Table 2 Models of experimental forelimb rehabilitation
From: Animal models of post-ischemic forced use rehabilitation: methods, considerations, and limitations
| Rehab model | Advantages | Disadvantages | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constraint | +Most direct model of CIMT; | -Constraint devices may be stressful, confounding results; | [25, 27, 75] |
| +Allows constraint for specific durations thereby allowing the evaluation of various durations of therapy; | -Lack of behavioural pressure to use paretic arm despite constraint | ||
| +Conducive to studies of unilateral forced use | |||
| Forcing use with locomotion | +Stimulates use of the paretic limb in a less aversive paradigm | -Can be stressful (involuntary forced use); | [27, 57, 76–81] |
| -May lack control over intensity (voluntary forced use); | |||
| Encouraging use | +Stimulates use of the paretic limb in a less aversive paradigm | -Complicated by other non-forced use therapy components such as cognitive stimulation; | [82–86] |
| -Usually involves bilateral forced use | |||
| Task specific exercises | +An addition to rehabilitation that models task specific shaping exercises of CIMT | -Requires the desire of animals to participate in a demanding task | [27, 76, 77, 82–84, 86] |