Auchstaetter Nolan, Luc Juliana, Lukye Stacey, Lynd Kaylea, Schemenauer Shelby, Whittaker Maura, Musselman Kristin E
N. Auchstaetter, MScPT, School of Physical Therapy, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
J. Luc, MScPT, School of Physical Therapy, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan.
Phys Ther. 2016 Jul;96(7):995-1005. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20150464. Epub 2015 Dec 23.
Best practice guidelines for stroke rehabilitation recommend functional electrical stimulation (FES) to improve gait and upper extremity function. Whether these guidelines have been implemented in practice is unknown.
The purposes of this study were: (1) to determine the frequency with which physical therapists use FES to address common therapeutic goals poststroke and (2) to identify the barriers to and facilitators of FES use.
This was a cross-sectional, survey study.
A valid and reliable online survey was sent to Canadian physical therapists. Questions about demographic characteristics, FES use, knowledge of FES literature, and barriers and facilitators were posed. Closed-ended questions were analyzed with descriptive statistics and index scoring to produce summary scores. Pearson or point-biserial correlation coefficients correlated FES use with demographic variables. Open-ended questions about barriers and facilitators were analyzed by 3 researchers using a conventional content analysis.
Two hundred ninety-eight physical therapists responded. Use of FES for clients with stroke was low for all therapeutic goals queried (improve walking, arm function, muscle strength and endurance, and sensation; prevent shoulder subluxation; and decrease spasticity). However, 52.6% of the respondents stated that they would like to increase their use of FES. More than 40% of the respondents were unsure of the strength of the evidence supporting FES for stroke care. Physical therapists with postgraduate FES training were more likely to use FES (r=.471, P<.001). A lack of access to resources, such as time, equipment, and training, was the most frequently cited barrier to FES use.
As an observational study, cause-and-effect relationships for FES use cannot be identified.
Functional electrical stimulation is not widely used by physical therapists in stroke rehabilitation. Improving access to resources-in particular, continuing education-may facilitate the implementation of FES into clinical practice.
中风康复的最佳实践指南推荐使用功能性电刺激(FES)来改善步态和上肢功能。这些指南在实际中是否得到实施尚不清楚。
本研究的目的是:(1)确定物理治疗师使用FES来实现中风后常见治疗目标的频率,以及(2)识别FES使用的障碍和促进因素。
这是一项横断面调查研究。
向加拿大物理治疗师发送了一份有效且可靠的在线调查问卷。提出了有关人口统计学特征、FES使用情况、FES文献知识以及障碍和促进因素的问题。对封闭式问题进行描述性统计和指数评分分析以得出汇总分数。使用Pearson或点二列相关系数将FES使用情况与人口统计学变量相关联。由3名研究人员使用传统内容分析法对有关障碍和促进因素的开放式问题进行分析。
298名物理治疗师做出了回应。对于所询问的所有治疗目标(改善行走、手臂功能、肌肉力量和耐力以及感觉;预防肩关节半脱位;以及减轻痉挛),中风患者使用FES的比例都很低。然而,52.6%的受访者表示他们希望增加FES的使用。超过40%的受访者不确定支持FES用于中风护理的证据强度。接受过FES研究生培训的物理治疗师更有可能使用FES(r = 0.471,P <.001)。缺乏时间、设备和培训等资源是最常被提及的FES使用障碍。
作为一项观察性研究,无法确定FES使用的因果关系。
物理治疗师在中风康复中并未广泛使用功能性电刺激。改善资源获取,特别是继续教育,可能有助于将FES应用于临床实践。