Ko Chang-Yong, Kim Sol-Bi, Choi Hyuk-Jae, Chang Yunhee, Kang Sungjae, Heo Yoon, Ryu Jeicheong, Kim Gyoosuk, Mun Museong
Korea Orthopedics and Rehabilitation Research Center, Incheon, South Korea.
Clin Interv Aging. 2014 Oct 14;9:1759-65. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S70722. eCollection 2014.
Patients with hand and/or wrist pathology are recommended to have a four-wheeled walker with an arm rest (FWW-AR) rather than a standard walker or a standard four-wheeled walker (FWW). However, only a few quantitative studies have been performed to compare upper and lower extremity weight bearing. The aim of this study was to evaluate forearm and foot weight bearing using a FWW-AR and the effect of the armrest height.
Eleven elderly women (mean age 80.1±5.3 years; mean height 148.5±4.0 cm; mean weight 51.2±9.0 kg) were enrolled. The subjects walked with an FWW-AR, with the elbow in either 90 degree (D90) or 130 degree (D130) flexion, for a distance of 10 m. Surface electromyographic signals were recorded for the upper, middle, and lower trapezius, anterior deltoid, and erector spinae muscles; walking velocity was measured with the subjects weight bearing on their feet and forearms while walking. Simultaneously, the maximum plantar and forearm loads during walking with an FWW-AR were measured.
The normalized foot plantar loads were lower at D90 than at D130, while the normalized forearm load was higher at D90 than at D130 (all P<0.05; left foot, 7.9±0.1 N/kg versus 8.8±0.1 N/kg; right foot, 8.6±0.2 N/kg versus. 9.6±0.1 N/kg; left forearm, 1.8±0.5 N/kg versus 0.8±0.2 N/kg; and right forearm, 2.0±0.5 N/kg versus 1.0±0.2 N/kg, respectively). The surface electromyographic activity of the muscles involved in shoulder elevation and the walking velocity were both lower with the elbow at D90 than at D130 (all P<0.05; left upper trapezius, 98.7%±19.5% versus 132.6%±16.9%; right upper trapezius, 83.4%±10.6% versus 108.1%±10.5%; left anterior deltoid, 94.1%±12.8% versus 158.6%±40.4%; right anterior deltoid, 99.1%±15.0% versus 151.9%±19.4%; and velocity, 0.6±0.1 m/sec versus 0.7±0.1 m/sec, respectively).
Weight bearing on the lower extremities is significantly reduced when the upper extremities are supported during walking with an FWW-AR. Furthermore, the weight bearing profile is dependent on the armrest height.
对于患有手部和/或腕部疾病的患者,建议使用带有扶手的四轮助行器(FWW - AR),而非标准助行器或标准四轮助行器(FWW)。然而,仅有少数定量研究比较了上下肢的负重情况。本研究旨在评估使用FWW - AR时前臂和足部的负重情况以及扶手高度的影响。
招募了11名老年女性(平均年龄80.1±5.3岁;平均身高148.5±4.0厘米;平均体重51.2±9.0千克)。受试者使用FWW - AR行走,肘部处于90度(D90)或130度(D130)屈曲状态,行走距离为10米。记录斜方肌上、中、下部,三角肌前部和竖脊肌的表面肌电信号;在受试者行走时,测量其足部和前臂负重时的行走速度。同时,测量使用FWW - AR行走过程中的最大足底和前臂负荷。
D90时标准化足底负荷低于D130时,而D90时标准化前臂负荷高于D130时(所有P<0.05;左脚,7.9±0.1牛/千克对8.8±0.1牛/千克;右脚,8.6±0.2牛/千克对9.6±0.1牛/千克;左前臂,1.8±0.5牛/千克对0.8±0.2牛/千克;右前臂,2.0±0.5牛/千克对1.0±0.2牛/千克)。肘部处于D90时,参与肩部抬高的肌肉的表面肌电活动和行走速度均低于D130时(所有P<0.05;左斜方肌上部,98.7%±19.5%对132.6%±16.9%;右斜方肌上部,83.4%±10.6%对108.1%±10.5%;左三角肌前部,94.1%±12.8%对158.6%±40.4%;右三角肌前部,99.1%±15.0%对151.9%±19.4%;速度,0.6±0.1米/秒对0.7±0.1米/秒)。
使用FWW - AR行走时,上肢得到支撑会显著降低下肢的负重。此外,负重情况取决于扶手高度。