Year: 2024 | Month: September | Volume: 14 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 179-187
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52403/ijhsr.20240923
Comparative Efficacy of Mental Practice and Mirror Therapy on Upper Limb Motor Function in Acute Stroke Rehabilitation: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Charles Finney M1, Gopal Kumar R2, Parvathi S3, Saravanan. V.S4, Dr S Jeyakumar5
1MPT (Neuro), Neuro Physiotherapist, Founder & Director Movhabily Physiotherapy, West Tambaram, Chennai - 600045.
2MBBS MRCP (UK), Assistant Professor, Department of General Medicine, Tagore Medical College and Hospital, Vandalur to Kelambakkam Road, Rathinamangalam Chennai -600127. Affiliated with The Tamil Nadu Dr. M.G.R. Medical University.
3HOD, Dept. Of Physiotherapy, Dr. Kamakshi memorial hospitals, Pallikaranai.
4Ph. D Research Scholar – School of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy, Garden City University, Bangalore, and Professor/Principal – Mohamed Sathak AJ College of Physiotherapy, Nungambakkam, Chennai.
5Ph. D, Professor & Research Supervisor, School of Health Sciences, Garden City University, Bangalore, Karnataka.
Corresponding Author: Charles Finney M
ABSTRACT
Background: Stroke rehabilitation help restore lost function and re integrates the stroke survivors in to the society. Based on mirror neuron system, mental practice (MP) does cognitive rehearsal of activities that involves same cortical changes as physical practice in stroke survivors.
Objective: To determine the comparative efficacy of a mental practice (MP) intervention versus a mirror therapy (MT) intervention on upper limb motor function after stroke.
Methodology: A thirty acute stroke subjects were assigned to the mental practice (MP; n-15) or to the mirror therapy (MT; n-15) group. Subjects were assessed before and after 7 weeks of intervention using Action Research Arm Test (ARAT). MP group was administered functional activity based visual motor imagery training and MT group was administered functional activity based mirror therapy training. Both groups had five tasks of real life rehearsal strategies and each session consisted of60minutes, 3 days in a week.
Results: After the intervention, means of ARAT using an ‘independent t-test’ showed subjects in the mental practice (MP) group were significantly higher than those of subjects in the mirror therapy (MT) group. There is a statistically significant difference in grasp, gross, pinch, grip and total score between the groups.
Conclusion: Mental practice is a promising adjuvant therapy to physiotherapy practice with minimal direct supervision and minimal expense. It’s feasible to self-administer in virtually any environment with no specialized equipment.
Key words: Mental practice, Motor imagery, Mirror therapy, Stroke rehabilitation, Plasticity.