Search

Copyright of Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Aim: To evaluate 'remind-to-move' (RTM) treatment by comparing it with constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) and conventional rehabilitation of the upper extremity in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy (CP).Method: Seventy-three children (44 males, 29 females; mean age 11y 8mo, standard deviation [SD] 3y 1mo) - with 20, 38, and 15 in Manual Ability Classification System levels I, II, and III respectively - were recruited from three special schools and randomly selected for an RTM (n=25) or CIMT (n=24) programme (for 75h over 3wks) or for conventional rehabilitation (n=24). The Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test, the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (Subtest 3), the Caregiver Functional Use Survey, and arm movement duration captured by accelerometers were used at the baseline, post-test, and 1-month and 3-month follow-ups.Results: Both the RTM and CIMT treatments achieved significant gains in manual capacities and spontaneous hand use immediately after the intervention compared with conventional rehabilitation, but there were no significant differences between the two interventions.Interpretation: The RTM treatment demonstrated similar therapeutic effects with CIMT in manual dexterity and functional hand use, but both interventions were superior to conventional rehabilitation. RTM is recommended as an alternative treatment for the hemiplegic upper extremity in children with CP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To validate a detailed intramuscular needle placement protocol using passive muscle stretching and relaxing for botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNT-A) treatment in the lower extremity of children with spastic cerebral palsy (CP), with verification by electrical stimulation.Method: A prospective observational study was performed in 75 children with spastic CP who received regular BoNT-A treatment under general anaesthesia (52 males, 23 females; mean age 8y 9mo, SD 3y 7mo, range 4-18y; mean body mass index 16.2, SD 3.7, range 7.7-26.7). A total of 1084 intramuscular needle placements using passive muscle stretching and relaxing were verified by electrical stimulation. Primary outcome was the positive predictive value.Results: Intramuscular needle placement in the muscles adductor brevis, adductor longus, gracilis, semimembranosus, semitendinosus, biceps femoris, rectus femoris, and lateral and medial heads of the gastrocnemius and soleus had a positive predictive value ranging from 85.7% to 100% (95% confidence interval ranging from 71.5-89.9% to 91.4-100%).Interpretation: This validated detailed protocol for intramuscular needle placement using passive muscle stretching and relaxing for BoNT-A treatment in the lower extremity of children with spastic CP is reliable and has a high positive predictive value. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To determine whether home-based, parent-delivered therapy comprising action observation (AO) and repeated practice (RP) improves upper limb function more than RP alone in children with unilateral cerebral palsy (UCP).Method: Design: single-blinded parallel-group randomized controlled trial with 1:1 allocation comparing AO+RP (intervention) with RP alone (control).Randomization: computer-generated, with allocation concealment by opaque sequentially-numbered envelopes.Setting: northern England, August 2011 to September 2013.Participants: 70 children with UCP; mean age 5.6 years (SD 2.1), 31 female.Intervention: home-based activities were provided, tailored to interests and abilities.Duration: 15 minutes/day, 5 days/week for 3 months.Assessments: Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA; primary outcome measure), Melbourne Assessment 2 (MA2), and ABILHAND-Kids at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months.Results: Outcome data was available at 3 months for 28 children in the AO+RP group and 31 controls, and at 6 months for 26 and 28 children respectively. There were no between-group differences in AHA, MA2, or ABILHAND-Kids at 3 or 6 months versus baseline (all p>0.05). Combined-group improvements (p<0.001), observed in AHA and MA2 at 3 months, were maintained at 6 months. ABILHAND-Kids also showed improvement at 3 months (p=0.003), maintained at 6 months.Interpretation: Parent-delivered RP (with or without AO) improves upper limb function and could supplement therapist input. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The ability to determine the relationship between selective motor control and upper extremity function in children with unilateral cerebral palsy (CP), and to measure the functional outcome and efficacy of interventions designed to improve selective motor control, has been limited by the lack of an objective, validated tool. The primary objective of this study is to describe the development of a clinical tool entitled Selective Control of the Upper Extremity Scale (SCUES), and present evidence of its validity and reliability.Method: Content validity was established through an expert panel (eight clinicians, mean and median of 17y of clinical experience, range 2-30y). Intra- and interrater reliability was determined by six occupational therapists who scored 10 participant studies. Construct validity of the SCUES was established by comparison to the spontaneous functional analysis section of the Shriners Hospitals Upper Extremity Evaluation, the Manual Ability Classification System, and the Box and Block test for 25 children with unilateral CP.Results: The content validity ratio values were greater than 0 (indicating >50% agreement) for 33 of the 34 items (97%), and equal or greater than 0.5 (indicating ≥75% agreement) for 26 of the 34 items (76%). Intrarater reliability was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] >0.75) for all segments and joints of the affected extremity. Interrater reliability was excellent for all segments and joints of the affected extremity except the shoulder (ICC=0.72). The SCUES was strongly correlated with the SHUEE (Spearman's rho=0.69, p=0.003). The SCUES was not correlated with the Manual Ability Classification System (rho=-0.24, p=0.369) or the Box and Block test (rho=0.47, p=0.066).Interpretation: Psychometric analysis of the SCUES revealed comparable validity to other accepted video-based clinical assessment tools for the upper extremity in children with CP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To determine if neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) applied to the ankle dorsiflexors during gait improves muscle volume and strength in children with unilateral spastic cerebral palsy (CP).Method: Thirty-two children (15 females, 17 males; mean age 10y 8mo, age range 5y 5mo-18y 1mo) with unilateral spastic CP and a Gross Motor Function Classification System of level I or level II were randomly assigned to either the 8-week daily NMES treatment group or control group (usual or conventional treatments). Outcomes at week 8 (post-NMES) and week 14 (carryover) included magnetic resonance imaging for muscle volumes (tibialis anterior, anterior compartment, and gastrocnemius), strength (hand-held dynamometry for isometric dorsiflexion strength and heel raises for functional strength), and clinical measures for lower limb selective motor control.Results: At week 8, the treatment group demonstrated significantly (p<0.05) increased muscle volumes for tibialis anterior, anterior compartment, medial and lateral gastrocnemius, and dorsiflexion strength not only when compared to their baseline values but also when compared to the control group at week 8. At week 14, both tibialis anterior and lateral gastrocnemius volumes in the treatment group remained significantly increased when compared to their baseline values. However, only lateral gastrocnemius volumes had significantly greater values when compared to the control group at week 14. There were no between group differences in the clinical measures for lower limb selective motor control at week 8 and 14.Interpretation: Eight weeks of daily NMES-assisted gait increases muscle volume and strength of the stimulated ankle dorsiflexors in children with unilateral spastic CP. These changes are use-dependent and do not carry over after the 8-week treatment period. Gastrocnemius volume also increased post-treatment with carryover at week 14. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To compare diazepam use, muscle spasm, analgesia, and side effects when clonidine or fentanyl are added to epidural bupivacaine in children with cerebral palsy after multilevel orthopaedic surgery.Method: Fifty children were prospectively randomized to receive clonidine (n=24, mean age 10y 10mo [SD 2y 11mo]) or fentanyl (n=26, mean age 10y 11mo [SD 2y 10mo]).Results: There was no difference in primary outcome measures: median diazepam use (fentanyl 0, interquartile range [IQR] 0-0; clonidine 0, IQR 0-0; p=0.46), any muscle spasm (no muscle spasms in: fentanyl, 36%; clonidine, 62%; p=0.11), painful muscle spasm (fentanyl 40%; clonidine 25%; p=0.46), or pain score ≥6 (none: fentanyl 44%; clonidine 42%; p=0.29). There were differences in secondary outcome measures: no vomiting (clonidine 63%; fentanyl 20%); vomiting occurred more frequently with fentanyl (32% vomited more than three times; clonidine none; p=0.001). Fentanyl resulted in more oxygen desaturation (at least two episodes: fentanyl 20%; clonidine 0; p<0.001). Clonidine resulted in lower mean (SD) area under the curve for systolic blood pressure (fentanyl 106.5 [11.0]; clonidine 95.7mmHg [7.9]) and heart rate (fentanyl 104.9 beats per minute [13.6]; clonidine 85.3 [11.5]; p<0.001).Interpretation: Clonidine and fentanyl provide adequate analgesia with low rates of muscle spasm, resulting in low diazepam use. The choice of epidural additive should be based upon the most tolerable side-effect profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]