Including a Lower-Extremity Component during Hand-Arm Bimanual Intensive Training does not Attenuate Improvements of the Upper Extremities: A Retrospective Study of Randomized Trials
Geoffroy Saussez, Marina B. Brandão, Andrew M. Gordon, Yannick Bleyenheuft
Abstract
Hand-Arm Bimanual Intensive Therapy (HABIT) promotes hand function using intensive practice of bimanual functional and play tasks. This intervention has shown to be efficacious to improve upper-extremity (UE) function in children with unilateral spastic cerebral palsy (USCP). In addition to UE function deficits, lower-extremity (LE) function and UE-LE coordination are also impaired in children with USCP. Recently, a new intervention has been introduced in which the LE is simultaneously engaged during HABIT (Hand-Arm Bimanual Intensive Therapy Including Lower Extremities; HABIT-ILE). Positive effects of this therapy have been demonstrated for both the UE and LE function in children with USCP. However, it is unknown whether the addition of this constant LE component during a bimanual intensive therapy attenuates UE improvements observed in children with USCP. This retrospective study, based on multiple randomized protocols, aims to compare the UE function improvements in children with USCP after HABIT or HABIT-ILE. This study included 86 children with USCP who received 90 h of either HABIT (n = 42) or HABIT-ILE (n = 44) as participants in previous studies. Children were assessed before, after, and 4-6 months after intervention. Primary outcomes were the ABILHAND-Kids and the Assisting Hand Assessment. Secondary measures included the Jebsen-Taylor Test of Hand Function, the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory [(PEDI); only the self-care functional ability domain] and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). Data analysis was performed using two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance with repeated measures on test sessions. Both groups showed similar, significant improvements for all tests (test session effect p < 0.001; group × test session interaction p > 0.05) except the PEDI and COPM. Larger improvements on these tests were found for the HABIT-ILE group (test session effect p < 0.001; group × test session interaction p < 0.05). These larger improvements may be explained by the constant simultaneous UE-LE engagement observed during the HABIT-ILE intervention since many daily living activities included in the PEDI and the COPM goals involve the LE and, more specifically, UE-LE coordination. We conclude that UE improvements in children with USCP are not attenuated by simultaneous UE-LE engagement during intensive intervention. In addition, systematic LE engagement during bimanual intensive intervention (HABIT-ILE) leads to larger functional improvements in activities of daily living involving the LE.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 May 2019.
All research outputs
#2,489,065
of 23,003,906 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#1,354
of 11,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,086
of 320,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#23
of 202 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,003,906 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,904 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,414 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 202 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
