Literature (Beck, 1986:96; Beaver & Brewster, 2002:132; Piaget et al., 2009:1) indicates that the first two years of a baby’s life is a critical period for development. This period is seen as windows of opportunity for development. There is still controversy in the literature regarding if baby stimulation helps babies to reach their neuro-motor development milestones faster, and which type of stimulation is the most advantageous, namely group stimulation or individual stimulation. The first objective of this study was to determine the effect of different methods of stimulation on the motor development of babies between the ages of 3 – 9 months, and secondly to determine what the effect of stimulation administered by a primary caregiver have on the motor development of babies between the ages of 3 – 9 months. A pretest-posttest design was used based on an available random sample where the effect of motor stimulation in different stimulation groups was tested. For objective 1 the babies (N=42) was divided into three different groups and exposed to informal stimulation (n=14), group stimulation as part of a day care program (n=15) and individual stimulation (n=13) administered by a primary caregiver. A nonstandardised checklist was designed by the researcher, refined in a pilot study and completed by the facilitators of the group and individual stimulation programs in which the content of the motor stimulation program was described. During the pretesting phase the babies were tested by the researcher in order to determine their motor milestone developmental status by means of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-2-measuring instrument (PDMS-2). This measuring instrument consists of five sub-scales that are converted to a gross motor, fine motor and total motor quotient. After applying the stimulation programs for 12 weeks on a daily basis in the group stimulation and the formal individual stimulation programs, the same aspects of the babies’ motor development was tested again by the PDMS-2. The results showed that after 3 – 9 months old babies were exposed to formal stimulation programs and the data was adjusted for age in months, gender, other activities and pretest results, they did not reach their neuro-motor developmental milestones faster than the babies that were exposed to informal stimulation. The results also show that babies that received individual stimulation administered by a primary caregiver did not reach their milestones faster than babies that only received informal stimulation. However, it seems that individual stimulation administered by a primary caregiver is more beneficial than group stimulation. For objective 2 the subjects (N=27) was divided into two groups and were exposed to informal stimulation (n=14) and individual stimulation (n=13) administered by a primary caregiver. A co-variance of analysis was used and effect sizes were determined for the differences that occurred. The results showed that 3 – 9 months old babies that were exposed to a formal stimulation program did not reach their neuro-motor development milestones faster than babies that were exposed to informal stimulation, because the informal stimulation groups achieved significant (d > 0.2) higher scores for the gross motor (d > 0.24), fine motor (d > 0.27) and total motor quotient (d > 0.33). Individual stimulation showed nonsignificant higher mean values for the reflex (ẋ = 10.30), locomotion (ẋ = 9.16) and visual-motor integration sub-scales (ẋ = 9.45), while informal stimulation showed higher mean values for static balance (ẋ = 11.46) and grasping skills (ẋ = 10.21). The conclusion can be made that simulation whether informal, formal or in a group is beneficial to babies, but the baby must be ready for the specific stimulation. The success of informal stimulation depends on the parents’ knowledge and educational levels. Consequently the same results will not necessarily be achieved by parents that are from a less wealthy environment and that have fewer opportunities to obtain knowledge about the optimal stimulation of babies. / Thesis (M.A. (Kinderkinetics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011

Background: Group Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (CST) has been found to be effective in improving cognitive functioning and quality of life in people with dementia. However, little is known about whether it would be effective if delivered in an individual format. Design: A small n within-subjects, repeated measures design was used, with participants acting as their own control, to assess whether Individual CST was beneficial for people with vascular dementia. Method: 27 research packs were distributed, 12 returned the opt-in slip, eight completed the therapy and five participants (with a diagnosis of vascular dementia) were included in this study. Participants completed a four-week baseline period, seven-weeks of Individual CST, followed by a four-week follow up period. Outcome variables were cognitive functioning (assessed at start of baseline and end of intervention), quality of life and self efficacy (assessed at start of baseline, start of intervention, end of intervention and end of follow up) and anxiety and depression (assessed weekly). Results: Cognitive functioning was maintained or improved in four out of five participants. Improvements tended to be in the memory and language domains but declined in the attention domain. Participant quality of life and anxiety and depression ratings were also maintained or improved following the intervention. Conclusion: This research suggests that Individual CST may be beneficial for people with vascular dementia in terms of maintaining or improving cognitive function, improving quality of life and mood. This has implications for the provision of future interventions for dementia. Further research is required to further build on these findings in addition to assessing cost-effectiveness before Individual CST is offered as a therapeutic option.

Würzburg, Universität, Thesis (doctoral), 2001.

Transcutaneous electrical stimulation (TNES) is a controversial treatment method for oropharyngeal dysphagia. Currently, few studies support the effectiveness of TNES for the treatment of dysphagia. This study examines the available research regarding the effectiveness of TNES for the treatment of oropharyngeal dysphagia. / text

Tissue engineering approaches have attempted to address some of the problems associated with articular cartilage defect repair, but grafts with sufficient functional properties have yet to reach clinical practice. Mechanical loads are properly controlled in the body to maintain the functional properties of articular cartilage. This inspires the inclusion of mechanical stimulation in any in vitro production of tissue engineered constructs for defect repair. This mechanical stimulation must improve the functional properties (both biochemical and structural) of engineered articular cartilage tissue. Only a few studies have applied more than two loading types to mimic the complex in vivo load/flow conditions. The general hypothesis of the present thesis proposes that the generation of functional articular cartilage substitute tissue in vitro benefits from load and fluid flow conditions similar to those occurring in vivo. It is specifically hypothesized that application of compression, shear and perfusion on chondrocyte-seeded constructs will improve their properties. It is also hypothesized that protein production of the cell-seeded constructs can be improved in a depth-dependent manner with some loading combinations. Thus, a hydromechanical stimulator system was developed that was capable of simultaneously applying compression, shear and perfusion. Functionality of system was tested by series of short-term pilot studies to optimize some of the system parameters. In these studies, agarose-chondrocytes constructs were stimulated for 2 weeks. Then, longer-term (21- 31 days) studies were performed to examine the effects of both mechanical (compression and dynamic shear) and hydromechanical (compression, dynamic shear and fluid flow) stimulation on glycosaminoglycan and collagen production. The effects of these loading conditions were also investigated for three layers of construct to find out if protein could be localized differently depth-wise. In one of the longer-term studies, the chosen mechanical and hydromechanical stimulation conditions increased total collagen production, with higher amount of collagen for hydromechanical compared with mechanical loading condition. However, their effectiveness in increasing total glycosaminoglycan production was inconclusive with the current loading regimes. The hydromechanically stimulated construct could localize higher collagen production to the top layer compared with middle and bottom layers. Some effectiveness of hydromechanical stimulation was demonstrated in this thesis. Future studies will be directed towards further optimization of parameters such as stimulation frequency and duration as well as fluid perfusion rate to produce constructs with more glycosaminoglycan and collagen.

Literature (Beck, 1986:96; Beaver & Brewster, 2002:132; Piaget et al., 2009:1) indicates that the first two years of a baby’s life is a critical period for development. This period is seen as windows of opportunity for development. There is still controversy in the literature regarding if baby stimulation helps babies to reach their neuro-motor development milestones faster, and which type of stimulation is the most advantageous, namely group stimulation or individual stimulation. The first objective of this study was to determine the effect of different methods of stimulation on the motor development of babies between the ages of 3 – 9 months, and secondly to determine what the effect of stimulation administered by a primary caregiver have on the motor development of babies between the ages of 3 – 9 months. A pretest-posttest design was used based on an available random sample where the effect of motor stimulation in different stimulation groups was tested. For objective 1 the babies (N=42) was divided into three different groups and exposed to informal stimulation (n=14), group stimulation as part of a day care program (n=15) and individual stimulation (n=13) administered by a primary caregiver. A nonstandardised checklist was designed by the researcher, refined in a pilot study and completed by the facilitators of the group and individual stimulation programs in which the content of the motor stimulation program was described. During the pretesting phase the babies were tested by the researcher in order to determine their motor milestone developmental status by means of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-2-measuring instrument (PDMS-2). This measuring instrument consists of five sub-scales that are converted to a gross motor, fine motor and total motor quotient. After applying the stimulation programs for 12 weeks on a daily basis in the group stimulation and the formal individual stimulation programs, the same aspects of the babies’ motor development was tested again by the PDMS-2. The results showed that after 3 – 9 months old babies were exposed to formal stimulation programs and the data was adjusted for age in months, gender, other activities and pretest results, they did not reach their neuro-motor developmental milestones faster than the babies that were exposed to informal stimulation. The results also show that babies that received individual stimulation administered by a primary caregiver did not reach their milestones faster than babies that only received informal stimulation. However, it seems that individual stimulation administered by a primary caregiver is more beneficial than group stimulation. For objective 2 the subjects (N=27) was divided into two groups and were exposed to informal stimulation (n=14) and individual stimulation (n=13) administered by a primary caregiver. A co-variance of analysis was used and effect sizes were determined for the differences that occurred. The results showed that 3 – 9 months old babies that were exposed to a formal stimulation program did not reach their neuro-motor development milestones faster than babies that were exposed to informal stimulation, because the informal stimulation groups achieved significant (d > 0.2) higher scores for the gross motor (d > 0.24), fine motor (d > 0.27) and total motor quotient (d > 0.33). Individual stimulation showed nonsignificant higher mean values for the reflex (ẋ = 10.30), locomotion (ẋ = 9.16) and visual-motor integration sub-scales (ẋ = 9.45), while informal stimulation showed higher mean values for static balance (ẋ = 11.46) and grasping skills (ẋ = 10.21). The conclusion can be made that simulation whether informal, formal or in a group is beneficial to babies, but the baby must be ready for the specific stimulation. The success of informal stimulation depends on the parents’ knowledge and educational levels. Consequently the same results will not necessarily be achieved by parents that are from a less wealthy environment and that have fewer opportunities to obtain knowledge about the optimal stimulation of babies. / Thesis (M.A. (Kinderkinetics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2011

Thesis (Ph.D.) -- McMaster University, 1999. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 154-160). Also available via World Wide Web.

Thesis (M.Sc.). / Written for the School of Computer Science. Title from title page of PDF (viewed 2008/05/30). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2004. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 89-108).

Thesis (Ph.D)--Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2009. / Committee Co-Chair: Shawn Hochman; Committee Co-Chair: Stephen P. DeWeerth; Committee Member: Lena Ting; Committee Member: Robert J. Butera; Committee Member: Robert Lee; Committee Member: Vivian K. Mushahwar. Part of the SMARTech Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Collection.