EFFECTIVENESS OF THE BOBATH APPROACH VERSUS CIMT IN IMPROVING HAND DEXTERITY AND QOL AMONG STROKE SURVIVORS

Background: Stroke significantly impairs hand dexterity and quality of life, affecting independence in daily activities. Rehabilitation plays a crucial role in restoring upper limb function, with the Bobath Approach and Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy (CIMT) being widely used interventions. While both therapies aim to improve motor recovery, CIMT emphasizes repetitive, task-specific training, whereas the Bobath Approach focuses on normalizing movement patterns. This study evaluates and compares the effectiveness of these two rehabilitation techniques in improving hand dexterity and quality of life among stroke survivors. Objective: To determine the effects of the Bobath Approach versus CIMT on hand dexterity and quality of life in stroke survivors. Methods: An experimental study was conducted on 32 stroke survivors (mean age: Bobath 55.2 ± 6.8 years, CIMT 54.9 ± 7.2 years) experiencing upper limb motor impairments. Participants were randomly assigned to Group A (Bobath) or Group B (CIMT). Hand dexterity was assessed using the Nine-Hole Peg Test (NHPT) and the Box and Block Test (BBT), while the Stroke-Specific Quality of Life Scale (SS-QOL) measured quality of life. The intervention lasted eight weeks, with sessions held three times per week for 45 minutes. Ethical approval was obtained, and data were analyzed using SPSS version 22. Results: Both groups showed significant improvements (p < 0.05) in hand dexterity and quality of life. The CIMT group demonstrated superior reductions in NHPT completion time (46.5 ± 11.9 to 30.4 ± 8.2 seconds) compared to the Bobath group (45.8 ± 12.2 to 38.2 ± 9.8 seconds). BBT scores increased from 29.1 ± 6.8 to 42.6 ± 6.9 blocks/min in the CIMT group and from 28.6 ± 6.5 to 35.1 ± 7.3 blocks/min in the Bobath group. SS-QOL scores improved from 51.8 ± 9.3 to 69.8 ± 9.7 in the CIMT group and from 52.3 ± 8.9 to 65.7 ± 10.2 in the Bobath group. Conclusion: CIMT was more effective than the Bobath Approach in improving fine motor skills, hand dexterity, and quality of life among stroke survivors. These findings highlight the clinical significance of task-specific training in stroke rehabilitation and suggest that CIMT should be considered as a primary intervention for optimizing motor recovery.