HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Marsden, J Articles by Greenwood, R Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Marsden, J Articles by Greenwood, R Topic Collections Relevant Article

Physiotherapy after stroke: define, divide and conquer

¹ Sobell Department of Movement Neurosciences, Institute of Neurology, Queen Square, London WC1, UK
² Regional Neurological Rehabilitation Unit, Homerton Hospital, London E9, and Acute Brain Injury Service, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London WC1, UK

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr R J Greenwood
RNRU, Homerton University Hospital, Homerton Row, London E9 6SR, UK; richard.greenwood@homerton.nhs.uk

Keywords: physiotherapy; stroke

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

When rehabilitating people after stroke, physiotherapists often favour a particular "approach". An "approach" is a theoretical construct based on a series of ideas and hypotheses about the retraining of movement that influences the content, structure, and aims of a therapy session.¹ In this edition of the journal (see pp 503–8), van Vliet et al² compare two approaches, "motor re-learning" and the "Bobath concept", the latter presently being the preferred approach within the United Kingdom.¹ The emphasis of "motor re-learning" is on context specific functional training using principles derived from motor learning theory, while that of the Bobath concept is on observational analysis and facilitation of normal movement using principles derived from neurodevelopmental and neurophysiological theory.

van Vliet and colleagues have previously shown that therapy using these two approaches differs, for example in the degree and type of feedback provided and extent to which everyday objects are used . . . [Full text of this article]

Relevant Article

Comparison of Bobath based and movement science based treatment for stroke: a randomised controlled trial

P M van Vliet, N B Lincoln, and A Foxall
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 2005 76: 503-508. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. De Wit, H. Kamsteegt, B. Yadav, G. Verheyden, H. Feys, and W. De Weerdt Defining the content of individual physiotherapy and occupational therapy sessions for stroke patients in an inpatient rehabilitation setting. Development, validation and inter-rater reliability of a scoring list Clinical Rehabilitation, May 1, 2007; 21(5): 450 - 459. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. De Wit, K. Putman, N. Lincoln, I. Baert, P. Berman, H. Beyens, K. Bogaerts, N. Brinkmann, L. Connell, E. Dejaeger, et al. Stroke Rehabilitation in Europe: What Do Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists Actually Do? Stroke, June 1, 2006; 37(6): 1483 - 1489. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]