Results showed that both CIT and BAT had significantly improved NMU scores but there was no difference between the two interventions.5 However, the BAT group did significantly increase force production in non-compliant UE compared to CIT.5 The CIT group did however show greater amounts of non-compliant UE use recorded by the MAL when compared to the BAT.5 The control group did not show any statistical increase in any of the outcome measures.5 In conclusion, both the BAT and CIT groups improved movement fluidity recorded by the NMU.5 The BAT group had the greatest increases in force production in the affected arm, while the CIT group was more effective in improving functional performance related with every day
Results showed that both CIT and BAT had significantly improved NMU scores but there was no difference between the two interventions.5 However, the BAT group did significantly increase force production in non-compliant UE compared to CIT.5 The CIT group did however show greater amounts of non-compliant UE use recorded by the MAL when compared to the BAT.5 The control group did not show any statistical increase in any of the outcome measures.5 In conclusion, both the BAT and CIT groups improved movement fluidity recorded by the NMU.5 The BAT group had the greatest increases in force production in the affected arm, while the CIT group was more effective in improving functional performance related with every day