Mirror Therapy Enhances Lower-Extremity Motor Recovery and Motor Functioning After Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Sütbeyaz S., Yavuzer G., Sezer N., Koseoglu B. F.

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, vol.88, no.5, pp.555-559, 2007 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 88 Issue: 5
  • Publication Date: 2007
  • Doi Number: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.02.034
  • Journal Name: Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Page Numbers: pp.555-559
  • Keywords: Cerebrovascular accident, Feedback, Imagery, Motor skills, Rehabilitation
  • Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University Affiliated: No


Sütbeyaz S, Yavuzer G, Sezer N, Koseoglu F. Mirror therapy enhances lower-extremity motor recovery and motor functioning after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Objective: To evaluate the effects of mirror therapy, using motor imagery training, on lower-extremity motor recovery and motor functioning of patients with subacute stroke. Design: Randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, 4-week trial, with follow-up at 6 months. Setting: Rehabilitation education and research hospital. Participants: A total of 40 inpatients with stroke (mean age, 63.5y), all within 12 months poststroke and without volitional ankle dorsiflexion. Interventions: Thirty minutes per day of the mirror therapy program, consisting of nonparetic ankle dorsiflexion movements or sham therapy, in addition to a conventional stroke rehabilitation program, 5 days a week, 2 to 5 hours a day, for 4 weeks. Main Outcome Measures: The Brunnstrom stages of motor recovery, spasticity assessed by the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS), walking ability (Functional Ambulation Categories [FAC]), and motor functioning (motor items of the FIM instrument). Results: The mean change score and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the Brunnstrom stages (mean, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.1; vs mean, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.5-1.2; P=.002), as well as the FIM motor score (mean, 21.4; 95% CI, 18.2-24.7; vs mean, 12.5; 95% CI, 9.6-14.8; P=.001) showed significantly more improvement at follow-up in the mirror group compared with the control group. Neither MAS (mean, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.4-1.2; vs mean, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.7; P=.102) nor FAC (mean, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.1; vs mean, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9; P=.610) showed a significant difference between the groups. Conclusions: Mirror therapy combined with a conventional stroke rehabilitation program enhances lower-extremity motor recovery and motor functioning in subacute stroke patients. © 2007 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.