Puckree Threethambal, Naidoo Pooveshni
Department of Health Sciences, Durban University of Technology, Durban, KwaZulu Natal, South Africa∗.
Department of Physiotherapy, University of KwaZulu Natal, Durban, KwaZulu Natal, South Africa†
PM R. 2014 Dec;6(12):1081-7. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2014.06.008. Epub 2014 Jun 26.
To compare the effect of a balance and stability-focused outpatient community-based rehabilitation and a regular physiotherapy program on balance, stability, and perceptions of improvement after acute stroke.
A randomized controlled trial in a community-based therapy center.
Fifty consecutive patients with a first stroke, who reported to a community-based therapy center over a 7-month period were allocated to the control group (regular physiotherapy) or the experimental group (balance and stability-focused rehabilitation).
A program of physiotherapy focused on balance and stability exercises. The control group received the regular physiotherapy program.
The Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS) and the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) monitored stability and balance. The normalized data (PASS and BBS) were analyzed by using analysis of covariance. Qualitative data were thematically described.
Internal consistency of baseline PASS and BBS scores was high (Cronbach α, .964 and .974, respectively). PASS overall pretest scores increased from 21.96 ± 21.41 (mean ± standard deviation) and 21.52 ± 8.43 to 67.67 ± 28.42 and 80.16 ± 22.60 posttest in the control and experimental groups, respectively. Posttest scores were significantly different (P = .004). The effect size was medium (.490). The overall BBS scores showed overall mean (standard deviation) increases from 44.71 ± 22.24 and 43.43 ± 17.11 pretest to 48.71 ± 23.18 and 59.71 ± 18.20 posttest for the control and experimental groups, respectively. The effect size was considered medium (.532).
The balance and stability-focused community-based rehabilitation program was more effective in improving stability and balance in patients with stroke compared with the regular physiotherapy program in resource-poor settings.
比较以平衡和稳定性为重点的门诊社区康复与常规物理治疗方案对急性中风后平衡、稳定性及改善感知的影响。
在社区治疗中心进行的一项随机对照试验。
连续50例首次中风患者,在7个月期间到社区治疗中心就诊,被分配到对照组(常规物理治疗)或实验组(以平衡和稳定性为重点的康复治疗)。
一项以平衡和稳定性练习为重点的物理治疗方案。对照组接受常规物理治疗方案。
中风患者姿势评估量表(PASS)和伯格平衡量表(BBS)监测稳定性和平衡。使用协方差分析对标准化数据(PASS和BBS)进行分析。对定性数据进行主题描述。
基线PASS和BBS评分的内部一致性较高(Cronbach α分别为0.964和0.974)。对照组和实验组的PASS总体预测试评分分别从21.96±21.41(均值±标准差)和21.52±8.43增加到67.67±28.42和80.16±22.60。测试后评分有显著差异(P = 0.004)。效应大小为中等(0.490)。总体BBS评分显示,对照组和实验组的总体平均(标准差)从预测试的44.71±22.24和43.43±17.11分别增加到测试后的48.71±23.18和59.71±18.20。效应大小被认为是中等(0.532)。
在资源匮乏的环境中,与常规物理治疗方案相比,以平衡和稳定性为重点的社区康复方案在改善中风患者的稳定性和平衡方面更有效。