Международный неврологический журнал Том 21, №1, 2025
Вернуться к номеру
Нейропластичність у реабілітації дітей із церебральним паралічем
Авторы: O.O. Kachmar, N.V. Kozyavkinа, A.D. Kushnir, O.V. Kozyavkina
Kozyavkin International Rehabilitation Clinic, Truskavets, Ukraine
Рубрики: Неврология
Разделы: Справочник специалиста
Версия для печати
Резюме
У статті розглядається значення нейропластичності в реабілітації дітей із церебральним паралічем (ДЦП), підкреслюється здатність мозку до адаптації та відновлення втрачених функцій. Використання нейропластичних механізмів дозволяє покращити рухові навички, когнітивні здібності та загальну якість життя. Дослідження підтверджують, що рання й інтенсивна реабілітація пацієнтів із ДЦП забезпечує кращі результати, оскільки дитячий мозок має високий рівень пластичності. Індивідуальний підхід є ключовим у процесі реабілітації, оскільки ступінь моторних порушень, когнітивні здібності та супутні патології можуть значно відрізнятись. Однією з методик, у якій використовується інтенсивний та індивідуальний підхід до відновлення функцій пацієнта з ДЦП, є система інтенсивної нейрофізіологічної реабілітації, відома як метод Козявкіна. Вона комбінує різні лікувальні впливи, що доповнюють та посилюють один одного, зокрема мануальну, фізичну терапію, ерготерапію та інші, сприяючи активізації нейропластичних змін. Поєднання різних методів реабілітації із багаторазовим повтором необхідної дії дозволяє забезпечити комплексний підхід і максимально використати потенціал нейропластичності. Застосування сучасних технологій, зокрема віртуальної реальності та реабілітаційних комп’ютерних ігор, підвищує мотивацію дітей і покращує результати терапії. Таким чином, у цій статті підкреслюється важливість нейропластичності як ключового фактора в реабілітації осіб із ДЦП. Завдяки цілеспрямованій багатокомпонентній терапії діти з церебральним паралічем можуть досягти кращої мобільності, більшої незалежності та покращення якості життя.
This article examines the significance of neuroplasticity in the rehabilitation of children with cerebral palsy (CP), emphasizing the brain’s ability to adapt and restore lost functions. Utilizing neuroplastic mechanisms helps improve motor skills, cognitive abilities, and the overall quality of life for patients. Research confirms that early and intensive rehabilitation yields better outcomes for children with CP, as the developing brain has a high degree of plasticity. An individualized approach is crucial in rehabilitation, as the severity of motor impairments, cognitive abilities, and associated conditions can vary significantly among patients. One of the rehabilitation methods that applies an intensive and personalized approach to restoring functions in children with CP is the Intensive Neurophysiological Rehabilitation System, commonly known as the Kozyavkin Method. It combines various therapeutic techniques that complement and enhance one another, including manual therapy, physical therapy, occupational therapy, and other interventions that promote neuroplastic changes. The combination of multiple rehabilitation methods with repetitive task practice ensures a comprehensive approach and maximizes the brain’s neuroplastic potential. The use of modern technologies such as virtual reality and rehabilitation-based computer games further increases children’s motivation and improves therapy outcomes. Thus, this article highlights the importance of neuroplasticity as a key factor in the rehabilitation of children with CP. Through targeted, multi-component therapy, children with cerebral palsy can achieve better mobility, greater independence, and an improved quality of life.
Ключевые слова
нейропластичність; церебральний параліч; реабілітація
neuronal plasticity; cerebral palsy; rehabilitation
Introduction
The human brain possesses a remarkable ability to adapt and reorganize itself in response to experiences, injuries, and therapeutic interventions — a phenomenon known as neuroplasticity. This capacity for change is particularly crucial in the rehabilitation of individuals with cerebral palsy (CP), a neurological condition resulting from early brain damage. By understanding and harnessing neuroplasticity, modern rehabilitation strategies aim to improve motor function, cognitive abilities, and overall quality of life for those affected. This article explores the history, mechanisms, and clinical applications of neuroplasticity, focusing on its role in rehabilitation of children with CP and state-of-the-art approaches such as the Intensive Neurophysiological Rehabilitation System (INRS).
The term “neuroplasticity” was defined for the first time by Polish neuroscientist Jerzy Konorski in 1948. He suggested a theory by which neurons that have been activated by the closeness of an active neural circuit, change and incorporate themselves into that circuit [1]. The history of neuroplasticity reveals a profound evolution in our understanding of the brain.
History of neuroplasticity: from fixed structures to adaptive potential
This shift from viewing the brain as a fixed organ to re-cognizing its adaptive nature has transformed neuroscience, leading to groundbreaking therapies for recovery from brain injuries, mental health interventions, and insights into lifelong learning.
For centuries, the prevailing belief in neuroscience was that the brain’s structure was fixed after early development. Ancient Greek philosophers, including Aristotle, theorized that the brain’s role was primarily to cool the blood rather than serve as the seat of thought and behavior. This mechanistic view of the brain persisted through the Renaissance, reinforced by influential thinkers like René Descartes, who argued that the brain functioned like a machine, with set pathways that governed actions in a predetermined way [2].
Descartes’ mechanistic model, later reinforced by 19th century scientists, relied on the analogy of the brain as a system of levers and pulleys, much like a machine. The idea that the brain could be broken down into individual parts with specific, unchanging functions became the dominant viewpoint. This rigid conception also shaped early medical approaches to brain injuries and disorders, as treatments were aimed at accommodating damage rather than enable functional recovery. During this period, medical practitioners often believed that once neurological pathways were damaged, they could not regenerate or adapt.
The 19th century saw the first significant challenges to the idea of an unchanging brain. Philosopher and psychologist William James suggested that the brain could undergo changes based on experience, introducing the term “plasticity” in The Principles of Psychology [3]. James emphasized that behavioral changes and environmental adaptations could reshape neural pathways, suggesting a level of flexibility. Around the same time, Santiago Ramón y Cajal, often regarded as the “father of modern neuroscience”, made groundbreaking discoveries regarding neurons, suggesting that they might adapt and create new connections — a theory that contradicted the dominant belief of an immutable brain [4].
Cajal’s theories were revolutionary; through his meticulous studies using early microscopy techniques, he discovered that neurons did not physically connect to one another as previously thought but instead communicated across small gaps. Cajal proposed that these synaptic connections could change over time — a concept that would later become central to understanding neuroplasticity. However, this concept faced resistance, as the prevailing doctrine of the time, known as the neuron doctrine, emphasized the stable, fixed nature of neural structures [5].
In the early 20th century, Karl Lashley’s research on brain lesions in rats provided evidence that the brain could compensate for damaged areas, indicating a level of adaptability. Lashley’s studies on cortical maps and memory, where he observed that certain functions could be restored even after damaging parts of the brain, suggested that other brain regions could “take over” lost functions. However, Lashley’s findings were interpreted conservatively, and the broader scientific community remained skeptical, continuing to view the brain as essentially hardwired after development. Other influential neuroscientists like Sir Charles Sherrington held firm to this fixed-brain model, reinforcing the idea that neural circuits were permanently established in early life [5].
Despite this resistance, new evidence of brain adaptability continued to accumulate. Researchers like Donald Hebb in the 1940s introduced influential theories on learning and brain organization. Hebb’s principle, often summarized as “neurons that fire together, wire together”, suggested that repeated activation of neural pathways could lead to stronger, more permanent connections. Although this theory was not immediately recognized as proof of neuroplasticity, it provided the conceptual foundation for later research [6].
The 1960s and 1970s marked a turning point for neuroplasticity, as experimental research yielded more definitive evidence of the brain’s adaptability. Neuropsychologist Paul Bach-y-Rita pioneered research demonstrating sensory substitution where individuals could use a tactile device to “see”, thus rerouting sensory information and proving the brain’s adaptability in interpreting new sensory inputs [7]. Around the same time, Michael Merzenich’s studies on cortical maps demonstrated that the brain’s sensory regions could reorganize based on experience, learning, or injury, providing concrete evidence of plasticity [8]. One of the most influential findings during this period was the phenomenon of long-term potentiation (LTP), discovered in 1973 by neuroscientists Tim Bliss and Terje Lømo. LTP demonstrated that repeated activation of certain neural pathways could increase synaptic strength, forming a cellular basis for memory and learning. LTP provided a physiological foundation for Hebb’s theories and reinforced the idea that neural pathways could indeed adapt through repeated use [9].
In the late 1970s, Michael Merzenich’s research on cortical plasticity provided additional evidence. Merzenich observed that the brain’s somatosensory cortex could reorganize after sensory deprivation or injury. He demonstrated that changes in cortical maps were not only possible but could be induced through training and practice, supporting the argument for plasticity [8].
With accumulating evidence, neuroplasticity became widely accepted by the late 20th century. This acceptance enabled the development of new therapies, particularly in rehabilitation. Edward Taub’s work on constraint-induced movement therapy demonstrated how repetitive exercise could prompt brain reorganization in stroke patients, allowing other parts of the brain to take over functions previously managed by damaged areas [10]. Techniques based on neuroplasticity principles such as occupational and physical therapies began to transform rehabilitation practices, giving patients new hope for recovery after neurological damage.
In addition to physical rehabilitation, neuroplasticity plays a role in the treatment of mental health disorders. With a new understanding that the brain could change in response to emotional and cognitive challenges, treatments like cognitive-behavioral therapy began to emerge. These approaches sought to help patients restructure harmful thought patterns, ultimately creating more positive neural pathways [11].
Today, neuroplasticity is a core concept in neuroscience, extending beyond recovery from injury to applications in mental health, education, and aging. Research on neuroplasticity’s role in aging has shown that cognitive engagement and physical activity can maintain and even improve brain function, challenging the belief that cognitive decline is inevitable with age [12].
There is growing interest in neuroplasticity’s role in combating neurodevelopmental and also neurodegenerative diseases. Studies are exploring how therapeutic interventions, cognitive training, and environmental stimulation may induce plastic changes that slow the progression of these diseases. In addition, researchers are investigating the molecular mechanisms of neuroplasticity such as gene expression, protein synthesis, and synaptic growth to identify potential pathways for enhancing plasticity through medical interventions [13].
The history of neuroplasticity demonstrates a significant paradigm shift in our understanding of the brain. From a rigid structure to a malleable organ capable of change and adaptation, neuroplasticity has transformed neuroscience and opened new possibilities in rehabilitation, mental health, and lifelong learning. As research continues to unlock the brain’s adaptive potential, neuroplasticity stands as a testament to the resilience and flexibility of the human mind, offering hope for recovery and growth across the lifespan.
Basic mechanisms of neuroplasticity
Understanding the mechanisms of neuroplasticity provides insights into how experiences and environments shape the brain, with implications for treating neurological conditions. Neuroplasticity encompasses a range of biological processes, from changes at the molecular and synaptic levels to broader alterations in brain circuitry and structure.
Synaptic plasticity represents the strengthening or weakening of connections, or synapses, between neurons. This dynamic process, influenced by learning and memory, underlies many forms of neuroplasticity. The two primary mechanisms of synaptic plasticity are LTP and long-term depression (LTD). LTP involves strengthening synapses based on increased activity, enhancing the efficiency of synaptic transmission. When a neuron is repeatedly stimulated, there is a gradual increase in calcium ion influx, activating signaling pathways and recruiting AMPA receptors to the synapse, thereby improving the postsynaptic neuron’s responsiveness [14]. This mechanism is critical for memory storage and learning, reinforcing frequently used neural pathways.
On the other hand, LTD results in the weakening of synaptic connections, reducing the influence of less used pathways. LTD helps balance the plasticity by selectively pruning less active synapses, allowing the brain to prioritize pathways relevant to current learning or memory processes [15]. This fine-tuning is crucial for memory accuracy, preventing the overcrowding of neural networks with redundant information. LTD is facilitated by a decrease in calcium influx, which activates phosphatases rather than kinases, leading to the removal of AMPA receptors from the postsynaptic membrane.
LTP and LTD highlight how activity-dependent plasticity enables neural circuits to adapt continuously. They involve complex biochemical cascades influenced by proteins, ion channels, and various neurotransmitters, including glutamate, which binds to NMDA and AMPA receptors in LTP and LTD [16]. These dynamic synaptic modifications reflect the brain’s ability to encode and organize information at the synaptic level.
Structural plasticity, or the physical changes in neurons, is another critical aspect of neuroplasticity. It involves the growth and retraction of dendritic spines — tiny protrusions on dendrites where synapses are located. Dendritic remodeling is highly dynamic, especially during learning, and the formation of new dendritic spines correlates with the acquisition of new information. The density, size, and shape of dendritic spines can change in response to environmental enrichment, stress, and cognitive stimulation [17]. The formation of new dendritic spines strengthens synaptic connections and increases the capacity for synaptic input, thereby enhancing learning and memory storage.
On the other hand, spine retraction or pruning helps remove redundant or unused connections, preventing neural circuits from becoming overloaded. This process ensures that only the most relevant and strengthened connections persist, supporting efficient information storage and retrieval. Animal studies have demonstrated that environmental factors, including physical activity and complex surroundings, can encourage dendritic growth and increase spine density, highlighting how lifestyle factors influence brain plasticity [18]. In humans, changes in structural plasticity have been observed in response to skill acquisition like in musicians and athletes, whose brains show region-specific increases in cortical thickness and gray matter density.
Neurogenesis, or the formation of new neurons, occurs predominantly during early development but continues in certain adult brain regions, particularly the hippocampus and olfactory bulb. In the adult brain, hippocampal neurogenesis has been linked to learning, memory, and emotional regulation, with newly generated neurons integrating into existing circuits and supporting cognitive flexibility [19]. While the overall rate of adult neurogenesis is relatively low, these neurons play a critical role in forming new memories and adapting to environmental changes.
Circuit reorganization is another facet of neuroplasticity, particularly relevant for recovery after brain injuries. When neurons are damaged, the brain can reroute or reorganize circuits to compensate for the loss. For instance, if certain motor functions are impaired by injury, the brain may strengthen alternative pathways or neighboring regions to restore function. This capability is essential for post-stroke recovery and is the basis for many therapeutic approaches designed to improve brain function following neurological injuries [20].
Neurotrophic factors such as brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) are proteins that support neuron growth, survival, and synaptic plasticity. BDNF plays a significant role in regulating the mechanisms of neuroplasticity, especially synaptic plasticity and structural remodeling. It enhances synaptic efficacy by promoting the growth and maturation of dendritic spines, as well as by facilitating the formation of new synapses [21]. Higher levels of BDNF have been associated with improved learning, memory, and cognitive performance, as it supports neurotransmitter release and the sensitivity of receptors on the postsynaptic neuron.
Importantly, environmental factors such as physical exercise and cognitive engagement can elevate BDNF le-vels and, consequently, enhance neuroplasticity. Studies have shown that exercise-induced BDNF release positively impacts hippocampal plasticity and spatial memory, sugges-ting a tangible link between lifestyle choices and cognitive resilience [22]. This evidence underscores the potential for interventions targeting neurotrophic factors to enhance cognitive function and mitigate neurodegenerative conditions.
Neuroplasticity enables the brain to adapt and reorganize in response to experiences, environmental changes, and learning. Scientists are uncovering how the brain maintains flexibility and resilience by exploring mechanisms such as synaptic plasticity, structural remodeling, neurogenesis, and role of neurotrophic factors. The insights gained from understanding neuroplasticity offer valuable applications for treating neurological and psychiatric disorders, allowing for more effective therapeutic interventions. With continued research, neuroplasticity remains a promising frontier in neuroscience, providing hope for harnessing the brain’s natural adaptability to improve health and recovery outcomes.
The Kozyavkin Method — a rehabilitation strategy that employs neuroplasticity
The brain’s capability to adapt and reorganize in response to external factors was a crucial element in the development of the innovative Intensive Neurophysiological Rehabilitation System, commonly referred to as the Kozyavkin Method, named after its creator, professor Volodymyr Kozyavkin. This innovative therapy is designed for patients with CP and various neurological movement disorders. Established about four decades ago in Ukraine, the Kozyavkin Method has received official endorsement from the Ukrainian government and has earned recognition across numerous countries.
The Kozyavkin Method is a holistic approach that includes intensive rehabilitation courses with various treatment modalities specifically designed to cater to the unique needs of each child. A key element of this method is a unique variation of spinal manipulation known as biomechanical correction of the spine. This technique is integrated with a range of therapeutic interventions that enhance and support one another such as reflexotherapy, a specialized massage system, physical therapy, joint mobilization, mechanotherapy, and computer game therapy, among others [23].
The rehabilitation process focuses on stimulating the child’s body compensatory abilities and promoting brain plasticity. By balancing muscle tone, restoring joint flexibility, enhancing tissue nutrition, and improving blood flow, a new functional state is established in the body that encourages quicker motor and cognitive development in children. Interventions are designed to enhance various functions, impacting different pathogenic pathways and achieving a more significant overall effect by amplifying one another. Age-appropriate, goal-oriented activities for training fine and gross motor skills are presented in a child-friendly manner, incorporating playful elements.
The treatment components of the INRS focus on distinct functional objectives within the Body Functions (joint mobility, muscle tone, voluntary movement, pain) and Activities and Participation (fine hand use, walking, mobility, interpersonal interactions, and family relationships) domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health.
The Intensive Neurophysiological Rehabilitation System is used to address various neurological disorders, though its main focus has been on rehabilitating children with cerebral palsy.
A recent clinical study investigated the effectiveness of the INRS for children with bilateral CP in a quasi-randomized controlled trial involving 48 participants aged 5–12 years. Results showed significant improvements in gross motor function (Gross Motor Function Measure) and hand function (Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test) after the INRS treatment compared to routine home treatment. The study highlights the potential of the INRS to enhance functional abilities in children with CP, although further longitudinal studies are recommended to assess long-term effects [24].
Neuroplasticity in cerebral palsy
Neuroplasticity plays a critical role in managing and improving outcomes for individuals with CP, a condition caused by non-progressive damage to the brain during early development. It often results in challenges such as motor impairments, sensory deficits, and cognitive difficulties.
The brain’s ability to reorganize itself by forming new neural connections, even in the face of injury, is a cornerstone of neuroplasticity potential. In CP, the motor regions of the brain like the cerebral cortex, basal ganglia, or cerebellum often suffer damage, leading to impairments in movement, posture, and coordination. However, neuroplasticity allows the brain to compensate for these deficits by forming alternative neural pathways.
During early childhood, the brain is especially adap-table — a phase known as heightened plasticity. This period is often referred to as a “critical window” for intervention, where therapeutic efforts can yield significant improvements in motor skills and function. Even though this plasticity declines with age, research has shown that the brain retains a remarkable ability to adapt throughout life. This means that interventions can be effective at any age, although earlier engagement typically leads to better outcomes [25].
A recent single-blind study of the Intensive Neurophysiological Rehabilitation System also highlights the connection between age and motor improvement in children with CP. This study investigates changes in motor functions among 57 children aged 4 to 12 years with spastic cerebral palsy after a two-week INRS treatment. Results indicated a statistically significant increase in Gross Motor Function Measure score, notable improvements in passive range of movements in large extremity joints, and decreased muscle spasticity. Notably, the calculated dependence between motor improvement and age indicates that younger children experience a slightly greater motor improvement [26].
Through neuroplasticity, undamaged brain regions can take over functions previously handled by damaged areas. For instance, alternative pathways can be developed to improve motor control, enabling individuals to perform initially impaired tasks. Neuroplasticity also facilitates better integration of sensory inputs and motor outputs, which is crucial for improving balance, coordination, and the execution of precise movements. The ability of neuroplasticity to reorganize neural networks is influenced by the intensity and specificity of therapeutic activities. Repeated practice and targeted stimulation encourage the brain to strengthen existing connections or develop new ones, thereby compensating for areas of dysfunction. This capacity for reorganization is not limited to motor skills; it can also enhance sensory integration and cognitive functions, further improving the quality of life for individuals with CP [27].
In the context of CP, neuroplasticity mechanisms are central to the success of many interventions aimed at redu-cing disability. These mechanisms allow for adaptive changes that promote functional independence, even in the presence of significant neural injury. By tapping into the brain’s inherent ability to change and adapt, neuroplasticity offers a pathway for meaningful recovery and improvement in people with CP.
Multicomponent INRS strategy to enhance neuroplasticity
The INRS combines different treatment modalities to capitalize on neuroplasticity and address the multifaceted needs of these children.
The INRS is focused on improving motor learning through repetitive and task-specific activities, strengthe-ning existing synaptic connections, and recruiting alternative neural pathways to bypass damaged regions. Recent research indicates that rehabilitation implemented early and effectively can significantly enhance motor, sensory, and cognitive functions, shaping a child’s overall developmental trajectory [27].
Given the complexity of CP, no single treatment can sufficiently address the wide range of symptoms and challenges it presents. Combining multiple therapies in the INRS creates a synergistic effect, maximizing the strengths of each approach. For example, physical therapy focuses on improving gross motor skills, muscle strength, and balance, while occupational therapy targets fine motor skills and daily activities.
One of the key elements in the multifactorial influence on a patient with cerebral palsy is the biomechanical correction of the spine, a unique method of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) that plays a crucial role in the Intensive Neurophysiological Rehabilitation System. This approach has a diverse range of beneficial effects on different systems. This method supports the enhancement of posture and mobility and improves overall neurological performance, leading to an improved quality of life for those with cerebral palsy.
A recently published review of the effects of spinal manipulative therapy on neurological symptoms presents several points based on the available literature [28]. The review highlights that some studies suggest SMT may enhance muscle strength in individuals with stroke and spinal pain. The evidence indicates that SMT can lead to alterations at the cortical level, which may be more pronounced in its influence on muscle strength. Furthermore, SMT appears to be beneficial for motor function, particularly in healthy individuals and those with impaired functional capacity like CP. However, the number of studies addressing this area is limited, and the outcome measures used vary significantly. An important takeaway from this narrative review is the recognition of quality of life as a critical outcome in both research and clinical practice. Even minor improvements in quality of life are significant for individuals with disabilities, and SMT has been associated with enhancements in overall health status and health-related quality of life across various disorders, including those accompanied by pain, balance impairments, and CP. Generally, while SMT shows promise for the symptomatic treatment of neurological disorders, the review emphasizes the need for further high-quality research to substantiate these findings and explore the full range of SMT’s effects.
By integrating different interventions, children receive comprehensive care that addresses all dimensions of their condition. Different therapies also stimulate various parts of the nervous system, promoting broader neuroplastic changes. Each of these therapies complements the others by targeting unique aspects of the child’s neural and physical development, fostering widespread improvements.
Engagement and motivation play a critical role in successful rehabilitation. Children respond differently to various therapies, and a multimodal approach allows programs to be tailored to their interests and abilities. For instance, play-based interventions or gamified therapies can be integrated with traditional methods to make rehabilitation more enjoyable. This diversity of approaches maintains the enthusiasm of children and ensures sustained participation, which is crucial for long-term progress.
Innovative technologies like rehabilitation computer games also enhance the scope of combined treatments for children with CP. Virtual reality-based therapies immerse children in engaging, interactive environments that improve both motor and cognitive functions. They assist in precise movement training, providing real-time feedback to facilitate learning. These technologies provide controlled environments that can be modified to meet the specific challenges faced by the child, thereby ensuring sustained engagement and maximizing the potential for neuroplasticity. Rehabilitation computer games, when combined with traditional approaches, create multidimensional rehabilitation strategies that significantly enhance outcomes [29].
Additionally, a combination of treatments can prevent burnout and fatigue. By distributing therapeutic focus across different methods, clinicians can avoid overloading specific muscles or cognitive functions. Alternating between activities like aquatic therapy and land-based exercises reduces physical strain while maintaining the intensity needed to achieve therapeutic goals.
Research consistently supports the effectiveness of combining treatments in rehabilitation of patients with CP. Studies have shown that multimodal approaches improve motor skills, functional independence, and quality of life more effectively than single modal interventions. For instance, pairing traditional physical therapy with assisted gait training has led to better walking outcomes than physical therapy alone.
The ultimate goal of rehabilitation is to improve immediate functional abilities and foster long-term independence and adaptability. As children grow and their needs change, a combined therapeutic approach allows for ongoing adjustments to meet new challenges and capitalize on emerging opportunities for development. This dynamic, integrated approach like the Intensive Neurophysiological Rehabilitation System acknowledges the evolving nature of rehabilitation and ensures that children with CP receive the comprehensive care they need to thrive [30].
So, combining different treatments in the rehabilitation of children with CP is vital to harnessing the power of neuroplasticity. By addressing the diverse challenges posed by CP and activating multiple neural pathways, this integrated approach promotes holistic development and maximizes the potential of each child. Through tailored, multimodal therapy programs children with CP can achieve greater independence, functionality, and an improved quality of life.
Treatment intensity as a crucial INRS feature
The Kozyavkin Method, also known as the Intensive Neurophysiological Rehabilitation System, emphasizes the importance of treatment intensity to achieve optimal therapeutic outcomes. The INRS course includes four to five hours of daily training for two weeks, five days per week. Treatment is child-friendly and intensive at the same time.
Furthermore, studies highlight that frequent and sustained therapy sessions in the Kozyavkin Method lead to enhanced motor skills, muscle tone regulation, and functional independence. The structured and repetitive nature of this system reinforces movement patterns, thereby improving coordination and reducing spasticity. Compared to traditional rehabilitation models, which often rely on periodic sessions, the intensive, short-term rehabilitation cycles of the INRS allow for accelerated progress within a limited timeframe.
Research suggests that intensive therapy regimens yield better motor improvements than conventional rehabilitation programs with lower frequency and intensity. High treatment intensity, as seen in the INRS, promotes greater neurophysiological adaptation, facilitating the reorganization of neural pathways, which is crucial for children with CP. Constant practice of specific movements may enable automatization and shift motor control to memory-based processing by restructuring the cortical representations of sensorimotor features. This restructuring is believed to appear after intensive repetitive training in adult survivors with stroke and pediatric participants with CP [31].
While the high intensity of treatment is a key advantage, it also requires careful patient selection and individualized treatment planning to ensure safety and effectiveness. Some children may experience temporary discomfort due to increased physical demand, but overall, the benefits in mobility, balance, and daily function outweigh potential challenges.
In conclusion, treatment intensity plays a pivotal role in the effectiveness of rehabilitation for children with CP. The Kozyavkin Method, through its structured and intensive approach, provides a scientifically backed system that fosters motor recovery and neuroplastic adaptation. Future research should continue to refine intensity parameters to optimize long-term functional outcomes for children treated with the INRS.
Patient variability and individualized approaches
Considering patient variability and adopting individualized approaches are essential components of effective rehabilitation for children with CP, as they play a critical role in activating neuroplasticity. Cerebral palsy is a heterogeneous group of disorders characterized by motor and postural dysfunctions resulting from developmental brain injuries. Its diversity requires rehabilitation strategies that are tailored to the unique circumstances of each child, as a one-size-fits-all approach risks failing to provide the precision necessary for substantial neural reorganization.
Neuroplasticity, the brain’s ability to reorganize its structure and function, underpins motor skill acquisition and functional recovery in children with CP. This capacity is heightened during early childhood, when the brain exhibits a remarkable ability to adapt to consistent, appropriately challenging stimuli. Effective rehabilitation must align with the child’s developmental stage, specific injury patterns, and functional capabilities, ensuring the neural system is neither under-stimulated nor overwhelmed. Individualized interventions are particularly crucial because children with CP present with wide-ranging motor impairments, cognitive profiles, associated conditions, and environmental influences.
Variability among patients stems from several factors. The type and severity of motor impairment, whether spastic, dyskinetic, ataxic, or mixed, directly influence therapeutic priorities and approaches. Cognitive abilities, emotional resilience, and behavioral characteristics also impact participation in therapy and its outcomes. Furthermore, comorbidities such as epilepsy, sensory deficits, and musculoskeletal deformities add layers of complexity that need to be addressed holistically. Family, healthcare access, and socioeconomic factors further shape the feasibility and effectiveness of therapeutic interventions.
Tailored rehabilitation strategies consider these diverse factors. For instance, goal setting must be individualized to ensure that the therapy aligns with the child’s aspirations and functio-nal needs. Some children have problems with attention, so they need more frequent pauses for more effective training, while others can lose their motivation during these breaks.
Moreover, a multidisciplinary approach involving physicians, physical and occupational therapists, speech therapists, psychologists, and medical nurses provides a comprehensive framework for addressing the multifaceted needs of children with CP.
Continuous monitoring and adaptation of therapy plans are vital for sustaining neuroplasticity activation. Tools such as the Gross Motor Function Measure and other instruments help assess progress and refine strategies over time. This adaptability ensures that interventions evolve with the child’s development and changing needs, maintaining the optimal level of challenge required for neural reorganization.
The importance of early intervention cannot be overstated, as the first years of life represent a critical period for harnessing neuroplasticity. However, evidence suggests that the brain remains capable of reorganization beyond early childhood, provided that interventions are personalized and consistently progressive. Studies have demonstrated that individualized approaches yield meaningful improvements in motor function and quality of life for children with CP by leveraging their unique neuroplastic potential [32].
So, considering patient variability and utilizing individualized approaches are indispensable for effective rehabilitation of children with cerebral palsy. These strategies not only maximize neuroplasticity but also foster meaningful, lasting improvements in motor function and independence. By prioritizing tailored interventions that reflect the unique circumstances of each child, therapists can empower children with CP to achieve their fullest potential and lead more independent lives.
Conclusions
Neuroplasticity plays a fundamental role in rehabilitation of individuals with cerebral palsy, offering a pathway for functional recovery and improved quality of life. The article explores the shift from a rigid understanding of the brain to recognizing its adaptive potential, detailing key mechanisms such as synaptic plasticity, structural remodeling, and neurogenesis.
These principles form the basis of rehabilitation approaches like the Intensive Neurophysiological Rehabilitation System, also known as the Kozyavkin Method.
By leveraging neuroplasticity, the INRS combines intensive, multimodal therapy strategies to enhance motor skills, cognitive function, and sensory integration. Studies highlight the importance of treatment intensity, patient variability, and individualized approaches in optimizing neuroplastic changes. Younger patients tend to show greater improvement, but neuroplasticity remains accessible throughout life, reinforcing the need for ongoing and adaptive therapy.
Ultimately, neuroplasticity underscores the brain’s ability to reorganize, compensating for damage and maximizing functional potential. As research advances, the application of neuroplasticity in rehabilitation of patients with cerebral palsy continues to evolve, promising better outcomes and greater independence for those affected.
Received 12.01.2025
Revised 17.02.2025
Accepted 21.02.2025
Список литературы
1. Konorski J. Conditioned reflexes and neuron organization. CUP Archive; 1948.
2. Finger S. Origins of neuroscience: a history of explorations into brain function. Oxford University Press; 2001.
3. James W. The principles of psychology. Henry Holt and Co.; 1890.
4. Shepherd GM. Foundations of the neuron doctrine. Oxford University Press; 2015.
5. Finger S. Minds behind the brain: a history of the pioneers and their discoveries. Oxford University Press; 2000.
6. Hebb DO. The organization of behavior: a neuropsychological theory. John Wiley & Sons; 1949. doi: 10.1037/h0055679.
7. Bach-y-Rita P. Sensory plasticity: applications to a vision substitution system. Arch Ophthalmol. 1967;79(5):785-795. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1968.00980020787007.
8. Merzenich M, Wright B, Jenkins W, Xerri C, Byl N, Miller S, Tallal P. Cortical plasticity underlying perceptual, motor, and cognitive skill development: implications for neurorehabilitation. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1996;61:1-8.
9. Bliss TVP, Lømo T. Long-lasting potentiation of synaptic transmission in the dentate area of the anesthetized rabbit following stimulation of the perforant path. J Physiol. 1973;232(2):331-356. doi: 10.1152/jn.1973.32.5.621.
10. Taub E, Uswatte G, Elbert T. New treatments in neurorehabi–litation founded on basic research. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2002;3(3):228-236.
11. Beck AT. Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. Penguin; 1979.
12. Park DC, Bischof GN. The aging mind: neuroplasticity in response to cognitive training. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2013;15(1):109-119.
13. Abbott LF, Nelson SB. Synaptic plasticity: taming the beast. Nat Neurosci. 2000;3(11):1178-1183.
14. Malenka RC, Bear MF. LTP and LTD: an embarrassment of riches. Neuron. 2004;44(1):5-21.
15. Citri A, Malenka RC. Synaptic plasticity: multiple forms, functions, and mechanisms. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2008;33(1):18-41.
16. Collingridge GL, Isaac JT, Wang YT. Receptor trafficking and synaptic plasticity. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004;5(12):952-962.
17. Pascual-Leone A, Amedi A, Fregni F, Merabet LB. The plastic human brain cortex. Ann Rev Neurosci. 2005;28:377-401.
18. Van Praag H, Schinder AF, Christie BR, Toni N, Palmer TD, Gage FH. Functional neurogenesis in the adult hippocampus. Nature. 2002;415(6875):1030-1034.
19. Abrous DN, Koehl M, Le Moal M. Adult neurogene–sis: from precursors to network and physiology. Physiol Rev. 2005;85(2):523-569.
20. Nudo RJ. Mechanisms for recovery of motor function following cortical damage. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2006;16(6):638-644.
21. Park H, Poo MM. Neurotrophin regulation of neural circuit development and function. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2013;14(1):7-23.
22. Vaynman S, Ying Z, Gomez-Pinilla F. Hippocampal BDNF mediates the efficacy of exercise on synaptic plasticity and cognition. Eur J Neurosci. 2004;20(10):2580-2590.
23. Kozyavkin VI, Babadahly M, Lun H, Kachmar OO, Hordiyevych SM, Lysovych VI, et al. Intensive Neurophysiological Rehabilitation System — the Kozyavkin method. A manual for rehabilitation specialists. Lviv: Design studio Papuga; 2012.
24. Kushnir A, Kachmar O. Intensive Neurophysiological Rehabilitation System for children with cerebral palsy: a quasi-randomized controlled trial. BMC Neurol. 2023;23:157. doi: 10.1186/s12883-023-03216-4.
25. Johnston MV. Plasticity in the developing brain: implications for rehabilitation. Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2009. doi: 10.1002/ddrr.64.
26. Kachmar O, Mysula I, Kushnir A, Voloshyn T, Matiushen–ko O, Hasiuk M, Hordiyevych M. Changes in motor functions in children with cerebral palsy after the course of intensive neurophysiological rehabilitation: a single-blind study. International Journal of Neuro–logy. 2019;5(107):5-11.
27. Hallett M. Neuroplasticity and rehabilitation. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2005.
28. Kushnir A, Fedchyshyn B, Kachmar O. Review of effects of spinal manipulative therapy on neurological symptoms. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2023;34:66-73. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2023.04.009.
29. Bonnechère B, Jansen B, Omelina L, Degelaen M, Wermenbol V, Rooze M, Van Sint Jan S. Can serious games be incorporated with conventional treatment of children with cerebral palsy? A review. Res Dev Disabil. 2014. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2014.04.016.
30. Bellomo RG, Barassi G, Verì N, Giannuzzo G, Di Felice PA, et al. Integrated rehabilitation approach in cerebral palsy patients. 2016. doi: 10.14813/ibra.2016.36.
31. Dan B. Beyond localizing neurology and psychology. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2016;58:4.
32. Morgan C, Novak I, Dale RC. Optimizing motor learning in infants at high risk of cerebral palsy: a pilot study. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2016;20(4):607-620. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpn.2016.01.016.