FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4234837112> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4234837112 endingPage "854" @default.
• W4234837112 startingPage "854" @default.
• W4234837112 abstract "Position Papers1 June 1985Biofeedback for Neuromuscular DisordersHEALTH AND PUBLIC POLICY COMMITTEE, AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANSHEALTH AND PUBLIC POLICY COMMITTEESearch for more papers by this author, AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANSSearch for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-102-6-854 SectionsAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ExcerptBiofeedback has been applied to the treatment of numerous neuromuscular disorders. The most widely used method has incorporated the electromyogram (EMG) in muscle reeducation. This technique has been used to train patients with spinal cord and peripheral nerve injuries (1-3), cerebral palsy (2), muscular atrophy resulting from surgery or arthritis (1, 2), hemiparesis resulting from head injury (4), Huntington's chorea (5), tremor (6), Parkinson's disease, and facial palsy (7, 8). However, EMG feedback has been most widely used and tested in patients with a variety of disorders that follow cerebrovascular accidents and in patients with torsion dystonias, particularly spasmodic torticollis....References1. BRUDNYGRYNBAUMKOREIN JBJ. Spasmodic torticollis: treatment by feedback display of the EMG. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1974;55:403-8. MedlineGoogle Scholar2. BRUDNYKOREINGRYNBAUM JJB. EMG feedback therapy: review of treatment of 114 patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1976;57:55-61. MedlineGoogle Scholar3. NACHTWOLFCOOGLER MSC. Use of electromyographic biofeedback during the acute phase of spinal cord injury: a case report. Phys Ther. 1982;62:290-4. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. AMATOHERMSMEYERKLEINMAN ACK. Use of electromyographic feedback to increase inhibitory control of spastic muscles. Phys Ther. 1973;53:1063-6. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. MACPHERSON E. Control of involuntary movement. Behav Res Ther. 1967;5:43-5. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6. LE BOEUF A. The treatment of a severe tremor by electromyogram feedback. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatr. 1976;7:59-61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar7. BROWNNAHAIWOLFBASMAJIAN DFSJ. Electromyographic biofeedback in the reeducation of facial palsy. Am J Phys Med. 1978;57:183-90. MedlineGoogle Scholar8. BOOKERRUBOWCOLEMAN HRP. Simplified feedback in neuromuscular retraining: an automated approach using electromyographic signals. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1969;50:621-5. MedlineGoogle Scholar9. MIDDAUGH S. EMG feedback as a muscle reeducation technique. Phys Ther. 1978;58:15-22. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10. MIDDAUGHMILLER SM. Electromyographic feedback: effect on voluntary muscle contractions in paretic subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1980;61:24-9. MedlineGoogle Scholar11. HURRELL M. Electromyographic feedback in rehabilitation. Physiotherapy. 1980;9:293-8. Google Scholar12. CAUDREYSEEGER DB. Biofeedback devices as an adjunct to physiotherapy. Physiotherapy. 1981;67:371-6. MedlineGoogle Scholar13. WOLF S. Essential considerations in the use of EMG biofeedback. Phys Ther. 1978;58:25-31. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar14. BRUDNYKOREINGRYNBAUMBELANDRESGIANUTSOS JJBPJ. Helping hemiparetics to help themselves: sensory feedback therapy. JAMA. 1979;241:814-8. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar15. KUKULKABASMAJIAN CJ. Assessment of an audio-visual feedback device used in motor training. Am J Phys Med. 1975;54:194-208. MedlineGoogle Scholar16. KUKULKABROWNBASMAJIAN CDJ. Biofeedback training for early finger joint mobilization. Am J Occup Ther. 1975;29:469-70. MedlineGoogle Scholar17. BURNSIDETOBIASBURSILL IHD. Electromyographic feedback in the remobilization of stroke patients: a controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1982;63:217-22. MedlineGoogle Scholar18. WOLF S. Electromyographic biofeedback applications to stroke patients: a critical review. Phys Ther. 1983;63:1448-55. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar19. FISHMAYERHERMAN DNR. Biofeedback [Letter]. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1976;57:152. MedlineGoogle Scholar20. FERNANDOBASMAJIAN CJ. Biofeedback in physical medicine and rehabilitation. Biofeedback Self Regul. 1978;3:435-55. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar21. KEEFESURWIT FR. Electromyographic biofeedback: behavioral treatment of neuromuscular disorders. J Behav Med. 1978;1:13-24. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar22. MARINACCIHORANDE AM. Electromyogram in neuromuscular reeducation. Bull Los Angeles Neurol Soc. 1960;25:57-71. MedlineGoogle Scholar23. ANDREWS J. Neuromuscular re-education of the hemiplegic with the aid of the electromyograph. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1964;45:530-4. MedlineGoogle Scholar24. JOHNSONGARTON HW. Muscle re-education in hemiplegia by use of electromyographic device. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1973;54:320-2. MedlineGoogle Scholar25. BASMAJIAN J. Control of individual motor Units. Am J Phys Med. 1967;46:480-6. MedlineGoogle Scholar26. BASMAJIANKUKULKANARAYANTAKEBE JCMK. Biofeedback treatment of foot-drop after stroke compared with standard rehabilitation technique: effects on voluntary control and strength. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1975;56:231-6. MedlineGoogle Scholar27. BASMAJIANREGENOSBAKER JEM. Rehabilitating stroke patients with biofeedback. Geriatrics. 1977;32:85-8. MedlineGoogle Scholar28. BASMAJIAN J. Biofeedback in rehabilitation: a review of principles and practices. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1981;62:469-75. MedlineGoogle Scholar29. BASMAJIANGOWLANDBRANDSTATERSWANSONTROTTER JCELJ. EMG feedback treatment of upper limb in hemiplegic stroke patients: a pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1982;63:613-6. MedlineGoogle Scholar30. SWAANVAN WIERINGENFOKKEMA DPS. Auditory electromyographic feedback therapy to inhibit undesired motor activity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1974;55:251-4. MedlineGoogle Scholar31. HURDPEGRAMNEPOMUCENO WVC. Comparison of actual and simulated EMG biofeedback in the treatment of hemiplegic patients. Am J Phys Med. 1980;59:73-82. MedlineGoogle Scholar32. MROCZEKHALPERNMCHUGH NDR. Electromyographic feedback and physical therapy for neuromuscular retraining in hemiplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1978;59:258-67. MedlineGoogle Scholar33. LEEHILLJOHNSTONSMIEHOROWSKI KERT. Myofeedback for muscle retraining in hemiplegic patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1976;57:588-91. MedlineGoogle Scholar34. MIDDAUGHMILLERFOSTERFERDON SCGM. Electromyographic feedback: effects on voluntary muscle contractions in normal subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1982;63:254-60. MedlineGoogle Scholar35. BINDERMOLLWOLF SCS. Evaluation of electromyographic biofeedback as an adjunct to therapeutic exercise in treating the lower extremities of hemiplegic patients. Phys Ther. 1981;61:886-93. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar36. WOLFBAKERKELLY SMJ. EMG biofeedback in stroke: a 1-year follow-up on the effect of patient characteristics. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1980;61:351-5. MedlineGoogle Scholar37. WOLFBAKERKELLY SMJ. EMG biofeedback in stroke: effect of patient characteristics. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1979;60:96-102. MedlineGoogle Scholar38. WOLFBINDER-MACLEOD SS. Electromyographic biofeedback applications to the hemiplegic patient: changes in upper extremity neuromuscular and functional status. Phys Ther. 1983;63:1404-13. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar39. WOLFBINDER-MACLEOD SS. Electromyographic biofeedback applications to the hemiplegic patient: changes in lower extremity neuromuscular and functional status. Phys Ther. 1983;63:1393-403. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar40. SHIAVICHAMPIONFREEMANBUGEL RSFH. Efficacy of myofeedback therapy in regaining control of lower extremity musculature following stroke. Am J Phys Med. 1979;58:185-94. MedlineGoogle Scholar41. CLEELAND C. Behavioral techniques in the modification of spasmodic torticollis. Neurology (Minneap). 1973;23:1241-7. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar42. KOREINBRUDNYGRYNBAUMSACHS-FRANKELWEISINGERLEVIDOW JJBGML. Sensory feedback therapy of spasmodic torticollis and dystonia: results in treatment of 55 patients. Adv Neurol. 1976;14:375-402. MedlineGoogle Scholar This content is PDF only. To continue reading please click on the PDF icon. Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania*This paper was authored by Peter M. Marzuk, M.D., and was developed for the Health and Public Policy Committee by the Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee: Donald E. Olson, M.D., Chairman; David Banta,, M.D.; Howard S. Frazier, M.D.; Richard B. Hornick, M.D.; Seymour Perry, M.D.; and Willis C. Maddrey, M.D. Members of the Health and Public Policy Committee for the 1984-85 term include Edwin P. Maynard III, M.D., Chairman; John H. Eisenberg, M.D.; Richard G. Farmer, M.D.; Daniel D. Federman, M.D.; John R. Hogness, M.D.; Leo E. Hollister, M.D.; Charles E. Lewis, M.D.; Donald E. Olson, M.D.; Malcolm L. Peterson, M.D.; Theodore B. Schwartz, M.D.; and Helen L. Smits, M.D. This paper was adopted by the Executive Committee of the Board of Regents on 28 January 1985. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics Cited byBiofeedback therapy in stroke rehabilitation: a reviewA review of stroke rehabilitation and physiotherapy.Stroke RehabilitationBiofeedback Training for Children with Bladder Sphincter IncoordinationSingle-Case Experimental Designs in Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 1 June 1985Volume 102, Issue 6Page: 854-858KeywordsParalysisParkinson diseasePatientsPrevention, policy, and public healthPublic policySafetySpinal cordStrokeSub-specialty careSurgery ePublished: 1 December 2008 Issue Published: 1 June 1985 Copyright & Permissions© 1985 American College of PhysiciansPDF downloadLoading ..." @default.
• W4234837112 created "2022-05-12" @default.
• W4234837112 date "1985-06-01" @default.
• W4234837112 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W4234837112 title "Biofeedback for Neuromuscular Disorders" @default.
• W4234837112 doi "https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-102-6-854" @default.
• W4234837112 hasPublicationYear "1985" @default.
• W4234837112 type Work @default.
• W4234837112 citedByCount "4" @default.
• W4234837112 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4234837112 hasConcept C1862650 @default.
• W4234837112 hasConcept C2776377089 @default.
• W4234837112 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4234837112 hasConcept C99508421 @default.
• W4234837112 hasConceptScore W4234837112C1862650 @default.
• W4234837112 hasConceptScore W4234837112C2776377089 @default.
• W4234837112 hasConceptScore W4234837112C71924100 @default.
• W4234837112 hasConceptScore W4234837112C99508421 @default.
• W4234837112 hasIssue "6" @default.
• W4234837112 hasLocation W42348371121 @default.
• W4234837112 hasOpenAccess W4234837112 @default.
• W4234837112 hasPrimaryLocation W42348371121 @default.
• W4234837112 hasRelatedWork W2026283600 @default.
• W4234837112 hasRelatedWork W2055209467 @default.
• W4234837112 hasRelatedWork W2071264699 @default.
• W4234837112 hasRelatedWork W2131560447 @default.
• W4234837112 hasRelatedWork W2560205657 @default.
• W4234837112 hasRelatedWork W2749589118 @default.
• W4234837112 hasRelatedWork W2782657029 @default.
• W4234837112 hasRelatedWork W3147437095 @default.
• W4234837112 hasRelatedWork W4320735972 @default.
• W4234837112 hasRelatedWork W4362522352 @default.
• W4234837112 hasVolume "102" @default.
• W4234837112 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4234837112 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4234837112 workType "article" @default.