives: To assess the efficacy of CIMT, modified CIMT (mCIMT), or forced use (FU) for arm management in people with hemiparesis after stroke.

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials register (last searched June 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2015), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2015), EMBASE (1980 to January 2015), CINAHL (1982 to January 2015), and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro; January 2015).

Selection criteria: Randomised control trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing CIMT, mCIMT or FU with other rehabilitative techniques, or none.

Data collection and analysis: One author identified trials from the results of the electronic searches according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, three review authors independently assessed methodological quality and risk of bias, and extracted data. The primary outcome was disability.

Main results: We included 42 studies involving 1453 participants. The trials included participants who had some residual motor power of the paretic arm, the potential for further motor recovery and with limited pain or spasticity, but tended to use the limb little, if at all. The majority of studies were underpowered (median number of included participants was 29) and we cannot rule out small-trial bias. Eleven trials (344 participants) assessed disability immediately after the intervention, indicating a non-significant standard mean difference (SMD) 0.24 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.05 to 0.52) favouring CIMT compared with conventional treatment. For the most frequently reported outcome, arm motor function (28 studies involving 858 participants), the SMD was 0.34 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.55) showing a significant effect (P value 0.004) in favour of CIMT. Three studies involving 125 participants explored disability after a few months of follow-up and found no significant difference, SMD -0.20 (95% CI -0.57 to 0.16) in favour of conventional treatment.

Authors' conclusions: CIMT is a multi-faceted intervention where restriction of the less affected limb is accompanied by increased exercise tailored to the person's capacity. We found that CIMT was associated with limited improvements in motor impairment and motor function, but that these benefits did not convincingly reduce disability. This differs from the result of our previous meta-analysis where there was a suggestion that CIMT might be superior to traditional rehabilitation. Information about the long-term effects of CIMT is scarce. Further trials studying the relationship between participant characteristics and improved outcomes are required.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Davide Corbetta: none known. Valeria Sirtori: none known. Greta Castellini: none known. Lorenzo Moja: none known. Roberto Gatti: none known.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram.
2
2
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
3
3
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
4
4
Funnel plot of comparison: 3 Constraint versus control: secondary outcomes, outcome: 3.1 Arm Motor Function.
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Constraint versus control: primary outcome, Outcome 1 Disability postintervention.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Constraint versus control: primary outcome, Outcome 2 Disability: 3 to 6‐month follow‐up.
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 Constraint versus control: subgroup analysis on primary outcome, Outcome 1 Amount of task practice.
2.2
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2 Constraint versus control: subgroup analysis on primary outcome, Outcome 2 Anatomical region restraint.
2.3
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2 Constraint versus control: subgroup analysis on primary outcome, Outcome 3 Time since stroke.
3.1
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3 Constraint versus control: secondary outcomes, Outcome 1 Arm Motor Function.
3.2
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3 Constraint versus control: secondary outcomes, Outcome 2 Perceived Arm Motor Function (Quality of Use).
3.3
3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3 Constraint versus control: secondary outcomes, Outcome 3 Perceived Arm Motor Function (Amount of Use).
3.4
3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3 Constraint versus control: secondary outcomes, Outcome 4 Arm Motor Impairment.
3.5
3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3 Constraint versus control: secondary outcomes, Outcome 5 Quality of life.
3.6
3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3 Constraint versus control: secondary outcomes, Outcome 6 Dexterity.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

References

References to studies included in this review

Alberts 2004 {published data only}
    1. Alberts JL, Butler AJ, Wolf SL. The effects of constraint‐induced therapy on precision grip: a preliminary study. Neurorehabilitation Neural Repair 2004;18(4):250‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PMC - PubMed
Atteya 2004 {published data only}
    1. Atteya AAA. Effects of modified constraint induced movement therapy on upper limb function in subacute stroke patients. Neurosciences 2004;9(1):24‐9. - PubMed
Azab 2009 {published data only}
    1. Azab M, Al‐Jarrah M, Nazzal M, Maayah M, Abu Sammour M, Jamous M. Effectiveness of constraint‐induced movement therapy (CIMT) as home‐based therapy on Barthel Index in patients with chronic stroke. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 2009;16(3):207‐11. - PubMed
Bergheim 2010 {published data only}
    1. Bergheim A. Modified constraint induced movement therapy versus traditional physiotherapy for cerebral infarction: a pilot study [Modifisert constraint‐induced movement therapy versus tradisjonell fysioterapietter hjerneinfarkt: en pilot studie]. Fysioterapeuten 2010;2(10):16‐22.
Boake 2007 {published data only}
    1. Boake C, Noser EA, Ro T, Baraniuk S, Gaber M, Johnson R, et al. Constraint‐induced movement therapy during early stroke rehabilitation. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2007;21(1):14‐24. - PubMed
Brogårdh 2009 {published data only}
    1. Brogårdh C, Vestling M, Sjölund BH. Shortened constraint‐induced movement therapy in subacute stroke ‐ no effect of using a restraint: a randomized controlled study with independent observers. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2009;41:231‐6. - PubMed
Brunner 2012 {published data only}
    1. Brunner IC, Skouen JS, Strand LI. Is modified constraint‐induced movement therapy more effective than bimanual training in improving arm motor function in the subacute phase post stroke? A randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation 2012;26(12):1078‐86. - PubMed
Dahl 2008 {published data only}
    1. Dahl AE, Askim T, Stock R, Langørgen E, Lydersen S, Indredavik B. Short‐ and long‐term outcome of constraint‐induced movement therapy after stroke: a randomized controlled feasibility trial. Clinical Rehabilitation 2008;22(5):436‐47. [PUBMED: 18441040 ] - PubMed
Dromerick 2000 {published data only}
    1. Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Hahn M, Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Hahn M. Does the application of constraint‐induced movement therapy during acute rehabilitation reduce arm impairment after ischemic stroke?. Stroke 2000;31(12):2984‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Dromerick 2009 {published data only}
    1. Dromerick AW, Lang CE, Birkenmeier RL, Wagner JM, Miller JP, Videen TO, et al. Very early constraint‐induced movement during stroke rehabilitation (VECTORS): a single‐center RCT. Neurology 2009;73:195‐201. - PMC - PubMed
Hammer 2009 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Hammer AM, Lindmark B. Effects of forced use on arm function in the subacute phase after stroke: a randomized, clinical pilot study. Physical Therapy 2009;89(6):526‐39. - PubMed
    1. Hammer AM, Lindmark B. Is forced use of the paretic upper limb beneficial? A randomized pilot study during subacute post‐stroke recovery. Clinical Rehabilitation 2009;23(5):424‐33. - PubMed
Hayner 2010 {published data only}
    1. Hayner K, Gibson G, Giles GM. Comparison of constraint‐induced movement therapy and bilateral treatment of equal intensity in people with chronic upper‐extremity dysfunction after cerebrovascular accident. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 2010;64:528‐39. - PubMed
Huseyinsinoglu 2012 {published data only}
    1. Huseyinsinoglu BE, Ozdincler AR, Krespi Y. Bobath Concept versus constraint‐induced movement therapy to improve arm functional recovery in stroke patients: a randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation 2012;26(8):705‐15. - PubMed
Khan 2011 {published data only}
    1. Khan CM, Oesch PR, Gamper UN, Kool JP, Beer S. Potential effectiveness of three different treatment approaches to improve minimal to moderate arm and hand function after stroke – a pilot randomized clinical trial. Clinical Rehabilitation 2011;25(11):1032‐41. - PubMed
Kim 2008 {published data only}
    1. Kim DG, Cho YW, Hong JH, Song JC, Chung HA, Bai D, et al. Effect of constraint‐induced movement therapy with modified opposition restriction orthosis in chronic hemiparetic patients with stroke. NeuroRehabilitation 2008;23:239‐44. - PubMed
Krawczyk 2012 {published data only}
    1. Krawczyk M, Sidaway M, Radwan´ska A, Zaborska J, Ujma R, Członkowska A. Effects of sling and voluntary constraint during constraint‐induced movement therapy for the arm after stroke: a randomized, prospective, single‐centre, blinded observer rated study. Clinical Rehabilitation 2012;26(11):990‐8. - PubMed
Lin 2007 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Lin KC, Wu CY, Wei TH, Lee CY, Liu JS. Effects of modified constraint‐induced movement therapy on reach‐to‐grasp movements and functional performance after chronic stroke: a randomized controlled study. Clinical Rehabilitation 2007;21:1075‐86. - PubMed
Lin 2009a {published data only}
    1. Lin K, Chang Y, Wu C, Chen Y. Effects of constraint‐induced therapy versus bilateral arm training on motor performance, daily functions, and quality of life in stroke survivors. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2009;23(5):441‐8. - PubMed
    1. Wu C, Hsieh Y, Lin K, Chuang L, Chang Y, Liu H, et al. Brain reorganization after bilateral arm training and distributed constraint‐induced therapy in stroke patients: a preliminary functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Chang Gung Medical Journal 2010;33(6):628‐38. - PubMed
Lin 2010 {published data only}
    1. Lin K, Chung H, Wu C, Liu H, Hsieh Y, Chen I, et al. Constraint‐induced therapy versus control intervention in patients with stroke: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2010;89(3):177‐85. - PubMed
Myint 2008 {published data only}
    1. Myint JMWW, Yuen GFC, Yu TKK, Kng CPL, Wong AMY, Chow KKC, et al. A study of constraint‐induced movement therapy in subacute stroke patients in Hong Kong. Clinical Rehabilitation 2008;22:112‐24. - PubMed
Page 2001 {published data only}
    1. Page SJ, Sisto SA, Levine P, Johnston MV, Hughes M, Ge SJ, et al. Modified constraint induced therapy: a randomized feasibility and efficacy study. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 2001;38(5):583‐90. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Page 2002b {published data only}
    1. Page SJ, Sisto S, Johnston MV, Levine P. Modified constraint‐induced therapy after subacute stroke: a preliminary study. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2002;16(3):290‐5. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Page 2004 {published data only}
    1. Page SJ, Sisto S, Levine P, McGrath RE. Efficacy of modified constraint‐induced movement therapy in chronic stroke: a single‐blinded randomized controlled trial. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004;85(1):14‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Page 2005b {published data only}
    1. Page SJ, Levine P, Leonard AC. Modified constraint‐induced therapy in acute stroke: a randomized controlled pilot study. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2005;19(1):27‐32. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Page 2008 {published data only}
    1. Page SJ, Levine P, Leonard A, Szaflarski JP, Kissela BM. Modified constraint‐induced therapy in chronic stroke: results of a single‐blinded randomized controlled trial. Physical Therapy 2008;88(3):333‐40. - PubMed
Ploughman 2004 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Ploughman M, Corbett D. Can forced‐use therapy be clinically applied after stroke? An exploratory randomized controlled trial. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004;85(9):1417‐23. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Singh 2013 {published data only}
    1. Singh P, Pradhan B. Study to assess the effectiveness of modified constraint‐induced movement therapy in stroke subjects: a randomized controlled trial. Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology 2013;16(2):180‐4. - PMC - PubMed
Smania 2012 {published data only}
    1. Smania N, Gandolfi M, Paolucci S, Iosa M, Ianes P, Recchia S, et al. Reduced‐intensity modified constraint‐induced movement therapy versus conventional therapy for upper extremity rehabilitation after stroke: a multicenter trial. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2012;26(9):1035‐45. - PubMed
Suputtitada 2004 {published data only}
    1. Suputtitada A, Suwanwela NC, Tumvitee S. Effectiveness of constraint‐induced movement therapy in chronic stroke patients. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand 2004;87(12):1482‐90. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Tariah 2010 {published data only}
    1. Tariah HA, Almalty A, Sbeih Z, Al‐Oraibi S. Constraint induced movement therapy for stroke survivors in Jordon: a home‐based model. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation 2010;17(12):638‐46.
Taub 1993 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Taub E, Miller NE, Novack TA, Cook EW 3rd, Fleming WC, Nepomuceno CS, et al. Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Archive of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1993;74:347‐54. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Treger 2012 {published data only}
    1. Treger I, Aidinof L, Lehrer H, Kalichman L. Modified constraint‐induced movement therapy improved upper limb function in subacute poststroke patients: a small‐scale clinical trial. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 2012;19(4):287‐93. - PubMed
Van Delden 2013 {published data only}
    1. Delden AEQ, Peper CE, Nienhuys KN, Zijp NI, Beek PJ, Kwakkel G. Unilateral versus bilateral upper limb training after stroke. the Upper Limb Training After Stroke clinical trial. Stroke 2013;44:2613‐6. - PubMed
Wang 2011 {published data only}
    1. Wang Q, Zhao J, Zhu Q, Li J, Meng P. Comparison of conventional therapy, intensive therapy and modified constraint‐induced movement therapy to improve upper extremity function after stroke. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2011;43:619‐25. - PubMed
Wittenberg 2003 {published and unpublished data}
    1. Wittenberg GF, Chen R, Ishii K, Bushara KO, Eckloff S, Croarkin E, et al. Constraint‐induced therapy in stroke: magnetic‐stimulation motor maps and cerebral activation. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2003;17(1):48‐57. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Wolf 2006 {unpublished data only}
    1. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Taub E, Uswatte G, Morris D, et al. Effect of constraint‐induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2006;296(17):2095‐104. - PubMed
    1. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP, Thompson PA, Taub E, Uswatte G, et al. Retention of upper limb function in stroke survivors who have received constraint‐induced movement therapy: the EXCITE randomised trial. Lancet Neurology 2008;7:33‐40. - PMC - PubMed
Wu 2007a {published and unpublished data}
    1. Wu CY, Lin KC, Chen HC, Chen IH, Hong WH. Effects of modified constraint‐induced movement therapy on movement kinematics and daily function in patients with stroke: a kinematic study of motor control mechanisms. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2007;21(5):460‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Wu 2007b {published and unpublished data}
    1. Wu CY, Chen CL, Tang SF, Lin KC, Huang YY. Kinematic and clinical analyses of upper‐extremity movements after constraint‐induced movement therapy in patients with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2007;88:964‐70. - PubMed
Wu 2007c {published and unpublished data}
    1. Wu CY, Chen CL, Tsai WC, Lin KC, Chou SH. A randomized controlled trial of modified constraint‐induced movement therapy for elderly stroke survivors: changes in motor impairment, daily functioning and quality of life. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2007;88:273‐8. - PubMed
Wu 2011 {published data only}
    1. Wu C, Chuang L, Lin K, Chen H, Tsay P. Randomized trial of distributed constraint‐induced therapy versus bilateral arm training for the rehabilitation of upper‐limb motor control and function after stroke. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2011;25(2):130‐9. - PubMed
Wu 2012a {published data only}
    1. Wu C, Chen Y, Lin K, Chao C, Chen Y. Constraint‐induced therapy with trunk restraint for improving functional outcomes and trunk‐arm control after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Physical Therapy 2012;92(4):483‐92. - PubMed
Yoon 2014 {published data only}
    1. Yoon JA, Koo BI, Shin MJ, Shin YB, Ko H, Shin Y. Effect of constraint‐induced movement therapy and mirror therapy for patients with subacute stroke. Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine 2014;38(4):458‐66. - PMC - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Brogårdh 2006 {published data only}
    1. Brogardh C, Flansbjer U. What is the long‐term benefit of constraint‐induced movement therapy? A four‐year follow‐up. Clinical Rehabilitation 2009;23:418‐23. - PubMed
    1. Brogårdh C, Sjölund BH. Constraint‐induced movement therapy in patients with stroke: a pilot study on effects of small group training and of extended mitt use. Clinical Rehabilitation 2006;20(3):218‐27. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Fuzaro 2012 {published data only}
    1. Fuzaro AC, Guerreiro CT, Galetti FC, Jucá RBVM, Araujo JE. Modified constraint‐induced movement therapy and modified forced‐use therapy for stroke patients are both effective to promote balance and gait improvements. Revista Brasileira de Fisioterapia 2012;16(2):157‐65. - PubMed
Gautier 2008 {published data only}
    1. Gauthier LV, Taub E, Perkins C, Ortmann M, Mark VW, Uswatte G. Remodeling the brain: plastic structural brain changes produced by different motor therapies after stroke. Stroke 2008;39(5):1520‐5. - PMC - PubMed
Lin 2008 {published data only}
    1. Lin KC, Wu CY, Liu JS. A randomized controlled trial of constraint‐induced movement therapy after stroke. Acta Neurochirurgica. Supplement 2008;101:61‐4. - PubMed
Lin 2009b {published data only}
    1. Lin K, Wu C, Liu J, Chen Y, Hsu C. Constraint‐induced therapy versus dose‐matched control intervention to improve motor ability, basic/extended daily functions, and quality of life in stroke. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2009;23(2):160‐5. - PubMed
Sawaki 2014 {published data only}
    1. Sawaki L, Butler AJ, Leng X, Wassenaar PA, Mohammad YM, Blanton S, Sathian K, Nichols‐Larsen DS, Wolf SL, Good DC, Wittenberg GF. Differential patterns of cortical reorganization following constraint‐induced movement therapy during early and late period after stroke: A preliminary study. NeuroRehabilitation 2014;35(3):415‐26. - PMC - PubMed
Tan 2012 {published data only}
    1. Tan C, Tretriluxana J, Pitsch E, Runnarong N, Winstein CJ. Anticipatory planning of functional reach‐to‐grasp: a pilot study. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2012;26(8):957‐67. - PMC - PubMed
Van der Lee 1999 {published data only}
    1. Lee JH, Wagenaar RC, Lankhorst GJ, Vogelaar TW, Deville WL, Bouter LM. Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients: results from a single‐blind randomized clinical trial. Stroke 1999;30(11):2369‐75. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Wu 2012b {published data only}
    1. Wu C, Chen Y, Chen H, Lin K, Yeh I. Pilot trial of distributed constraint‐induced therapy with trunk restraint to improve poststroke reach to grasp and trunk kinematics. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2012;26(3):247‐55. - PubMed

References to studies awaiting assessment

Barzel 2015 {published data only}
    1. Barzel A, Ketels G, Tetzlaff B, Krüger H, Haevernick K, Daubmann A, et al. Enhancing activities of daily living of chronic stroke patients in primary health care by modified constraint‐induced movement therapy (HOMECIMT): study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial. Trials 2013;14:334. - PMC - PubMed
Boe 2014 {unpublished data only}
    1. Boe S. Atlantic Canada Modified Constraint Induced Movement Therapy Trial. ClinicalTrials.gov (accessed 1 June 2015). [NCT01283620]
Dos Santos 2012 {unpublished data only}
    1. dos Santos LB. Impact of the restriction of the non paretic upper limb in rehabilitation of patients post‐stroke: randomized clinical trial. ClinicalTrials.gov (accessed 1 June 2015). [NCT01623973]
Jansa 2007 {unpublished data only}
    1. Jansa J, Puh U, Angleitner K, Sicherl Z, Mesec A. Functional evaluation of constraint‐induced movement therapy (CIMT) in acute stroke. European Journal of Neurology 2007; Vol. 14, issue 1 Suppl:152‐3.
Olivier 2012 {unpublished data only}
    1. Olivier S. Effects of a modified constraint induced therapy intervention in stroke patients: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. ClinicalTrials.gov (accessed 1 June 2015). [NCT00839670]
Uswatte 2014 {unpublished data only}
    1. Uswatte G. Constraint‐induced therapy modified for rehabilitating arm function in stroke survivors w/plegic hands. ClinicalTrials.gov (accessed 1 June 2015). [NCT00366210]

References to ongoing studies

Gautier 2015 {unpublished data only}
    1. Gautier L. Examining how motor rehabilitation promotes brain reorganization following stroke, an MRI study. ClinicalTrials.gov (accessed 1 June 2015). [NCT01725919]
Padovani Do Santos 2015 {published data only}
    1. Padovani dos Santos T. Checking a security protocol of modified forced use therapy and efficacy reducing the constriction of the movement time in 12 hours. ClinicalTrials.gov (accessed 1 June 2015).
Pereira 2015 {unpublished data only}
    1. Pereira ND, Camargo PR, Furtado CH. Effects of constraint‐induced therapy for the scapular kinematics and related to the quality of movement in patients with severe chronic hemiparesis. ClinicalTrials.gov (accessed 1 June 2015). [NCT02373436]

Additional references

Abdul Latif 2011
    1. Abdul Latif L, Daud Amadera JE, Pimentel D, Pimentel T, Fregni F. Sample size calculation in physical medicine and rehabilitation: a systematic review of reporting, characteristics, and results in randomized controlled trials. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2011;92(2):306‐15. - PubMed
Albert 2012
    1. Albert SJ, Kesselring J. Neurorehabilitation of stroke. Journal of Neurology 2012;259(1):817‐32. - PubMed
Altman 1990
    1. Altman DG, Dore CJ. Randomisation and baseline comparisons in clinical trials. Lancet 1990;335:149‐53. - PubMed
Burns 2007
    1. Burns A, Burridge J, Pickering R. Does the use of a constraint mitten to encourage use of the hemiplegic upper limb improve arm function in adults with subacute stroke?. Clinical Rehabilitation 2007;21(10):895‐904. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Butler 2007
    1. Butler A, Wolf S. Putting the brain on the map: use of transcranial magnetic stimulation to assess and induce cortical plasticity of upper‐extremity movement. Physical Therapy 2007;87:719–36. - PubMed
Crow 1989
    1. Crow JL, Lincoln NB, Nouri FM, Weerdt W. The effectiveness of EMG biofeedback in the treatment of arm function after stroke. International Disability Studies 1989;11(4):155‐60. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Dayan 2013
    1. Dayan E, Censor N, Buch ER, Sandrini M, Cohen LG. Noninvasive brain stimulation: from physiology to network dynamics and back. Nature Neuroscience 2013;16(7):838‐44. - PMC - PubMed
Deeks 2001
    1. Deeks JJ, Altman DG, Bradburn MJ. Statistical methods for examining heterogeneity and combining results from several studies in meta‐analysis. In: Egger M, Davey Smith G, Altman DG editor(s). Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta‐analysis in Context. 2nd Edition. London: BMJ Publication Group, 2001.
DiSilvestro 2015
    1. DiSilvestro KJ, Tjoumakaris FP, Maltenfort MG, Spindler KP, Freedman KB. Systematic reviews in sports medicine. American Journal of Sports Medicine 2015 Apr 21 [Epub ahead of print]. [PUBMED: 25899433] - PubMed
Edwards 1998
    1. Edwards SJL, Lilford RJ, Braunholtz DA, Jackson JC, Hewison J, Thornton J. Ethical issues in the design and conduct of randomized controlled trials. Health Technology Assessments 1998;2:1‐130. - PubMed
Engauge Software 5.1 [Computer program]
    1. http://digitizer.sourceforge.net/. Engauge Digitizer. http://digitizer.sourceforge.net/, 2011.
French 2007
    1. French B, Thomas LH, Leathley MJ, Sutton CJ, McAdam J, Forster A, et al. Repetitive task training for improving functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006073.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Gianola 2013
    1. Gianola S, Gasparini M, Agostini M, Castellini G, Corbetta D, Gozzer P, et al. Survey of the reporting characteristics of systematic reviews in rehabilitation. Physical Therapy 2013;93(11):1456‐66. - PubMed
Gustavsson 2010
    1. Gustavsson A, Svensson M, Jacobi F, Allgulander C, Alonso J, Beghi E. Cost of disorders of the brain in Europe 2010. European Neuropsychopharmacology 2011;21:718‐79. - PubMed
Hatano 1976
    1. Hatano S. Experience from a multicenter stroke register: a preliminary report. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 1976;54:541‐53. - PMC - PubMed
Hesse 2003
    1. Hesse S, Schulte‐Tigges G, Konrad M, Bardeleben A, Werner C. Robot‐assisted arm trainer for the passive and active practice of bilateral forearm and wrist movements in hemiparetic subjects. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2003;84(6):915‐20. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Higgins 2011
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Hoare 2007
    1. Hoare BJ, Wasiak J, Imms C, Carey L. Constraint ‐induced movement therapy in the treatment of the upper limb in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004149.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Hotopf 1997
    1. Hotopf M, Lewis G, Normand C. Putting trials on trial ‐ the costs and consequences of small trials in depression: a systematic review of methodology. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 1997;51(4):354‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PMC - PubMed
Hotopf 1999
    1. Hotopf M, Churchill R, Lewis G. Pragmatic randomised controlled trials in psychiatry. British Journal of Psychiatry 1999;175:217‐23. - PubMed
Juni 2006
    1. Juni P, Reichenbach S, Dieppe P. Osteoarthritis: rational approach to treating the individual. Best Practice and Research. Clinical Rheumatology 2006;20(4):721‐40. - PubMed
Kagan 2012
    1. Kagan A, Korner‐Bitensky N. Virtual reality ‐ upper extremity. Stroke Engine Intervention. Montreal: McGill University. Available at: http://www.strokengine.ca/intervention/virtual‐reality‐upper‐extremity/ 2009 (accessed 30 May 2015).
Kim 2004
    1. Kim YH, Park JW, Ko MH, Jang SH, Lee PK. Plastic changes of motor network after constraint‐induced movement therapy. Yonsei Medical Journal 2004;45(2):241‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Knapp 1963
    1. Knapp HD, Taub E, Berman AJ. Movements in monkeys with deafferented forelimbs. Experimental Neurology 1963;7:305‐15. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Lang 2008
    1. Lang CE, Edwards DF, Birkenmeier RL, Dromerick AW. Estimating minimal clinically important differences of upper‐extremity measures early after stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2008;89(9):1693‐700. - PMC - PubMed
Laver 2011
    1. Laver KE, George S, Thomas S, Deutsch JE, Crotty M. Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 9. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008349.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Levy 2001
    1. Levy CE, Nichols DS, Schmalbrock PM, Keller P, Chakeres DW. Functional MRI evidence of cortical reorganization in upper‐limb stroke hemiplegia treated with constraint‐induced movement therapy. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2001;80(1):4‐12. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Liepert 2000
    1. Liepert J, Bauder H, Wolfgang HR, Miltner WH, Taub E, Weiller C. Treatment‐induced cortical reorganization after stroke in humans. Stroke 2000;31(6):1210‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Liepert 2001
    1. Liepert J, Uhnde I, Graf S, Leidner O, Weiller C. Motor cortex plasticity during forced‐use therapy in stroke patients: a preliminary study. Journal of Neurology 2001;248(4):315‐21. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Lum 2002
    1. Lum PS, Burgar CG, Shor PC, Majmundar M, Loos M. Robot‐assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper‐limb motor function after stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2002;83(7):952‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Masiero 2007
    1. Masiero S, Celia A, Rosati G, Armani M. Robotic‐assisted rehabilitation of the upper limb after acute stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2007;88(2):142‐9. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
McCombe Waller 2008
    1. McCombe Waller S, Whitall J. Bilateral arm training: why and who benefits?. NeuroRehabiltiation 2008;23:29‐41. - PMC - PubMed
Mehrholz 2012
    1. Mehrholz J, Platz T, Kugler J, Pohl M. Electromechanical and robot‐assisted arm training for improving generic activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 6. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006876.pub3] - DOI - PubMed
Michielsen 2010
    1. Michielsen ME, Selles RW, Geest JN, EckhardtM, Yavuzer G, Stam HJ, et al. Motor recovery and cortical reorganization after mirror therapy in chronic stroke patients. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2011;25(3):223‐33. - PubMed
Miller 2010
    1. Miller E, Murray L, Richards L, Zorowitz R, Bakas T. Comprehensive overview of nursing and interdisciplinary rehabilitation care of the stroke patient: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Stroke 2010;41:2402–48. - PubMed
Miltner 1999
    1. Miltner WH, Bauder H, Sommer M, Dettmers C, Taub E. Effects of constraint‐induced movement therapy on patients with chronic motor deficits after stroke: a replication. Stroke 1999;30(3):586‐92. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Moreland 1994
    1. Moreland J, Thomson MA. Efficacy of electromyographic biofeedback compared with conventional physical therapy for upper‐extremity function in patients following stroke: a research overview and meta‐analysis. Physical Therapy 1994;74(6):534‐47. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Nijland 2010
    1. Nijland RH, Wegen EE, Harmeling‐van der Wel BC, Kwakkel G, EPOS Investigators. Presence of finger extension and shoulder abduction within 72 hours after stroke predicts functional recovery: early prediction of functional outcome after stroke: the EPOS cohort study. Stroke 2010;41(4):745‐50. - PubMed
Page 2002a
    1. Page SJ, Sisto S, Johnston MV, Levine P, Hughes M. Modified constraint‐induced therapy in subacute stroke: a case report. Archive of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2002;82(3):286‐90. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Page 2005a
    1. Page SJ, Levine P, Leonard AC. Effects of mental practice on affected limb use and function in chronic stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2005;86(3):399‐402. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Page 2007a
    1. Page SJ, Levine P, Leonard A. Mental practice in chronic stroke: results of a randomized, placebo‐controlled trial. Stroke 2007;38(4):1293‐7. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Pollock 2014
    1. Pollock A, Farmer SE, Brady MC, Langhorne P, Mead GE, Mehrholz J, et al. Interventions for improving upper limb function after stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 11. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010820.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Pomeroy 2006
    1. Pomeroy VM, King L, Pollock A, Baily‐Hallam A, Langhorne P. Electrostimulation for promoting recovery of movement of functional ability after stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003241.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Rathkolb 1990
    1. Rathkolb O, Baykoushev S, Baykousheva V. Myobiofeedback in motor reeducation of wrist and fingers after hemispherical stroke. Electromyography and Clinical Neurophysiology 1990;30(2):89‐92. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
RevMan 2014 [Computer program]
    1. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.
Ro 2006
    1. Ro T, Noser E, Boake C, Johnson R, Gaber M, Speroni A, et al. Functional reorganization and recovery after constraint‐induced movement therapy in subacute stroke: case reports. Neurocase 2006;12(1):50‐60. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Saka 2009
    1. Saka Ö, Mcguire A, Wolfe C. Cost of stroke in the United Kingdom. Age and Ageing 2009;38:27‐32. - PubMed
Sathian 2000
    1. Sathian K, Greenspan AI, Wolf SL. Doing it with mirrors: a case study of a novel approach to neurorehabilitation. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2000;14(1):73‐6. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Schaechter 2002
    1. Schaechter JD, Kraft E, Hilliard TS, Dijkhuizen RM, Benner T, Finklestein SP, et al. Motor recovery and cortical reorganization after constraint‐induced movement therapy in stroke patients: a preliminary study. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair 2002;16(4):326‐38. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Sirtori 2003
    1. Sirtori V, Gatti R, Corbetta D. Constraint induced movement therapy for upper extremities in stroke patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2003, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004433] - DOI - PubMed
Smania 2007
    1. Smania N, Paolucci S, Tinazzi M, Borghero A, Manganotti P, Fiaschi A, et al. Active finger extension: a simple movement predicting recovery of arm function in patients with acute stroke. Stroke 2007;38(3):1088‐90. - PubMed
Sterr 2006
    1. Sterr A, Szameitat A, Shen S, Freivogel S. Application of the CIT concept in the clinical environment: hurdles, practicalities, and clinical benefits. Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology 2006;19(1):48‐54. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Stinear 2007
    1. Stinear C, Barber P, Smale P, Coxon J, Fleming M, Byblow W. Functional potential in chronic stroke patients depends on corticospinal tract integrity. Brain 2007;130:170–80. - PubMed
Stinear 2010
    1. Stinear C. Prediction of recovery of motor function after stroke. Lancet Neurology 2010;9:1228–32. - PubMed
Sunderland 2005
    1. Sunderland A, Tuke A. Neuroplasticity, learning and recovery after stroke: a critical evaluation of constraint‐induced therapy. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 2005;15(2):81‐96. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Szaflarski 2006
    1. Szaflarski JP, Page SJ, Kissela BM, Lee JH, Levine P, Strakowski SM. Cortical reorganization following modified constraint‐induced movement therapy: a study of 4 patients with chronic stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2006;87(8):1052‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Taub 1977
    1. Taub E, Heitmann RD, Barro G. Alertness, level of activity, and purposive movement following somatosensory deafferentation in monkeys. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1977;290:348‐65. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Taub 1980
    1. Taub E, Harger M, Grier HC, Hodos W. Some anatomical observations following chronic dorsal rhizotomy in monkeys. Neuroscience 1980;5(2):389‐401. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Taub 1994
    1. Taub E, Crago JE, Burgio LD, Groomes TE, Cook EW, DeLuca SC, et al. An operant approach to rehabilitation medicine: overcoming learned nonuse by shaping. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 1994;61(2):281‐93. [MEDLINE: ] - PMC - PubMed
Taub 1999
    1. Taub E, Uswatte G, Pidikiti R. Constraint‐induced movement therapy: a new family of techniques with broad application to physical rehabilitation ‐ a clinical review. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 1999;36(3):237‐51. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Van der Lee 2004
    1. Lee JH, Beckerman H, Knol DL, Vet HCW, Bouter LM. Clinimetric properties of the Motor Activity Log for the assessment of arm use in hemiparetic patients. Stroke 2004;35:1410‐4. - PubMed
Villamar 2013
    1. Villamar MF, Contreras VS, Kuntz RE, Fregni F. The reporting of blinding in physical medicine and rehabilitation randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2013;45(1):6‐13. - PubMed
Wade 1987
    1. Wade D, Hewer R. Functional abilities after stroke: measurement, natural history and prognosis. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 1987;50:177‐82. - PMC - PubMed
WHO 2011
    1. World Health Organization. The atlas of heart disease and stroke. http://www.who.int/cardiovascular_diseases/en/cvd_atlas_15_burden_stroke... (accessed on 1 June 2015).
Wissink 2014
    1. Wissink KS, Spruit‐van Eijk M, Buijck BI, Koopmans RT, Zuidema SU. Stroke rehabilitation in nursing homes: intensity of and motivation for physiotherapy. Tijdschrift voor Gerontologie en Geriatrie 2014;45(3):144‐53. [PUBMED: 24801121] - PubMed

References to other published versions of this review

Bjorklund 2006
    1. Bjorklund A, Fecht A. The effectiveness of constraint‐induced therapy as a stroke intervention: a meta‐analysis. Occupational Therapy in Health Care 2006;20(2):31‐49. - PubMed
Bonaiuti 2007
    1. Bonaiuti D, Rebasti L, Sioli P. The constraint induced movement therapy: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials on the adult stroke patients. Europa Medicophysica 2007;43(2):139‐46. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Corbetta 2010
    1. Corbetta D, Sirtori V, Moja L, Gatti R. Constraint‐induced movement therapy in stroke patients: systematic review and meta‐analysis. European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2010;46:537‐44. - PubMed
French 2008
    1. French B, Leathley M, Sutton C, McAdam J, Thomas L, Forster A, et al. A systematic review of repetitive functional task practice with modelling of resource use, costs and effectiveness. Health Technology Assessment 2008;12(30):1‐4. - PubMed
Hakkennes 2005
    1. Hakkennes S, Keating JL. Constraint‐induced movement therapy following stroke: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Australian Journal of Physiotherapy 2005;51(4):221‐31. [MEDLINE: ] - PubMed
Kwakkel 2015
    1. Kwakkel G, Veerbeek JM, Wegen EE, Wolf SL. Constraint‐induced movement therapy after stroke. Lancet Neurology 2015;14(2):224‐34. [PUBMED: 25772900] - PMC - PubMed
Mark 2006
    1. Mark VW, Taub E, Morris DM. Neuroplasticity and constraint‐induced movement therapy. Europa Medicophysica 2006;42:269‐84. - PubMed
McIntyre 2012
    1. McIntyre A, Viana R, Janzen S, Mehta S, Pereira S, Teasell R. Systematic review and meta‐analysis of constraint‐induced movement therapy in the hemiparetic upper extremity more than six months post stroke. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 2012;19(6):499‐513. - PubMed
Nijland 2011
    1. Nijland R, Kwakkel G, Bakers J, Wegen E. Constraint‐induced movement therapy for the upper paretic limb in acute or sub‐acute stroke: a systematic review. International Journal of Stroke 2011;6:425‐33. - PubMed
Pelton 2012
    1. Pelton T, Vliet P, Hollands K. Interventions for improving coordination of reach to grasp following stroke: a systematic review. International Journal of Evidence‐based Healthcare 2012;10:89‐102. - PubMed
Peurala 2011
    1. Peurala Sh, Kantanen MP, Sjögren T, Paltamaa J, Karhula M, Heinonen A. Effectiveness of constraint‐induced movement therapy on activity and participation after stroke: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. 2011 26;3:209‐23. - PubMed
Shi 2011
    1. Shi YX, Tian JH, Yang KH, Zhao Y. Modified constraint‐induced movement therapy versus traditional rehabilitation in patients with upper‐extremity dysfunction after stroke: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2011;92:972‐82. - PubMed
Sirtori 2009
    1. Sirtori V, Corbetta D, Moja L, Gatti R. Constraint‐induced movement therapy for upper extremities in stroke patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004433] - DOI - PubMed
Stevenson 2012
    1. Stevenson T, Thalman L, Christie H, Poluha W. Constraint‐induced movement therapy compared to dose‐matched interventions for upper‐limb dysfunction in adult survivors of stroke: a systematic review with meta‐analysis. Physiotherapy Canada 2012;64(4):397‐413. - PMC - PubMed
Thrane 2014
    1. Thrane G, Friborg O, Anke A, Indredavik B. A meta‐analysis of constraint‐induced movement therapy after stroke. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2014;46(9):833‐42. - PubMed

Publication types