Background: After a Stroke, paralysis of the arm or leg is common and frequently interferes with daily activities like walking, dressing, or eating. Mirror therapy (MT) is a form of rehabilitation in which a mirror is positioned between the arms or legs to provide the illusion of normal movement in the effected limb. Mirror therapy is an easy to applied intervention for people with stroke. Therapists can apply this intervention with low cost. Only a mirror with an experienced therapist is required to apply this therapy in a clinic and at home. This configuration stimulates many brain areas related to movement, sensation, and pain.

Method: Following a stroke, forty patients with hemiparesis were included (29 males and 11 females, average age 49 years). Twenty patients received Conventional Therapy while also receiving mirror therapy at the same time. And twenty patients received only mirror therapy. For four weeks, each treatment was administered five days a week for 60 minutes each day. The FMA-UE and Brunnstrom both subscale with good psychometric properties indicated high reliability and validity for motor impairment was used to take reading before and after treatment.

Result: After 4 weeks of rehabilitation, both groups had significant improvements, but greater progress was seen in Conventional plus mirror group as compared to only Mirror group. There was a statistically significant increase in the upper extremity recorded by Brunnstrom stages (P value = 0.723 to 0.004). There was also a statistically significant improvement for both groups in FMA-UE scale (Mean = -14.4500 for Mirror Group and -33.100 for conventional plus mirror group). It was clearly seen from these results that, the post-treatment FMA upper extremity score was statistically significantly higher in the CMG than in the MG.

Conclusion: MT is a promising and easy method to improve motor recovery of the upper limb in subacute stroke patients. Combining traditional and mirror therapy is a successful way to help hemiplegic patients regain upper limb motor function.¹ We can therefore, conclude that there is statistically significant difference between the Pre-test and Post-test scores, or between the score before treatment and the scores after treatment. So, we will reject the Null Hypothesis and accept the Alternate Hypothesis, because the treatment administered was EFFECTIVE.

KEYWORDS: Stroke rehabilitation, Mirror therapy, Upper extremity.