RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine the utility of treating facial palsy with mirror book therapy in conjunction with facial physical rehabilitation. METHODS: We randomly selected and reviewed the charts of 25 patients with idiopathic facial palsy. 10 of these patients received facial physical rehabilitation including manual therapy and postural exercises. 15 of these patients received mirror book therapy in conjunction with standard facial rehabilitation. Before and after treatment, patients in both groups were rated using the Facial Grading System (FGS) score, the Facial Disability Index--Physical (FDIP) score, and the Facial Disability Index--Social (FDIS) score. Differences in response to therapy were analyzed. RESULTS: Patients in the facial physical rehabilitation group without mirror book therapy group showed on average a 20.8% increase in the FGS score, a 19% increase in the FDIP score, and a 14.6% increase in the FDIS score. Patients in the mirror book therapy group showed an average of 24.9% increase in the Facial Grading System (FGS) score, a 21.6% increase in the Facial Disability Index--Physical (FDIP) score, and a 24.5% increase in the Facial Disability Index--Social (FDIS) score. CONCLUSION: The addition of mirror book therapy to standard facial rehabilitation treatments does significantly improve outcomes in the treatment of idiopathic facial palsy.
RESUMO
We conducted a retrospective chart review to determine the effectiveness of treating idiopathic facial palsy with mirror book therapy in conjunction with facial physical rehabilitation. We compared outcomes in 15 patients who underwent mirror book therapy in addition to standard therapy with those of 10 patients who underwent standard rehabilitation therapy without the mirror book. Before and after treatment, patients in both groups were rated according to the Facial Grading System (FGS), the Facial Disability Index-Physical (FDIP), and the Facial Disability Index-Social (FDIS). Patients in the mirror therapy group had a mean increase of 24.9 in FGS score, 22.0 in FDIP score, and 25.0 in FDIS score, all of which represented statistically significant improvements over their pretreatment scores. Those who did not receive mirror book therapy had mean increases of 20.8, 19.0, 14.6, respectively; these, too, represented significant improvements over baseline, and thus there was no statistically significant difference in improvement between the two groups. Nevertheless, our results show that patients who used mirror book therapy in addition to standard facial rehabilitation therapy experienced significant improvements in the treatment of idiopathic facial palsy. While further studies are necessary to determine if it has a definitive, statistically significant advantage over standard therapy, we recommend adding this therapy to the rehabilitation program in view of its ease of use, low cost, and lack of side effects.
