Yoshida Yosuke, Ikuno Koki, Shomoto Koji
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Yamato Kashihara Hospital, Nara, Japan; Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Science, Kio University, Nara, Japan.
Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Science, Kio University, Nara, Japan; Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Nishiyamato Rehabilitation Hospital, Nara, Japan.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Dec;98(12):2364-2370. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.05.005. Epub 2017 Jun 10.
To compare sensory-level neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) and conventional motor-level NMES in patients after total knee arthroplasty.
Prospective randomized single-blind trial.
Hospital total arthroplasty center: inpatients.
Patients with osteoarthritis (N=66; mean age, 73.5±6.3y; 85% women) were randomized to receive either sensory-level NMES applied to the quadriceps (the sensory-level NMES group), motor-level NMES (the motor-level NMES group), or no stimulation (the control group) in addition to a standard rehabilitation program.
Each type of NMES was applied in 45-minute sessions, 5d/wk, for 2 weeks.
Data for the quadriceps maximum voluntary isometric contraction, the leg skeletal muscle mass determined using multiple-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis, the timed Up and Go test, the 2-minute walk test, the visual analog scale, and the range of motion of the knee were measured preoperatively and at 2 and 4 weeks after total knee arthroplasty.
The motor-level NMES (P=.001) and sensory-level NMES (P=.028) groups achieved better maximum voluntary isometric contraction results than did the control group. The motor-level NMES (P=.003) and sensory-level NMES (P=.046) groups achieved better 2-minute walk test results than did the control group. Some patients in the motor-level NMES group dropped out of the experiment because of discomfort.
Motor-level NMES significantly improved muscle strength and functional performance more than did the standard program alone. Motor-level NMES was uncomfortable for some patients. Sensory-level NMES was comfortable and improved muscle strength and functional performance more than did the standard program alone.
比较全膝关节置换术后患者感觉水平神经肌肉电刺激(NMES)与传统运动水平NMES的效果。
前瞻性随机单盲试验。
医院全关节置换中心:住院患者。
骨关节炎患者(N = 66;平均年龄73.5±6.3岁;85%为女性)被随机分为三组,除接受标准康复计划外,分别接受股四头肌感觉水平NMES治疗(感觉水平NMES组)、运动水平NMES治疗(运动水平NMES组)或不接受刺激(对照组)。
每种类型的NMES每次治疗45分钟,每周5天,共2周。
术前及全膝关节置换术后2周和4周测量股四头肌最大自主等长收缩数据、使用多频生物电阻抗分析测定的腿部骨骼肌质量、计时起立行走测试、2分钟步行测试、视觉模拟量表以及膝关节活动范围。
运动水平NMES组(P = 0.001)和感觉水平NMES组(P = 0.028)的最大自主等长收缩结果优于对照组。运动水平NMES组(P = 0.003)和感觉水平NMES组(P = 0.046)的2分钟步行测试结果优于对照组。运动水平NMES组的一些患者因不适退出实验。
运动水平NMES比单独的标准方案能显著改善肌肉力量和功能表现。运动水平NMES对一些患者来说不舒服。感觉水平NMES舒适,且比单独的标准方案更能改善肌肉力量和功能表现。