Bobath and NeuroDevelopmental Therapy: what is the future?
M. Mayston
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.13221
2016-10-01
Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology
Abstract:For many years, the multidisciplinary therapy approach developed by Bertha and Karel Bobath for cerebral palsy (CP) was met with a very positive response. Families flocked to the Bobath Centre in London for treatment and a home programme, and the training courses for therapists had up to 4-year waiting lists. In 1965 it was hailed in the UK parliament as a breakthrough in the management of CP. The approach was taken by trainees to many countries, and courses and professional associations were established worldwide. As a result, it became the main approach to the management of CP, almost to the exclusion of all other interventions. It was also applied to early intervention of high-risk infants, which was unusual at that time. In the last few years, Bobath/NeuroDevelopmental Therapy (NDT) for most professionals in the world of childhood disability management has fallen from favour and use, and this is related to the lack of an evidence base. It has even been suggested in this journal that the approach should be discontinued. This is unsurprising, though perhaps not for the reasons stated in that particular systematic review. Bobath/NDT are both systems of intervention, not single treatment modalities. But there are far more reaching issues than that. Over time, the terms Bobath and NDT have to an extent been used synonymously, though they are not the same. Bobath and NDT both aim to offer a holistic, multidisciplinary intervention with the objective of optimal participation in daily life, but in practice there are fundamental differences in how each achieves that objective. NDT interpreted the original multidisciplinary neurophysiologically-based Bobath approach in terms of biomechanics, which resulted in a different emphasis in clinical practice which is in my view more passive. Some practitioners focus on the hands-on rather than the original emphasis on the importance of activity for function (activity and participation). Some include all treatments under the Bobath/NDT umbrella, while others identify what is Bobath/NDT and see other interventions as adjuncts. The Bobath/NDT approach to management is also often different in children and adults. Development is a good thing; however, practitioners have developed Bobath/NDT in many different directions, resulting in a diversity of approaches. This has produced a situation for which there is no universally agreed definition of what Bobath/NDT is, or what it means to be a Bobathor NDT-trained therapist. Given this diversity, the essence of ‘What is Bobath?’ cannot be universally identified, agreed, practised, or taught, and ultimately cannot submit itself to rigorous research. While the Bobath name has high heritage value, it no longer stands for a valid universal therapy approach. What does this mean for the future? Centres and hospitals named after Bobath represent that heritage, but like the already-established Bobath/NDT associations, they need to change their emphasis of activity to offer effective child/ family-centred interventions which can lead to optimal activity and participation. My personal view is that the contribution of Bobath/NDT to the management of CP has historical value, but it would be more realistic and respectful to discontinue use of the name as a therapy approach. Let us all take a step back, not just those who associate themselves with Bobath/NDT. The future is about promoting current practice which draws on the various guidelines such as those offered by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE), whose rigorous approach to review of the literature is unbiased and also identifies research needs. Given that the research evidence base is lacking for CP intervention, sound clinical reasoning with reference to current knowledge on neuroplasticity, development, motor learning, muscle physiology, biomechanics, and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, Children & Youth Version (http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/) can provide a rational basis for intervention. This is the responsibility of all therapists and practitioners, including the various Bobath/NDT associations and centres worldwide. Optimal participation in daily life comes from a common-sense, realistic approach to management.