...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of NeuroEngineering Rehabilitation >Unilateral versus bilateral robot-assisted rehabilitation on arm-trunk control and functions post stroke: a randomized controlled trial
【24h】

Unilateral versus bilateral robot-assisted rehabilitation on arm-trunk control and functions post stroke: a randomized controlled trial

机译:单侧和双侧机器人辅助康复对臂节控制和卒中后功能的影响:一项随机对照试验

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background Although the effects of robot-assisted arm training after stroke are promising, the relative effects of unilateral (URT) vs. bilateral (BRT) robot-assisted arm training remain uncertain. This study compared the effects of URT vs. BRT on upper extremity (UE) control, trunk compensation, and function in patients with chronic stroke. Method This was a single-blinded, randomized controlled trial. The intervention was implemented at 4 hospitals. Fifty-three patients with stroke were randomly assigned to URT, BRT, or control treatment (CT). Each group received UE training for 90 to 105 min/day, 5 days/week, for 4 weeks. The kinematic variables for arm motor control and trunk compensation included normalized movement time, normalized movement units, and the arm-trunk contribution slope in unilateral and bilateral tasks. Motor function and daily function were measured by the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT), Motor Activity Log (MAL), and ABILHAND Questionnaire. Results The BRT and CT groups elicited significantly larger slope values (i.e., less trunk compensation) at the start of bilateral reaching than the URT group. URT led to significantly better effects on WMFT-Time than BRT. Differences in arm control kinematics and performance on the MAL and ABILHAND among the 3 groups were not significant. Conclusions BRT and URT resulted in differential improvements in specific UE/trunk performance in patients with stroke. BRT elicited larger benefits than URT on reducing compensatory trunk movements at the beginning of reaching. In contrast, URT produced better improvements in UE temporal efficiency. These relative effects on movement kinematics, however, did not translate into differential benefits in daily functions. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00917605.
机译:背景技术尽管中风后机器人辅助手臂训练的效果令人鼓舞,但单侧(URT)与双边(BRT)机器人辅助手臂训练的相对效果仍然不确定。这项研究比较了URT与BRT对慢性卒中患者上肢(UE)控制,躯干补偿和功能的影响。方法这是一项单盲,随机对照试验。干预措施在4家医院实施。 53名中风患者被随机分配到URT,BRT或对照治疗(CT)。每个小组接受UE训练90天至105分钟/天,5天/周,持续4周。手臂电机控制和躯干补偿的运动学变量包括标准化的运动时间,标准化的运动单位以及单边和双边任务中的臂干贡献斜率。运动功能和日常功能通过Wolf运动功能测试(WMFT),运动活动记录(MAL)和ABILHAND问卷进行测量。结果BRT和CT组在双侧伸手开始时引起的斜率值明显大于URT组(即,躯干补偿值更低)。与BRT相比,URT对WMFT-Time的影响明显更好。 3组之间的手臂控制运动学以及MAL和ABILHAND的性能差异不显着。结论BRT和URT可使卒中患者的特定UE /躯干表现有所不同。与URT相比,BRT可以在到达之初就减少补偿性躯干运动带来更大的好处。相反,URT在UE时间效率方面产生了更好的改善。但是,这些对运动运动学的相对影响并没有转化为日常功能的不同好处。试用注册ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT00917605。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号