Evolution of the Gross Motor Function of Cerebral Palsy Patients treated during a Basic Bobath Course

Claudia Alc?ntara de Torre
Reabilita??o especializada

Sonia Gusman
Reabilita??o Especializada

     Full text: Not available
     Last modified: February 27, 2007

Abstract
Introduction : The Bobath`s Concept main principles are specific preparation for goals, use of concepts of motor control and motor learning with active participation of the patients , functional goals and practice, emphasis on quality of movements and individually planned treatment. Key points of control are used to influence postures and movements. Purpose: To evaluate the motor improvement in the group of patients who were treated in a Bobath Course and to see if this improvement is more significant than another group of patients who were treated by therapists who were not Bobath trained. Subjects: 16 subjects age 1 year and 4 months to 7 years and 8 months, mean age 4 years. The control group (N=8) and experimental group (N=8) were matched for age, quality of tonus (spasticity or atetose), level of GMFCS (Gross Motor Functional Classification System), initial score of GMFM (Gross Motor Function Measure). Methods: Controlled trial. The experimental group was treated in a Basic Bobath course and control group continued to receive the same classical treatment they were receiving before the assessment. For both groups only physiotherapy treatment hours (10 hours + or ? 1) were computed because the main point of this study was the gross motor function. The method of assessment was GMFM-66 that was applied just before the beginning of the treatment at Bobath course for the experimental group and after 10 hours (+or-1) of physiotherapy treatment. In the control group the GMFM was applied and the next session started to count the 10 hours (+or-1) of classical Physiotherapy treatment and the patients were regularly being treated, as established. Analysis: t of Student Test was used. Results: GMFM detected gross motor functional changes showing t=2,36 and p = 0,03 for the experimental group. Conclusions: The experimental group had a more statistical significant improvement in motor gross function than the control group. For other studies we planned a larger sample as well as the study of the difference of evolution between spastic and athetosic patients using GMFM assessment. They seem to be different.