Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde do Trairi, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Natal, RN, Brazil.
Laboratório de Desempenho PneumoCardiovascular e Músculos Respiratórios, Departamento de Fisioterapia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Natal, RN, Brazil.
Braz J Phys Ther. 2017 Jan-Feb;21(1):24-29. doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2016.12.002. Epub 2017 Jan 13.
Stroke may lead to several health problems, but positive effects can be promoted by learning to perform physical therapy techniques correctly.
To compare two different types of observational practice (video instructions and demonstration by a physical therapist) during the use of incentive spirometry (IS).
A total of 20 patients with diagnosis of stroke and 20 healthy individuals (56±9.7 years) were allocated into two groups: one with observational practice with video instructions for the use of IS and the other with observational practice with demonstration by a physical therapist. Ten attempts for the correct use of IS were carried out and the number of errors and the magnitude of response were evaluated. The statistic used to compare the results was the three-way ANOVA test.
The stroke subjects showed less precision when compared to the healthy individuals (mean difference 1.80±0.38) 95%CI [1.02-2.52], p<0.0001. When the type of practice was analyzed, the stroke subjects showed more errors with the video instructions (mean difference 1.5±0.5, 95%CI [0.43-2.56] (p=0.08)) and therapist demonstration (mean difference 2.40±0.52, 95%CI [1.29-3.50] (p=0.00)) when compared to the healthy individuals.
The stroke subjects had a worse performance in learning the use of volume-oriented incentive spirometry when compared to healthy individuals; however, there was no difference between the types of observational practice, suggesting that both may be used to encourage the use of learning IS in patients with stroke.
中风可能导致多种健康问题，但通过学习正确执行物理治疗技术，可产生积极影响。
比较两种不同的激励性肺活量计（IS）观察实践（视频指导和物理治疗师演示）。
共纳入 20 名中风诊断患者和 20 名健康个体（56±9.7 岁），分为两组：一组接受使用 IS 的视频指导观察实践，另一组接受物理治疗师演示的观察实践。进行了 10 次正确使用 IS 的尝试，并评估了错误次数和反应幅度。用于比较结果的统计方法是三因素方差分析。
与健康个体相比，中风患者的精确度较低（平均差异 1.80±0.38，95%CI [1.02-2.52]，p<0.0001）。当分析实践类型时，与健康个体相比，中风患者在视频指导（平均差异 1.5±0.5，95%CI [0.43-2.56]（p=0.08））和治疗师演示（平均差异 2.40±0.52，95%CI [1.29-3.50]（p=0.00））中表现出更多错误。
与健康个体相比，中风患者在学习使用基于容量的激励性肺活量计时表现更差；然而，两种观察实践类型之间没有差异，这表明两者都可用于鼓励中风患者使用 IS 进行学习。
