Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2026
Modified Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy with Trunk Restraint for Upper Extremity Functional Motor Recovery,Balance and Health-Related Quality of Life in Chronic Stroke: A Single-Blinded Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
The upper extremity functional recovery remains a major challenge for specialists during post stroke rehabilitation, pertaining to adoption of various compensatory strategies by patients leading to motor redundancy and persistent functional limitations.
Objectives
The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of Patient Tailored-Modified Constraint Induced Movement Therapy (mCIMT) combined with Trunk Restraint (TR) on Upper Extremity motor ability, balance, and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in chronic stroke survivors.
Methods
In this patient-blinded trial, 34 voluntary patients with chronic hemiplegia (>6 months post-stroke), aged 45–65 years, with Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores > 24 having and spasticity graded 1 or 1 + on Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), were recruited and randomly allocated (1:1) to experimental or control groups. The experimental group received 60 min of Conventional Physical Therapy (CPT) plus 120 min of mCIMT with TR, while the control group received CPT treatment alone, three sessions per week for six consecutive weeks. Outcomes were assessed pre- and post-intervention using the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and Stroke Specific Quality of Life Scale (SS-QOL).
Results
Both groups demonstrated significant improvements from baseline to post-intervention (p < 0.01) across all outcome measures. However, the experimental group exhibited significantly greater gains in functional ability, as reflected by SS-QOL scores (p < 0.005), compared to the control group.
Conclusion
Eighteen sessions of mCIMT along with TR, delivered over six weeks in combination with CPT, demonstrated significant improvements in all outcomes (WMFT, BBS, and SS-QOL) among chronic stroke patients and is as beneficial to individual rehabilitation as conventional therapy alone.
Trial registry name and URL: ClinicalTrails.gov (Registration ID: NCT06692569)
AbdullahiA.TruijenS.UmarN. A.UsehU.EgwuonwuV. A.Van CriekingeT.SaeysW. (2021). Effects of lower limb constraint induced movement therapy in people with stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Neurology, 12, 638904. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.638904
2.
AlahmariK.PaulS. (2016). Prevalence of stroke in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia—Through a physiotherapist diary. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 7(1), 228–233. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2016.v7n1p228
3.
AtkinsonJ.WeiW.PotenzaS.SimpsonG.MiddletonA.WalkerS.TongS.HastieR.LindquistA. (2023). Patients’ understanding of long-term cardiovascular risks and associated health-seeking behaviours after pre-eclampsia. Open Heart, 10(1), e002230. https://doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2022-002230
4.
BangD. H.ShinW. S.ChoiH. S. (2018). Effects of modified constraint-induced movement therapy with trunk restraint in early stroke patients: A single-blinded, randomized, controlled, pilot trial. NeuroRehabilitation, 41(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.3233/NRE-172187
5.
BruyneelA. V.ReinmannA.SordetC.VenturelliP.FeldmannI.GuyenE. (2024). Reliability and validity of the trunk position sense and modified functional reach tests in individuals after stroke. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice, 40(1), 118–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2022.2077079
6.
BustamanteA.García-BerrocosoT.RodriguezN.LlombartV.RibóM.MolinaC.MontanerJ. (2016). Ischemic stroke outcome: A review of the influence of post-stroke complications within the different scenarios of stroke care. European Journal of Internal Medicine, 29, 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejim.2015.11.030
7.
CaoM.LiX. (2021). Effectiveness of modified constraint-induced movement therapy for upper limb function intervention following stroke: A brief review. Sports Medicine and Health Science, 3(3), 134–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smhs.2021.07.001
8.
Chih-LinK.HuG.-C. (2018). Post-stroke spasticity: A review of epidemiology, pathophysiology, and treatments. International Journal of Gerontology, 12(4), 280–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijge.2018.05.005
El SayedM. M.AdeujaA. O.El-NahrawyE.OlaishM. A. (1999). Characteristics of stroke in Hofuf, Saudi Arabia. Annals of Saudi Medicine, 19(1), 27–31. https://doi.org/10.5144/0256-4947.1999.27
11.
FlansbjerU. B.BlomJ.BrogårdhC. (2012). The reproducibility of Berg Balance Scale and the single-leg stance in chronic stroke and the relationship between the two tests. PM&R, 4(3), 165–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmrj.2011.11.003
12.
FranciscoG. E.WisselJ.PlatzT.ShengL. (2021). Post-stroke spasticity. 2021 Jan 15. In PlatzT. (Ed.), Clinical pathways in stroke rehabilitation: Evidence-based clinical practice recommendations [internet] (149–173). Springer. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK585580/ https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58505-1_9
13.
FuzaroA. C.GuerreiroC. T.GalettiF. C.JucáR. B.AraujoJ. E. (2012). Modified constraint-induced movement therapy and modified forced-use therapy for stroke patients are both effective to promote balance and gait improvements. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, 16(2), 157–165. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-35552012000200010
14.
GhrouzA.MarcoE.Muñoz-RedondoE.BozaR.Ramirez-FuentesC.DuarteE. (2022). The effect of motor relearning on balance, mobility and performance of activities of daily living among post-stroke patients: Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. European Stroke Journal, 7(1), 76–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/23969873211061027
15.
GilesM. F.RothwellP. M. (2008). Measuring the prevalence of stroke. Neuroepidemiology, 30(4), 205–206. https://doi.org/10.1159/000131304
16.
KuklinaE. V.TongX.GeorgeM. G.BansilP. (2012). Epidemiology and prevention of stroke: A worldwide perspective. Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics, 12(2), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1586/ern.11.99
17.
KwakkelG.VeerbeekJ. M.van WegenE. E. H.WolfS. L. (2015). Constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke. The Lancet Neurology, 14(2), 224–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70160-7
18.
LimaR. C. M.MichaelsenS. M.NascimentoL. R.PoleseJ. C.PereiraN. D.Teixeira-SalmelaL. F. (2014). Addition of trunk restraint to home-based modified constraint-induced movement therapy does not bring additional benefits in chronic stroke individuals with mild and moderate upper limb impairments: A pilot randomized controlled trial. NeuroRehabilitation, 35(3), 391–404. https://doi.org/10.3233/NRE-141133
19.
LinK. C.FuT.WuC. Y.HsiehC. J. (2011). Assessing the stroke-specific quality of life for outcome measurement in stroke rehabilitation: Minimal detectable change and clinically important difference. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 9, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-9-5
20.
LinK. C.HsiehY. W.WuC. Y.ChenC. L.JangY.LiuJ. S. (2009). Minimal detectable change and clinically important difference of the Wolf Motor Function Test in stroke patients. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 23(5), 429–434. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19289487 https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968308331144
21.
MichaelsenS. M.DannenbaumR.LevinM. F. (2006). Task-specific training with trunk restraint on arm recovery in stroke: Randomized control trial. Stroke, 37(1), 186–192. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.0000196940.20446.c9
22.
MorrisD. M.TaubE.MarkV. W. (2006). Constraint-induced movement therapy: Characterizing the intervention protocol. Europa Medicophysica, 42(3), 257–268.
23.
PostM. W. M.BoosmanH.ZandvoortM. M.PassierP. E. C. A.RinkelG. J. E.Visser-MeilyJ. M. A. (2011). Development and validation of a short version of the Stroke Specific Quality of Life Scale. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 82(3), 283–286. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2010.211888
24.
ReddyR. S.GularK.DixitS.KandakurtiP. K.TedlaJ. S.GautamA. P.SangadalaD. R. (2022). Impact of constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) on functional ambulation in stroke patients—A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(19), 12809. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912809
25.
ReissA. P.WolfS. L.HammelE. A.McLeodE. L.WilliamsE. A. (2012). Constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT): Current perspectives and future directions. Stroke Research and Treatment, 2012, 159391. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/159391
26.
SilvaE. M.AlbuquerqueJ. A. (2017). Influence of constraint-induced movement therapy on functional performance in stroke patients: A randomized clinical trial. Fisioterapia e Pesquisa, 24(2), 184–190. https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-2950/16789224022017
27.
SirtoriV.CorbettaD.MojaL.GattiR. (2009). Constraint-induced movement therapy for upper extremities in stroke patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2009(4), CD004433. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004433.pub2
28.
SmithM. A.TomitaM. R. (2020). Combined effects of telehealth and modified constraint-induced movement therapy for individuals with chronic hemiparesis. International Journal of Telerehabilitation, 12(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2020.6324
29.
TamuraS.MiyataK.KobayashiS.TakedaR.IwamotoH. (2022). The minimal clinically important difference in berg Balance Scale score among patients with early subacute stroke: A multicenter retrospective observational study. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 29(6), 423–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749357.2021.1943800
30.
TedlaJ. S.GularK.ReddyR. S.de Sá FerreiraA.RodriguesE. C.KakaraparthiV. N.GyerG.SangadalaD. R.QasheeshM.NambiG. (2022). Effectiveness of constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) on balance and functional mobility in the stroke population: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Healthcare, 10(3), 495. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10030495
31.
WeiW. X. J.FongK. N. K.ChungR. C. K.CheungH. K. Y.ChowE. S. L. (2018). Remind-to-move” for promoting upper extremity recovery using wearable devices in subacute stroke: A multi-center randomized controlled study. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 27(1), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2018.2882740
32.
WoodburyM.GrattanE. S.LiC. Y. (2023). Development of a short form assessment combining the Fugl-Meyer Assessment–Upper Extremity and the Wolf Motor Function Test for evaluating stroke recovery. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 104(10), 1661–1668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2023.05.014
33.
WuC. Y.ChenY. A.LinK. C.ChaoC. P.ChenY. T. (2012). Constraint-induced therapy with trunk restraint for improving functional outcomes and trunk-arm control after stroke: A randomized controlled trial. Physical Therapy, 92(4), 483–492. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20110213
34.
YadavR. K.SharmaR.BorahD.KothariS. Y. (2016). Efficacy of modified constraint-induced movement therapy in the treatment of hemiparetic upper limb in stroke patients: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 10(11), YC01–YC05. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/21893.8856
35.
ZhangJ.XiaoX.JinQ.LiJ.ZhongD.LiY.QinY.ZhangH.LiuX.XueC.ZhengZ.JinR. (2023). The effect and safety of constraint-induced movement therapy for post-stroke motor dysfunction: A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Frontiers in Neurology, 14, 1137320. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2023.1137320
36.
ZhouM.TuY.CuiJ.GaoP.YiT.WangJ.HaoQ.LiH.ZhuT. (2022). Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on lower extremity motor dysfunction in post-stroke patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Neurology, 13, 1028206. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1028206
