The Effectiveness of Goal-Oriented Dual Task Proprioceptive Training in Subacute Stroke: A Retrospective Observational Study.

IF 2.1 Q1 REHABILITATION Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine-ARM Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-28 DOI:10.5535/arm.23086
Rita Chiaramonte, Salvatore D'Amico, Salvatore Caramma, Giuseppina Grasso, Simona Pirrone, Maria Giovanna Ronsisvalle, Marco Bonfiglio
{"title":"The Effectiveness of Goal-Oriented Dual Task Proprioceptive Training in Subacute Stroke: A Retrospective Observational Study.","authors":"Rita Chiaramonte, Salvatore D'Amico, Salvatore Caramma, Giuseppina Grasso, Simona Pirrone, Maria Giovanna Ronsisvalle, Marco Bonfiglio","doi":"10.5535/arm.23086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To show the effectiveness of goal-oriented proprioceptive training in subacute stroke for balance, autonomy, and fall risk.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Out a total of 35 patients, consistent in age (75.31±8.65 years), type of stroke (ischemic, 3 to 11 weeks before), and motor impairment, 18 patients underwent solely proprioceptive rehabilitation, the other 17 dual task exercises. The study assessed autonomy using Barthel Index, fall risk with Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), balance through Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and Tinetti test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After two months, significant improvements were recorded in Barthel Index, BBS (p<0.0001), Tinetti test (p<0.0001 in dual task group, p=0.0029 in single task group), and TUG (p=0.0052 in dual task group, p=0.0020 in single task group) in both groups. Comparing the two groups, dual task group showed a significant difference in Tinetti balance assessment (p=0.0052), between the total score of Tinetti test and TUG in single (p=0.0271), and dual task (p=0.0235). Likewise, Tinetti gait test was significantly related to TUG in single (p=0.0536), and dual task (p=0.0466), while Tinetti balance test to Barthel Index (p=0.0394), BBS (p<0.0001), and TUG in single (p=0.0219), and dual task (p=0.0196). Lastly, there is a positive correlation of the use of aids with BBS (p=0.0074), and total score of Tinetti test (p=0.0160).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In subacute stroke, goal-oriented proprioceptive training improved balance, but only partially autonomy. Furthermore, the use of aids after dual-task exercises improved recovery of balance, but did not reduced falls.</p>","PeriodicalId":47738,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine-ARM","volume":"48 1","pages":"31-41"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10915301/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine-ARM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5535/arm.23086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To show the effectiveness of goal-oriented proprioceptive training in subacute stroke for balance, autonomy, and fall risk.

Methods: Out a total of 35 patients, consistent in age (75.31±8.65 years), type of stroke (ischemic, 3 to 11 weeks before), and motor impairment, 18 patients underwent solely proprioceptive rehabilitation, the other 17 dual task exercises. The study assessed autonomy using Barthel Index, fall risk with Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), balance through Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and Tinetti test.

Results: After two months, significant improvements were recorded in Barthel Index, BBS (p<0.0001), Tinetti test (p<0.0001 in dual task group, p=0.0029 in single task group), and TUG (p=0.0052 in dual task group, p=0.0020 in single task group) in both groups. Comparing the two groups, dual task group showed a significant difference in Tinetti balance assessment (p=0.0052), between the total score of Tinetti test and TUG in single (p=0.0271), and dual task (p=0.0235). Likewise, Tinetti gait test was significantly related to TUG in single (p=0.0536), and dual task (p=0.0466), while Tinetti balance test to Barthel Index (p=0.0394), BBS (p<0.0001), and TUG in single (p=0.0219), and dual task (p=0.0196). Lastly, there is a positive correlation of the use of aids with BBS (p=0.0074), and total score of Tinetti test (p=0.0160).

Conclusion: In subacute stroke, goal-oriented proprioceptive training improved balance, but only partially autonomy. Furthermore, the use of aids after dual-task exercises improved recovery of balance, but did not reduced falls.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以目标为导向的双任务知觉训练对亚急性中风的疗效:回顾性观察研究
目的方法:在年龄(75.31±8.65 岁)、中风类型(缺血性,3 至 11 周前)和运动障碍一致的 35 名患者中,18 名患者只接受了本体感觉训练:在年龄(75.31±8.65 岁)、中风类型(缺血性,3 至 11 周前)和运动障碍一致的 35 名患者中,18 名患者只接受本体感觉康复训练,其他 17 名患者接受双重任务训练。研究使用巴特尔指数(Barthel Index)评估自理能力,使用定时起立行走测试(TUG)评估跌倒风险,使用伯格平衡量表(BBS)和蒂内蒂测试评估平衡能力:结果:两个月后,巴特尔指数和 BBS(p)均有明显改善:结论:在亚急性中风患者中,以目标为导向的本体感觉训练可改善平衡能力,但只能改善部分自理能力。此外,在双任务训练后使用辅助工具可改善平衡的恢复,但并不能减少跌倒。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
32
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊最新文献
Factors Affecting Life Satisfaction Among People With Physical Disabilities During COVID-19: Observational Evidence from a Korean Cohort Study. Motor Function Measurement in Children: Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM). Coexistence of Non-Lower Body Mass Index and Exercise Habits Reduce Readmission in Older Patients With Heart Failure. Change in Plantar Pressure and Plain Radiography in Pediatric Flexible Flatfoot: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Cross-Cultural Translation and Validation of the Thai Version of the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia (SARA-TH).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1