中风后上肢的阻力式与主动式辅助机器人训练:随机对照研究。

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Pub Date : 2023-12-19 DOI:10.1016/j.rehab.2023.101789
Sun Young Jeon , Myung Ki , Joon-Ho Shin
{"title":"中风后上肢的阻力式与主动式辅助机器人训练:随机对照研究。","authors":"Sun Young Jeon ,&nbsp;Myung Ki ,&nbsp;Joon-Ho Shin","doi":"10.1016/j.rehab.2023.101789","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Selection of a suitable training modality according to the status of upper limb function can maximize the effects of robotic rehabilitation; therefore, it is necessary to identify the optimal training modality.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>This study aimed to compare robotic rehabilitation approaches incorporating either resistance training (RET) or active-assisted training (AAT) using the same rehabilitation robot in people with stroke and moderate impairment.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In this randomized controlled trial, we randomly allocated 34 people with stroke who had moderate impairment to either the experimental group (RET, <em>n</em> = 18) or the control group (AAT, <em>n</em> = 16). Both groups performed robot-assisted therapy for 30 min, 5 days per week, for 4 weeks. The same rehabilitation robot provided resistance to the RET group and assistance to the AAT group. Body function and structure, activity, and participation outcomes were evaluated before, during, and after the intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>RET led to greater improvements than AAT in terms of smoothness (<em>p</em> = 0.006). The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA)-upper extremity (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), FMA-proximal (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), Action Research Arm Test-gross movement (<em>p</em> = 0.011), and kinematic variables of joint independence (<em>p</em> = 0.017) and displacement (<em>p</em> = 0.011) also improved at the end of intervention more in the RET group.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Robotic RET was more effective than AAT in improving upper limb function, structure, and activity among participants with stroke who had moderate impairment.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56030,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine","volume":"67 1","pages":"Article 101789"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187706572300060X/pdfft?md5=29be79662a3f64248b524bb8af552600&pid=1-s2.0-S187706572300060X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resistive versus active assisted robotic training for the upper limb after a stroke: A randomized controlled study\",\"authors\":\"Sun Young Jeon ,&nbsp;Myung Ki ,&nbsp;Joon-Ho Shin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rehab.2023.101789\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Selection of a suitable training modality according to the status of upper limb function can maximize the effects of robotic rehabilitation; therefore, it is necessary to identify the optimal training modality.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>This study aimed to compare robotic rehabilitation approaches incorporating either resistance training (RET) or active-assisted training (AAT) using the same rehabilitation robot in people with stroke and moderate impairment.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In this randomized controlled trial, we randomly allocated 34 people with stroke who had moderate impairment to either the experimental group (RET, <em>n</em> = 18) or the control group (AAT, <em>n</em> = 16). Both groups performed robot-assisted therapy for 30 min, 5 days per week, for 4 weeks. The same rehabilitation robot provided resistance to the RET group and assistance to the AAT group. Body function and structure, activity, and participation outcomes were evaluated before, during, and after the intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>RET led to greater improvements than AAT in terms of smoothness (<em>p</em> = 0.006). The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA)-upper extremity (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), FMA-proximal (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001), Action Research Arm Test-gross movement (<em>p</em> = 0.011), and kinematic variables of joint independence (<em>p</em> = 0.017) and displacement (<em>p</em> = 0.011) also improved at the end of intervention more in the RET group.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Robotic RET was more effective than AAT in improving upper limb function, structure, and activity among participants with stroke who had moderate impairment.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56030,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine\",\"volume\":\"67 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 101789\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187706572300060X/pdfft?md5=29be79662a3f64248b524bb8af552600&pid=1-s2.0-S187706572300060X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187706572300060X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187706572300060X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:根据上肢功能状况选择合适的训练方式可以最大限度地提高机器人康复的效果;因此,有必要确定最佳的训练方式:本研究旨在比较使用同一康复机器人进行阻力训练(RET)或主动辅助训练(AAT)的机器人康复方法,适用于中度损伤的中风患者:在这项随机对照试验中,我们将 34 名中度功能障碍的脑卒中患者随机分配到实验组(RET,18 人)或对照组(AAT,16 人)。两组均进行机器人辅助治疗,时间均为 30 分钟,每周 5 天,为期 4 周。同一台康复机器人为 RET 组提供阻力,为 AAT 组提供帮助。对干预前、干预期间和干预后的身体功能和结构、活动和参与结果进行了评估:结果:就平滑度而言,RET 比 AAT 有更大的改善(p = 0.006)。在干预结束时,RET 组的 Fugl-Meyer 评估(FMA)- 上肢(p < 0.001)、FMA- 近端(p < 0.001)、行动研究手臂测试- 大体运动(p = 0.011)以及关节独立性(p = 0.017)和位移(p = 0.011)等运动学变量的改善程度也更大:结论:在改善中度功能障碍的中风患者的上肢功能、结构和活动方面,机器人 RET 比 AAT 更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Resistive versus active assisted robotic training for the upper limb after a stroke: A randomized controlled study

Background

Selection of a suitable training modality according to the status of upper limb function can maximize the effects of robotic rehabilitation; therefore, it is necessary to identify the optimal training modality.

Objectives

This study aimed to compare robotic rehabilitation approaches incorporating either resistance training (RET) or active-assisted training (AAT) using the same rehabilitation robot in people with stroke and moderate impairment.

Methods

In this randomized controlled trial, we randomly allocated 34 people with stroke who had moderate impairment to either the experimental group (RET, n = 18) or the control group (AAT, n = 16). Both groups performed robot-assisted therapy for 30 min, 5 days per week, for 4 weeks. The same rehabilitation robot provided resistance to the RET group and assistance to the AAT group. Body function and structure, activity, and participation outcomes were evaluated before, during, and after the intervention.

Results

RET led to greater improvements than AAT in terms of smoothness (p = 0.006). The Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA)-upper extremity (p < 0.001), FMA-proximal (p < 0.001), Action Research Arm Test-gross movement (p = 0.011), and kinematic variables of joint independence (p = 0.017) and displacement (p = 0.011) also improved at the end of intervention more in the RET group.

Conclusions

Robotic RET was more effective than AAT in improving upper limb function, structure, and activity among participants with stroke who had moderate impairment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
4.30%
发文量
136
审稿时长
34 days
期刊介绍: Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine covers all areas of Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine; such as: methods of evaluation of motor, sensory, cognitive and visceral impairments; acute and chronic musculoskeletal disorders and pain; disabilities in adult and children ; processes of rehabilitation in orthopaedic, rhumatological, neurological, cardiovascular, pulmonary and urological diseases.
期刊最新文献
Return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction - prognostic factors and prognostic models: A systematic review. “From pain to neglect behavior of peripheral origin” Diffusion tensor imaging reveals Papez circuit lesions in severe traumatic brain injury with memory disorder. Simulated breathing in virtual reality does not affect perceived effort during the physical rehabilitation of people with long COVID Intensive interdisciplinary specialized rehabilitation or regular physiotherapy for multiple sclerosis? A randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation
×
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