Aksu 2001.
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | Study design: RCT with three treatment groups Method of randomisation: not stated ("Patients were randomly divided into three groups") |
|
| Participants | Number of participants: n = 20 Inclusion criteria: "patients, whose functional levels were similar, were included" |
|
| Interventions | (1) Group 1 (n = 9) "Four exercises ... were chosen from Bobath’s neurodevelopmental approach" The individual components delivered are listed in Table 6. Based on the individual components, this intervention is categorised as a neurophysiological intervention Length of intervention period: not stated Number of sessions and length of individual sessions: not stated Intervention provider: not stated (2) Group 2 (n = 7) "Six exercises ... were chosen from Bobath’s neurodevelopmental approach" The individual components delivered are listed in Table 6. Based on the individual components, this intervention is categorised as a neurophysiological intervention Length of intervention period: not stated Number of sessions and length of individual sessions: not stated Intervention provider: not stated (3) Group 3 (n = 4) "Eight exercises ... were chosen from Bobath’s neurodevelopmental approach" The individual components delivered are listed in Table 6. Based on the individual components, this intervention is categorised as a neurophysiological intervention Length of intervention period: not stated Number of sessions and length of individual sessions: not stated Intervention provider: not stated This study is classified as active intervention one (neurophysiological) versus active intervention two (neurophysiological) versus active intervention three (neurophysiological) (Table 9) |
|
| Outcomes | Other secondary outcome measures: Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement (STREAM) Time points when outcomes were assessed: "after the stroke in the first week, motor assessment was performed" |
|
| Notes | Abstract only No data available for analysis |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No information provided |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No information provided |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | No information provided |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | No dropouts |
| Free of systematic differences in baseline characteristics of groups compared? | Unclear risk | No information provided |
| Did authors adjust for baseline differences in their analyses? | Unclear risk | No information provided |
| Other bias | Unclear risk | Limited information: abstract only |