The effect of early intervention of mirror visual feedback on pain, disability and motor function following hand reconstructive surgery: a randomized clinical trial
Objective: To determine the effect of mirror visual feedback (MVF) on disability, pain, and motor function on patients who underwent hand reconstructive surgery. Design: Randomized, single-blinded controlled trial. Setting: Rehabilitation center. Subjects: A total of 40 patients who were randomly as...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical rehabilitation 2019-03, Vol.33 (3), p.494-503 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 503 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 494 |
| container_title | Clinical rehabilitation |
| container_volume | 33 |
| creator | Abolfazli, Mahsa Lajevardi, Laleh Mirzaei, Leila Abdorazaghi, Hosein Ali Azad, Akram Taghizadeh, Ghorban |
| description | Objective:
To determine the effect of mirror visual feedback (MVF) on disability, pain, and motor function on patients who underwent hand reconstructive surgery.
Design:
Randomized, single-blinded controlled trial.
Setting:
Rehabilitation center.
Subjects:
A total of 40 patients who were randomly assigned into the intervention group (n = 20) and control group (n = 20) participated in this study.
Interventions:
The rehabilitation sessions took place twice a week for eight weeks. The control group received traditional rehabilitation for 75 minutes. While the intervention group performed MVF and traditional rehabilitation for 30 and 45 minutes, respectively.
Measures:
Pain and disability of the hand were assessed with McGill pain questionnaire and Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores. The range of joint motion was evaluated by Goniometer, and the strength of grip and pinch was evaluated by Dynamometer and Pinch gauge and dexterity evaluated by Minnesota Manual Muscle test.
Results:
The results indicated that both traditional and MVF methods induced significant decreasing pain (Pain Rate Index: F = 68.48, P = 0.000; Number of Word Count: F = 70.96, P = 0.000), disability (F = 50.08, P = 0.000) and increasing dexterity (placing test: F = 28.73, P = 0.000), and range of motion (F = 33.16, P = 0.000). The results also showed that the positive effect of MVF on pain, disability, dexterity, and range of motion was significantly greater than that of controls (P 0.05).
Conclusion:
MVF, in conjunction with traditional rehabilitation programs, may lead to greater improvements in pain, disability, placing dexterity, and range of motion. But it seems not to be effective on pinch and grip power and turning dexterity. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0269215518811907 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2136549362</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0269215518811907</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2136549362</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-9dbededd9e6e35ce0b55e0a1fe78105981ff756e1bc4ea48e615a6e00771ac593</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU1v1DAQhi1ERZfCnROyxKUHUjxJHCfcUFU-pEpcyjly7PHWxbEX21m0_B5-KA5bQKrEyZKfZ94Z6SXkBbALACHesLobauAc-h5gYOIR2UArRMV60TwmmxVXKz8lT1O6Y4z1dQtPyGnDWt53Nd-Qnze3SNEYVJkGQ1FGd6DWZ4x79NkGv_7ONsYQ6d6mRTpqEPUk1Vda4E5a_5pqm-Rknc0HKr2mc8jFNotXvwNMcC58t35Lb1caUQWfclwK3SNNS9xiPLylksaCw2x_oKbKWW9VWZajle4ZOTHSJXx-_56RL--vbi4_VtefP3y6fHddqabjuRr0hBq1HrDDhitkE-fIJBgUPTA-9GCM4B3CpFqUbY8dcNkhY0KAVHxozsj5MXcXw7cFUx5nmxQ6Jz2GJY01lD3t0HR1UV89UO_CEn25rlgDa4am5lAsdrRUDClFNOMu2lnGwwhsXBscHzZYRl7eBy_TjPrvwJ_KilAdhSS3-G_rfwN_AdiVpqM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2190393251</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The effect of early intervention of mirror visual feedback on pain, disability and motor function following hand reconstructive surgery: a randomized clinical trial</title><source>SAGE Complete</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><creator>Abolfazli, Mahsa ; Lajevardi, Laleh ; Mirzaei, Leila ; Abdorazaghi, Hosein Ali ; Azad, Akram ; Taghizadeh, Ghorban</creator><creatorcontrib>Abolfazli, Mahsa ; Lajevardi, Laleh ; Mirzaei, Leila ; Abdorazaghi, Hosein Ali ; Azad, Akram ; Taghizadeh, Ghorban</creatorcontrib><description>Objective:
To determine the effect of mirror visual feedback (MVF) on disability, pain, and motor function on patients who underwent hand reconstructive surgery.
Design:
Randomized, single-blinded controlled trial.
Setting:
Rehabilitation center.
Subjects:
A total of 40 patients who were randomly assigned into the intervention group (n = 20) and control group (n = 20) participated in this study.
Interventions:
The rehabilitation sessions took place twice a week for eight weeks. The control group received traditional rehabilitation for 75 minutes. While the intervention group performed MVF and traditional rehabilitation for 30 and 45 minutes, respectively.
Measures:
Pain and disability of the hand were assessed with McGill pain questionnaire and Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores. The range of joint motion was evaluated by Goniometer, and the strength of grip and pinch was evaluated by Dynamometer and Pinch gauge and dexterity evaluated by Minnesota Manual Muscle test.
Results:
The results indicated that both traditional and MVF methods induced significant decreasing pain (Pain Rate Index: F = 68.48, P = 0.000; Number of Word Count: F = 70.96, P = 0.000), disability (F = 50.08, P = 0.000) and increasing dexterity (placing test: F = 28.73, P = 0.000), and range of motion (F = 33.16, P = 0.000). The results also showed that the positive effect of MVF on pain, disability, dexterity, and range of motion was significantly greater than that of controls (P < 0.05), but there was no significant result in grip and lateral pinch strength between the intervention and control group (P > 0.05).
Conclusion:
MVF, in conjunction with traditional rehabilitation programs, may lead to greater improvements in pain, disability, placing dexterity, and range of motion. But it seems not to be effective on pinch and grip power and turning dexterity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0269-2155</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1477-0873</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0269215518811907</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30458625</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Clinical research ; Clinical trials ; Control groups ; Dexterity ; Disability ; Early intervention ; Evidence-based medicine ; Feedback ; Intervention ; Motion ; Motor ability ; Pain ; Plastic surgery ; Power ; Questionnaires ; Rehabilitation ; Shoulder pain ; Surgery ; Visual feedback</subject><ispartof>Clinical rehabilitation, 2019-03, Vol.33 (3), p.494-503</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-9dbededd9e6e35ce0b55e0a1fe78105981ff756e1bc4ea48e615a6e00771ac593</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-9dbededd9e6e35ce0b55e0a1fe78105981ff756e1bc4ea48e615a6e00771ac593</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-7869-2735</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0269215518811907$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0269215518811907$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,21800,27905,27906,30980,43602,43603</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30458625$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Abolfazli, Mahsa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lajevardi, Laleh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mirzaei, Leila</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abdorazaghi, Hosein Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Azad, Akram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taghizadeh, Ghorban</creatorcontrib><title>The effect of early intervention of mirror visual feedback on pain, disability and motor function following hand reconstructive surgery: a randomized clinical trial</title><title>Clinical rehabilitation</title><addtitle>Clin Rehabil</addtitle><description>Objective:
To determine the effect of mirror visual feedback (MVF) on disability, pain, and motor function on patients who underwent hand reconstructive surgery.
Design:
Randomized, single-blinded controlled trial.
Setting:
Rehabilitation center.
Subjects:
A total of 40 patients who were randomly assigned into the intervention group (n = 20) and control group (n = 20) participated in this study.
Interventions:
The rehabilitation sessions took place twice a week for eight weeks. The control group received traditional rehabilitation for 75 minutes. While the intervention group performed MVF and traditional rehabilitation for 30 and 45 minutes, respectively.
Measures:
Pain and disability of the hand were assessed with McGill pain questionnaire and Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores. The range of joint motion was evaluated by Goniometer, and the strength of grip and pinch was evaluated by Dynamometer and Pinch gauge and dexterity evaluated by Minnesota Manual Muscle test.
Results:
The results indicated that both traditional and MVF methods induced significant decreasing pain (Pain Rate Index: F = 68.48, P = 0.000; Number of Word Count: F = 70.96, P = 0.000), disability (F = 50.08, P = 0.000) and increasing dexterity (placing test: F = 28.73, P = 0.000), and range of motion (F = 33.16, P = 0.000). The results also showed that the positive effect of MVF on pain, disability, dexterity, and range of motion was significantly greater than that of controls (P < 0.05), but there was no significant result in grip and lateral pinch strength between the intervention and control group (P > 0.05).
Conclusion:
MVF, in conjunction with traditional rehabilitation programs, may lead to greater improvements in pain, disability, placing dexterity, and range of motion. But it seems not to be effective on pinch and grip power and turning dexterity.</description><subject>Clinical research</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Control groups</subject><subject>Dexterity</subject><subject>Disability</subject><subject>Early intervention</subject><subject>Evidence-based medicine</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Motion</subject><subject>Motor ability</subject><subject>Pain</subject><subject>Plastic surgery</subject><subject>Power</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Shoulder pain</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Visual feedback</subject><issn>0269-2155</issn><issn>1477-0873</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU1v1DAQhi1ERZfCnROyxKUHUjxJHCfcUFU-pEpcyjly7PHWxbEX21m0_B5-KA5bQKrEyZKfZ94Z6SXkBbALACHesLobauAc-h5gYOIR2UArRMV60TwmmxVXKz8lT1O6Y4z1dQtPyGnDWt53Nd-Qnze3SNEYVJkGQ1FGd6DWZ4x79NkGv_7ONsYQ6d6mRTpqEPUk1Vda4E5a_5pqm-Rknc0HKr2mc8jFNotXvwNMcC58t35Lb1caUQWfclwK3SNNS9xiPLylksaCw2x_oKbKWW9VWZajle4ZOTHSJXx-_56RL--vbi4_VtefP3y6fHddqabjuRr0hBq1HrDDhitkE-fIJBgUPTA-9GCM4B3CpFqUbY8dcNkhY0KAVHxozsj5MXcXw7cFUx5nmxQ6Jz2GJY01lD3t0HR1UV89UO_CEn25rlgDa4am5lAsdrRUDClFNOMu2lnGwwhsXBscHzZYRl7eBy_TjPrvwJ_KilAdhSS3-G_rfwN_AdiVpqM</recordid><startdate>201903</startdate><enddate>201903</enddate><creator>Abolfazli, Mahsa</creator><creator>Lajevardi, Laleh</creator><creator>Mirzaei, Leila</creator><creator>Abdorazaghi, Hosein Ali</creator><creator>Azad, Akram</creator><creator>Taghizadeh, Ghorban</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7869-2735</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201903</creationdate><title>The effect of early intervention of mirror visual feedback on pain, disability and motor function following hand reconstructive surgery: a randomized clinical trial</title><author>Abolfazli, Mahsa ; Lajevardi, Laleh ; Mirzaei, Leila ; Abdorazaghi, Hosein Ali ; Azad, Akram ; Taghizadeh, Ghorban</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-9dbededd9e6e35ce0b55e0a1fe78105981ff756e1bc4ea48e615a6e00771ac593</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Clinical research</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Control groups</topic><topic>Dexterity</topic><topic>Disability</topic><topic>Early intervention</topic><topic>Evidence-based medicine</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Motion</topic><topic>Motor ability</topic><topic>Pain</topic><topic>Plastic surgery</topic><topic>Power</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Shoulder pain</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Visual feedback</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Abolfazli, Mahsa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lajevardi, Laleh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mirzaei, Leila</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abdorazaghi, Hosein Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Azad, Akram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taghizadeh, Ghorban</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical rehabilitation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Abolfazli, Mahsa</au><au>Lajevardi, Laleh</au><au>Mirzaei, Leila</au><au>Abdorazaghi, Hosein Ali</au><au>Azad, Akram</au><au>Taghizadeh, Ghorban</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The effect of early intervention of mirror visual feedback on pain, disability and motor function following hand reconstructive surgery: a randomized clinical trial</atitle><jtitle>Clinical rehabilitation</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Rehabil</addtitle><date>2019-03</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>494</spage><epage>503</epage><pages>494-503</pages><issn>0269-2155</issn><eissn>1477-0873</eissn><abstract>Objective:
To determine the effect of mirror visual feedback (MVF) on disability, pain, and motor function on patients who underwent hand reconstructive surgery.
Design:
Randomized, single-blinded controlled trial.
Setting:
Rehabilitation center.
Subjects:
A total of 40 patients who were randomly assigned into the intervention group (n = 20) and control group (n = 20) participated in this study.
Interventions:
The rehabilitation sessions took place twice a week for eight weeks. The control group received traditional rehabilitation for 75 minutes. While the intervention group performed MVF and traditional rehabilitation for 30 and 45 minutes, respectively.
Measures:
Pain and disability of the hand were assessed with McGill pain questionnaire and Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores. The range of joint motion was evaluated by Goniometer, and the strength of grip and pinch was evaluated by Dynamometer and Pinch gauge and dexterity evaluated by Minnesota Manual Muscle test.
Results:
The results indicated that both traditional and MVF methods induced significant decreasing pain (Pain Rate Index: F = 68.48, P = 0.000; Number of Word Count: F = 70.96, P = 0.000), disability (F = 50.08, P = 0.000) and increasing dexterity (placing test: F = 28.73, P = 0.000), and range of motion (F = 33.16, P = 0.000). The results also showed that the positive effect of MVF on pain, disability, dexterity, and range of motion was significantly greater than that of controls (P < 0.05), but there was no significant result in grip and lateral pinch strength between the intervention and control group (P > 0.05).
Conclusion:
MVF, in conjunction with traditional rehabilitation programs, may lead to greater improvements in pain, disability, placing dexterity, and range of motion. But it seems not to be effective on pinch and grip power and turning dexterity.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>30458625</pmid><doi>10.1177/0269215518811907</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7869-2735</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0269-2155 |
| ispartof | Clinical rehabilitation, 2019-03, Vol.33 (3), p.494-503 |
| issn | 0269-2155 1477-0873 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2136549362 |
| source | SAGE Complete; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA) |
| subjects | Clinical research Clinical trials Control groups Dexterity Disability Early intervention Evidence-based medicine Feedback Intervention Motion Motor ability Pain Plastic surgery Power Questionnaires Rehabilitation Shoulder pain Surgery Visual feedback |
| title | The effect of early intervention of mirror visual feedback on pain, disability and motor function following hand reconstructive surgery: a randomized clinical trial |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T01%3A39%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20effect%20of%20early%20intervention%20of%20mirror%20visual%20feedback%20on%20pain,%20disability%20and%20motor%20function%20following%20hand%20reconstructive%20surgery:%20a%20randomized%20clinical%20trial&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20rehabilitation&rft.au=Abolfazli,%20Mahsa&rft.date=2019-03&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=494&rft.epage=503&rft.pages=494-503&rft.issn=0269-2155&rft.eissn=1477-0873&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0269215518811907&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2136549362%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2190393251&rft_id=info:pmid/30458625&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0269215518811907&rfr_iscdi=true |