The Effect of Craniosacral Therapy as Additive Procedure.

This observational, retrospective study has shown, that the addition of craniosacral therapy to the Vojta method has improved the effects of the therapy in 6 months follow-up period. The chance for improvement was 9.42 times higher in Vojta + craniosacral group compared to the group conducted only with Vojta method. The study results suggest that the craniosacral procedure should be considered as an additive regimen to the Vojta method in the therapy of children with central coordination disorders (CCD) . More data is still needed to improve the rehabilitation process in this group of patients.

The aim of the retrospective, observational study was the comparison between the effectiveness of Vojta therapy used alone and its combination with craniosacral therapy after 6 months of the therapy. Data for analysis was from one Rehabilitation Center and covered the observation period: January 1, 2014 - November 30, 2019. The data was analyzed for the purpose of the study between January 1, 2022 - July 1, 2022. To assess the effectiveness of the mentioned rehabilitation models for the children with central coordination disorders (CCD), the neurological status of the patient, expressed as the number of abnormal reactions (Vojta tests), at the beginning (W0) and after 6 months (W6) of the therapy was recorded blindly, based on the individual's records (collected previously for the purpose of the other study). Children who had completed six months of therapy and had efficacy results documented in their medical records were divided into group A (children treated with Vojta therapy alone) and group B (children treated with Vojta therapy combined with craniosacral therapy). Information about: the age at which the children started therapy, the APGAR score at the first minute of their life, the week in which they were born, mode of delivery, sex, birth weight, mother's age at delivery and duration of breastfeeding, was also collected to compare the groups. Finally data from 32 children in group A and 19 children in group B was analyzed.