Background: Hand-arm bimanual intensive therapy (HABIT) has been shown to be an effective method for improving upper-extremity function. However, owing to ambiguity within the evidence of HABIT’s effects on hand function among children with unilateral spastic cerebral palsy (CP), this meta-analysis sought to elucidate whether the same was true in this patient population. Summary: A computerized database search yielded 468 studies. After meticulous scrutiny and screening of these studies according to the selection criteria, 4 full-text articles were included in the meta-analysis. All 4 studies underwent a methodological quality assessment according to the Physiotherapy Evidence Database Scale (PEDro), with a score of greater than 8. Five comparisons were then made involving the 4 selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The effect size was measured using the correlation coefficient (r value). The effect sizes of the individual studies were 0.006, 0.03, 0.04, 0.22, and 0.15. The total effect size was 0.06. Key Message: This meta-analysis determined that there is a trivial benefit using HABIT when compared to constraint-induced movement therapy or structured and unstructured bimanual therapy in pediatric patients with unilateral spastic CP. More RCTs are needed to substantiate our evidence.

中文翻译：

---

手-臂双合力强化疗法对单侧痉挛性脑瘫患儿手功能的疗效：Meta分析

背景：手臂双手强化疗法（HABIT）已被证明是改善上肢功能的有效方法。然而，由于 HABIT 对单侧痉挛性脑瘫 (CP) 儿童手功能影响的证据含糊不清，本荟萃分析试图阐明在该患者群体中是否也是如此。摘要：计算机数据库搜索产生了 468 项研究。根据选择标准对这些研究进行细致的审查和筛选，4篇全文文章被纳入荟萃分析。所有 4 项研究都根据物理治疗证据数据库量表 (PEDro) 进行了方法学质量评估，得分大于 8。然后对 4 项选定的随机对照试验 (RCT) 进行了五次比较。使用相关系数（r 值）测量效果大小。个别研究的效果大小分别为 0.006、0.03、0.04、0.22 和 0.15。总效应量为 0.06。关键信息：这项荟萃分析确定，与约束诱导运动疗法或结构化和非结构化双手疗法相比，使用 HABIT 对患有单侧痉挛性 CP 的儿科患者的益处微不足道。需要更多的 RCT 来证实我们的证据。该荟萃分析确定，与约束诱导的运动疗法或结构化和非结构化双手疗法相比，使用 HABIT 对患有单侧痉挛性 CP 的儿科患者的益处微不足道。需要更多的 RCT 来证实我们的证据。该荟萃分析确定，与约束诱导的运动疗法或结构化和非结构化双手疗法相比，使用 HABIT 对患有单侧痉挛性 CP 的儿科患者的益处微不足道。需要更多的 RCT 来证实我们的证据。