Predicting Recovery of Upper Extremity Motor Function After Stroke According to the NovEl Intervention Using Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Occupational Therapy: NEURO

T. Hamaguchi, M. Abo, Tomoko Tanaka, K. Murata, Makoto Suzuki, N. Nakaya, K. Taguchi
{"title":"Predicting Recovery of Upper Extremity Motor Function After Stroke According to the NovEl Intervention Using Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Occupational Therapy: NEURO","authors":"T. Hamaguchi, M. Abo, Tomoko Tanaka, K. Murata, Makoto Suzuki, N. Nakaya, K. Taguchi","doi":"10.1177/2516608520918998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background: To encourage patient goal setting and active participation in their own rehabilitation, physicians should provide patients with evidence-based prognostic predictions. Objective: This study aimed to analyze whether logarithmic time series changes in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) score of the upper extremity (from treatment to one month after treatment) owing to NovEl intervention using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and intensive occupational therapy (NEURO) conformed to logarithmic model formulae (group level), and whether the FMA score could be predicted by applying pre/posttreatment FMA scores following the model equation (individual level). Methods: This retrospective, longitudinal study included 514 poststroke paralysis patients admitted to our hospital between March 2010 and December 2018. FMA scores at 3 time points (before, after, and 4 weeks after treatment) were assessed, and conventional logarithmic regression analyses were performed to determine the time course of motor recovery. Subjects were randomly divided into 2 groups in derivation (n = 257) and validation (n = 257) analysis. Results: The time series change in the FMA score correlated with logarithmic model formulae (r2 = .97). The FMA score was substituted for the logarithmic formulae, and individual FMA scores (4 weeks after NEURO treatment) were predicted. The r2 value between the predicted and measured FMA scores was .65. Conclusions: The logarithmic model based on FMA scores before and after NEURO treatment individually predicted approximately 65% of FMA scores 4 weeks after treatment. NEURO allows the physicians to explain the prognosis to individual patients so that they can participate in their rehabilitation practices and achieve their goals.","PeriodicalId":93323,"journal":{"name":"Journal of stroke medicine","volume":"13 1","pages":"14 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of stroke medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2516608520918998","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Background: To encourage patient goal setting and active participation in their own rehabilitation, physicians should provide patients with evidence-based prognostic predictions. Objective: This study aimed to analyze whether logarithmic time series changes in the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) score of the upper extremity (from treatment to one month after treatment) owing to NovEl intervention using repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and intensive occupational therapy (NEURO) conformed to logarithmic model formulae (group level), and whether the FMA score could be predicted by applying pre/posttreatment FMA scores following the model equation (individual level). Methods: This retrospective, longitudinal study included 514 poststroke paralysis patients admitted to our hospital between March 2010 and December 2018. FMA scores at 3 time points (before, after, and 4 weeks after treatment) were assessed, and conventional logarithmic regression analyses were performed to determine the time course of motor recovery. Subjects were randomly divided into 2 groups in derivation (n = 257) and validation (n = 257) analysis. Results: The time series change in the FMA score correlated with logarithmic model formulae (r2 = .97). The FMA score was substituted for the logarithmic formulae, and individual FMA scores (4 weeks after NEURO treatment) were predicted. The r2 value between the predicted and measured FMA scores was .65. Conclusions: The logarithmic model based on FMA scores before and after NEURO treatment individually predicted approximately 65% of FMA scores 4 weeks after treatment. NEURO allows the physicians to explain the prognosis to individual patients so that they can participate in their rehabilitation practices and achieve their goals.
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
根据重复经颅磁刺激和职业疗法的新干预预测中风后上肢运动功能的恢复
背景:为了鼓励患者设定目标并积极参与自己的康复,医生应该为患者提供循证预后预测。摘要目的:本研究旨在分析重复经颅磁刺激和强化职业治疗(NEURO)的NovEl干预后上肢Fugl-Meyer评估(FMA)评分(从治疗至治疗后1个月)的对数时间序列变化是否符合对数模型公式(组水平),以及是否可以根据模型方程(个体水平)应用治疗前/治疗后FMA评分预测FMA评分。方法:回顾性、纵向研究纳入2010年3月至2018年12月在我院住院的514例脑卒中后瘫痪患者。评估3个时间点(治疗前、治疗后和治疗后4周)的FMA评分,并进行常规对数回归分析以确定运动恢复的时间过程。将受试者随机分为衍生分析(n = 257)和验证分析(n = 257)两组。结果:FMA评分的时间序列变化与对数模型公式相关(r2 = .97)。用FMA评分代替对数公式,预测个体FMA评分(NEURO治疗后4周)。预测FMA评分与实测FMA评分之间的r2值为0.65。结论:基于NEURO治疗前后FMA评分的对数模型分别预测治疗后4周FMA评分的约65%。NEURO允许医生向个别患者解释预后,以便他们能够参与康复实践并实现他们的目标。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Study of the Correlation of Pulsatility Index by Transcranial Doppler in the Clinical Outcome of Patients with Cerebral Venous Sinus 
Thrombosis Acute Ischaemic Stroke in a Young Adult in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Case Report of Post-strangulation Carotid Artery Dissection The Effect of Biological Sex on a County Pre-hospital Stroke Initiative COVID and Vaccine-related Cerebral Venous Thrombosis Expert Consensus on Improving Stroke Care Ecosystem in India
×
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