Authors: 

Dr. Steven J. Cousins, BASc, MASc, PhD, PEng

Head of Biomedical Engineering Services
Royal Hospital for Neuro-disability
West Hill, Putney, London SW15 3SW
Telephone: 020 8780 4500 Extension 5055
Email: [email protected]

Mr. Richard Jefferson*, DipCOT, MSc

Senior Occupational Therapist
Royal Hospital for Neuro-disability
West Hill, Putney, London SW15 3SW

*Currently at:
Homerton University Hospital NHS Trust
Homerton Row, Hackney, London E9 6SR
Telephone: 020 8510 7967

This paper has been submitted to the Journal of Clinical Rehabilitation

Abstract:

“Objective: To investigate the efficacy of Mobile Arm Supports (MAS) and to identify the variables that may influence MAS efficacy in functional activity.

Design: A group study with measures taken before and after a four-week intervention with MAS.

Setting: Subjects were community based (living at home) or residential (in a continuing care and rehabilitation facility).

Subjects: Twenty (12 male, eight female) with upper limb weakness (some with ataxia and tremor) presenting with Motor Neuron Disease, Acute Traumatic Brain Injury (<2 years), Chronic Traumatic Brain Injury (<2 years), Muscular Dystrophy and Multiple Sclerosis.

Main Outcome Measures: Timed activities including eating, page turning and keyboard use were correlated with developed observational functional scores. Eleven other measures in addition to a quality of life measure were included.

Results: Findings for all pathologies and three equipment types show an improvement in the average timed activities of 34.9% (p<0.0002) and improvement in the average TELER indicators of 23.1% (p<0.0007).

Conclusion: Functional improvements using Mobile Arm Supports can be substantial allowing function and multiple activities where they had been very limited. Functional TELER indicators were well correlated with timed procedures allowing the future use of the simpler observational TELER indicators as an outcome measure of functional improvement with MAS. There are also correlations between the functional improvements and life satisfaction (quality of life) for the subjects.”