Bottom-up versus Top-down designed rehabilitation sessions in chronic stroke survivors: a pilot randomized controlled trial

• Published in: Disability and rehabilitation 2024-07, p.1-10
• Main Authors: Hejazi-Shirmard, Mahnaz, Taghizadeh, Ghorban, Rassafiani, Mehdi, Cheraghifard, Moslem, Yousefi, Mahin, Hosseini, Seyed Hossein, Askary Kachoosangy, Reihaneh, Lajevardi, Laleh
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 0963-8288; 1464-5165; 1464-5165
• DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2024.2384622

The present study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Top-down and Bottom-up approaches on levels of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Framework (ICF), including impairments, activities, and participation. Thirty-nine chronic stroke survivors were recruited for this single-blinded randomized clinical trial. Participants were assigned to Top-down, Bottom-up interventions, or control group, and received a 6-week intervention. They were assessed before/after treatments and at follow-up (6 weeks later). Impairments were measured through kinematic analysis, Trail Making Tests (TMT), and Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA). Activity and participation were evaluated Box and Block Test, Motor Activity Log (MAL), and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), respectively. We found significant improvements in impairment (FMA) and participation (COPM) in all groups, however, COPM scores improved beyond the MCID only in the Top-down, and FMA scores exceeded the MCID in Top-down and Bottom-up groups. Use of the upper limb in daily activities (MAL) enhanced in the Top-down group, although was not clinically significant. In most of the outcome measures, no significant difference was observed between groups. It seems that Top-down, Bottom-up, and traditional interventions have relatively comparable effectiveness in chronic stroke survivors. IRCT20150721023277N2.