Tuncay Figen, Borman Pinar, Taşer Burcu, Ünlü İlhan, Samim Erdal
From the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ahi Evran University Training and Research Hospital, Kırşehir, Turkey (FT); Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University Medical Faculty, Ankara, Turkey (PB); and Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (BT) and Department of Otorhinolaryngology (İÜ, ES), Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 Mar;94(3):222-8. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000171.
The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of electrical stimulation when added to conventional physical therapy with regard to clinical and neurophysiologic changes in patients with Bell palsy.
This was a randomized controlled trial. Sixty patients diagnosed with Bell palsy (39 right sided, 21 left sided) were included in the study. Patients were randomly divided into two therapy groups. Group 1 received physical therapy applying hot pack, facial expression exercises, and massage to the facial muscles, whereas group 2 received electrical stimulation treatment in addition to the physical therapy, 5 days per week for a period of 3 wks. Patients were evaluated clinically and electrophysiologically before treatment (at the fourth week of the palsy) and again 3 mos later. Outcome measures included the House-Brackmann scale and Facial Disability Index scores, as well as facial nerve latencies and amplitudes of compound muscle action potentials derived from the frontalis and orbicularis oris muscles.
Twenty-nine men (48.3%) and 31 women (51.7%) with Bell palsy were included in the study. In group 1, 16 (57.1%) patients had no axonal degeneration and 12 (42.9%) had axonal degeneration, compared with 17 (53.1%) and 15 (46.9%) patients in group 2, respectively. The baseline House-Brackmann and Facial Disability Index scores were similar between the groups. At 3 mos after onset, the Facial Disability Index scores were improved similarly in both groups. The classification of patients according to House-Brackmann scale revealed greater improvement in group 2 than in group 1. The mean motor nerve latencies and compound muscle action potential amplitudes of both facial muscles were statistically shorter in group 2, whereas only the mean motor latency of the frontalis muscle decreased in group 1.
The addition of 3 wks of daily electrical stimulation shortly after facial palsy onset (4 wks), improved functional facial movements and electrophysiologic outcome measures at the 3-mo follow-up in patients with Bell palsy. Further research focused on determining the most effective dosage and length of intervention with electrical stimulation is warranted.
本研究旨在确定在贝尔面瘫患者中,电刺激加常规物理治疗在临床和神经生理学变化方面的疗效。
这是一项随机对照试验。60例被诊断为贝尔面瘫的患者(右侧39例,左侧21例)纳入研究。患者被随机分为两个治疗组。第1组接受物理治疗,包括热敷、面部表情训练以及对面部肌肉进行按摩,而第2组除物理治疗外还接受电刺激治疗,每周5天,为期3周。在治疗前(面瘫第4周)以及3个月后对患者进行临床和电生理评估。观察指标包括House - Brackmann量表和面部残疾指数评分,以及面神经潜伏期和额肌及口轮匝肌复合肌肉动作电位的波幅。
本研究纳入了29名男性(48.3%)和31名女性(51.7%)贝尔面瘫患者。在第1组中,16例(57.1%)患者无轴突退变,12例(42.9%)有轴突退变,而第2组分别为17例(53.1%)和15例(46.9%)。两组的基线House - Brackmann和面部残疾指数评分相似。发病3个月后,两组的面部残疾指数评分改善程度相似。根据House - Brackmann量表对患者进行分类显示,第2组的改善程度大于第1组。第2组双侧面部肌肉的平均运动神经潜伏期和复合肌肉动作电位波幅在统计学上均缩短,而第1组仅额肌的平均运动潜伏期缩短。
面瘫发作后不久(4周)增加为期3周的每日电刺激,在贝尔面瘫患者3个月随访时改善了面部功能运动和电生理观察指标。有必要进一步开展研究以确定电刺激最有效的剂量和干预时长。