Suppr超能文献

使用机电步态训练器进行步态训练(有无功能性电刺激)对亚急性卒中患者的有效性:一项随机对照试验。

Effectiveness of gait training using an electromechanical gait trainer, with and without functional electric stimulation, in subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial.

作者信息

Tong Raymond K, Ng Maple F, Li Leonard S

机构信息

Department of Health Technology and Informatics, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.

出版信息

Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006 Oct;87(10):1298-304. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.06.016.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the therapeutic effects of conventional gait training (CGT), gait training using an electromechanical gait trainer (EGT), and gait training using an electromechanical gait trainer with functional electric stimulation (EGT-FES) in people with subacute stroke.

DESIGN

Nonblinded randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Rehabilitation hospital for adults.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty patients were recruited within 6 weeks after stroke onset; 46 of these completed the 4-week training period.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 gait intervention groups: CGT, EGT, or EGT-FES. The experimental intervention was a 20-minute session per day, 5 days a week (weekdays) for 4 weeks. In addition, all participants received their 40-minute sessions of regular physical therapy every weekday as part of their treatment by the hospital.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Five-meter walking speed test, Elderly Mobility Scale (EMS), Berg Balance Scale, Functional Ambulatory Category (FAC), Motricity Index leg subscale, FIM instrument score, and Barthel Index.

RESULTS

The EGT and EGT-FES groups had statistically significantly more improvement than the CGT group in the 5-m walking speed test (CGT vs EGT, P=.011; CGT vs EGT-FES, P=.001), Motricity Index (CGT vs EGT-FES, P=.011), EMS (CGT vs EGT, P=.006; CGT vs EGT-FES, P=.009), and FAC (CGT vs EGT, P=.005; CGT vs EGT-FES, P=.002) after the 4 weeks of training. No statistically significant differences were found between the EGT and EGT-FES groups in all outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

In this sample with subacute stroke, participants who trained on the electromechanical gait trainer with body-weight support, with or without FES, had a faster gait, better mobility, and improvement in functional ambulation than participants who underwent conventional gait training. Future studies with assessor blinding and larger sample sizes are warranted.

摘要

目的

比较传统步态训练(CGT)、使用机电步态训练器的步态训练(EGT)以及使用带有功能性电刺激的机电步态训练器的步态训练(EGT-FES)对亚急性中风患者的治疗效果。

设计

非盲随机对照试验。

地点

成人康复医院。

参与者

在中风发作后6周内招募了50名患者;其中46名完成了为期4周的训练期。

干预措施

参与者被随机分配到3个步态干预组中的1组:CGT、EGT或EGT-FES。实验干预为每天20分钟,每周5天(工作日),共4周。此外,所有参与者作为医院治疗的一部分,每个工作日接受40分钟的常规物理治疗。

主要观察指标

5米步行速度测试、老年人活动量表(EMS)、伯格平衡量表、功能性步行分类(FAC)、下肢运动指数子量表、FIM工具评分和巴氏指数。

结果

在4周训练后,EGT组和EGT-FES组在5米步行速度测试(CGT与EGT,P = 0.011;CGT与EGT-FES,P = 0.001)、运动指数(CGT与EGT-FES,P = 0.011)、EMS(CGT与EGT,P = 0.006;CGT与EGT-FES,P = 0.009)和FAC(CGT与EGT,P = 0.005;CGT与EGT-FES,P = 0.002)方面的改善在统计学上显著高于CGT组。在所有观察指标上,EGT组和EGT-FES组之间未发现统计学上的显著差异。

结论

在这个亚急性中风样本中,使用带有体重支持的机电步态训练器进行训练的参与者,无论是否使用FES,与接受传统步态训练的参与者相比,步态更快、活动能力更好,且功能性步行有改善。有必要进行评估者盲法和更大样本量的未来研究。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验