首页> 外文期刊>Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation >Effects of Home-Based Versus Clinic-Based Rehabilitation Combining Mirror Therapy and Task-Specific Training for Patients With Stroke: A Randomized Crossover Trial
【24h】

Effects of Home-Based Versus Clinic-Based Rehabilitation Combining Mirror Therapy and Task-Specific Training for Patients With Stroke: A Randomized Crossover Trial

机译:基于家庭的基于诊所的康复结合镜子治疗和卒中患者的任务培训的影响:随机交叉试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

ObjectiveWe investigated the treatment effects of a home-based rehabilitation program compared with clinic-based rehabilitation in patients with stroke. DesignA single-blinded, 2-sequence, 2-period, crossover-designed study. SettingRehabilitation clinics and participant’s home environment. ParticipantsIndividuals with disabilities poststroke. InterventionsDuring each intervention period, each participant received 12 training sessions, with a 4-week washout phase between the 2 periods. Participants were randomly allocated to home-based rehabilitation first or clinic-based rehabilitation first. Intervention protocols included mirror therapy and task-specific training. Main Outcome MeasuresOutcome measures were selected based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Outcomes of impairment level were the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, Box and Block Test, and Revised Nottingham Sensory Assessment. Outcomes of activity and participation levels included the Motor Activity Log, 10-meter walk test, sit-to-stand test, Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, and EuroQoL-5D Questionnaire. ResultsPretest analyses showed no significant evidence of carryover effect. Home-based rehabilitation resulted in significantly greater improvements on the Motor Activity Log amount of use subscale (P=.01) and the sit-to-stand test (P=.03) than clinic-based rehabilitation. The clinic-based rehabilitation group had better benefits on the health index measured by the EuroQoL-5D Questionnaire (P=.02) than the home-based rehabilitation group. Differences between the 2 groups on the other outcomes were not statistically significant. ConclusionsThe home-based and clinic-based rehabilitation groups had comparable benefits in the outcomes of impairment level but showed differential effects in the outcomes of activity and participation levels.
机译:目的探讨了与中风患者的临床康复相比对家庭康复计划的治疗效果。 Designa单盲,2序,2周期,交叉设计的研究。 Saintrehabilitation Clinics和参与者的家庭环境。与残疾失败者的参与者单独。干预每个干预期,每个参与者都收到了12个培训课程,在2个时期之间具有4周的洗涤阶段。将参与者随机分配给首先或基于诊所的康复首先分配给家庭的康复。干预协议包括镜像治疗和特定任务培训。主要取得的措施措施是根据国际运作,残疾和健康的国际分类选择的。减值水平的结果是Fugl-Meyer评估,框和阻止测试,并修改了诺丁汉感官评估。活动和参与水平的结果包括电机活动日志,10米的步伐测试,坐足式测试,加拿大职业性能措施和欧元QOL-5D问卷调查问卷。结果促进分析显示没有明显的核算效果证据。基于家庭的康复导致电机活动日志的使用次级次级(P = .01)和静坐测试(P = .03)的临床康复而显着提高。基于诊所的康复集团对由欧元QOL-5D问卷调查问卷(P = .02)测量的健康指数而言的益处优于基于家庭的康复集团。 2组对其他结果之间的差异没有统计学意义。结论,基于家庭和基于诊所的康复团体在减值水平的结果中具有可比的利益,但在活动和参与水平的结果中表现出差异影响。

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