脉冲电磁场和神经肌肉电刺激对中风后肩部疼痛的疗效

Q4 Health Professions Revista Pesquisa em Fisioterapia Pub Date : 2024-05-06 DOI:10.17267/2238-2704rpf.2024.e5441
Aradhana Nimesh, Varun Singh, S. Punia, M. Boora
{"title":"脉冲电磁场和神经肌肉电刺激对中风后肩部疼痛的疗效","authors":"Aradhana Nimesh, Varun Singh, S. Punia, M. Boora","doi":"10.17267/2238-2704rpf.2024.e5441","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION: Shoulder pain after stroke, a complication with a prevalence of up to 16–84% usually occurs after 2–3 months and leads to patients withdrawing from rehabilitation programs, staying in the hospital longer, having less limb function and having a great negative impact on their quality of life. The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of PEMF and NMES in reducing shoulder pain in patients with stroke. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized controlled trial included 51 patients with shoulder pain following stroke. The patients were randomly assigned to three groups (17 people in each group): Pulsed Electromagnetic Field (PEMF), Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) and Control group. The outcome measures were Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) and Fugl Meyer Assessment–Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Active and Passive Range of Motion (AROM/PROM) assessed at the baseline, six weeks into the intervention, and one week into the follow-up. RESULTS: VAS score for pain showed a mean change of 1.60, 1.60 and 4.94 in PEMF, NMES, and control respectively after 20 sessions. It showed pain was significantly improved in all the groups (p<0.001), but the effectiveness of the PEMF and NMES groups was superior to the control group. CONCLUSION: The current literature showed that PEMF & NMES are effective in improving post-stroke shoulder pain, spasticity, range of motion and motor function and a novel method for stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation.","PeriodicalId":36370,"journal":{"name":"Revista Pesquisa em Fisioterapia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficiency of pulsed electromagnetic field and neuromuscular electrical stimulation on painful shoulder following stroke\",\"authors\":\"Aradhana Nimesh, Varun Singh, S. Punia, M. Boora\",\"doi\":\"10.17267/2238-2704rpf.2024.e5441\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"INTRODUCTION: Shoulder pain after stroke, a complication with a prevalence of up to 16–84% usually occurs after 2–3 months and leads to patients withdrawing from rehabilitation programs, staying in the hospital longer, having less limb function and having a great negative impact on their quality of life. The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of PEMF and NMES in reducing shoulder pain in patients with stroke. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized controlled trial included 51 patients with shoulder pain following stroke. The patients were randomly assigned to three groups (17 people in each group): Pulsed Electromagnetic Field (PEMF), Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) and Control group. The outcome measures were Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) and Fugl Meyer Assessment–Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Active and Passive Range of Motion (AROM/PROM) assessed at the baseline, six weeks into the intervention, and one week into the follow-up. RESULTS: VAS score for pain showed a mean change of 1.60, 1.60 and 4.94 in PEMF, NMES, and control respectively after 20 sessions. It showed pain was significantly improved in all the groups (p<0.001), but the effectiveness of the PEMF and NMES groups was superior to the control group. CONCLUSION: The current literature showed that PEMF & NMES are effective in improving post-stroke shoulder pain, spasticity, range of motion and motor function and a novel method for stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Pesquisa em Fisioterapia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Pesquisa em Fisioterapia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17267/2238-2704rpf.2024.e5441\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Health Professions\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Pesquisa em Fisioterapia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17267/2238-2704rpf.2024.e5441","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:中风后肩部疼痛是一种并发症,发病率高达 16-84%,通常在 2-3 个月后发生,导致患者退出康复计划、住院时间延长、肢体功能减退,并对其生活质量产生极大的负面影响。本研究旨在确定 PEMF 和 NMES 对减轻中风患者肩部疼痛的效果。材料和方法:一项前瞻性随机对照试验纳入了 51 名中风后肩痛患者。患者被随机分配到三组(每组 17 人):脉冲电磁场(PEMF)组、神经肌肉电刺激(NMES)组和对照组。结果测量包括视觉模拟量表(VAS)、改良阿什沃斯量表(MAS)、Fugl Meyer 评估-上肢(FMA-UE)、主动和被动活动范围(AROM/PROM),分别在基线、干预六周和随访一周时进行评估。结果:20 次疗程后,PEMF、NMES 和对照组的疼痛 VAS 平均值分别为 1.60、1.60 和 4.94。结果显示,各组疼痛均有明显改善(P<0.001),但 PEMF 组和 NMES 组的疗效优于对照组。结论:目前的文献显示,PEMF 和 NMES 能有效改善中风后肩部疼痛、痉挛、活动范围和运动功能,是中风患者进行康复治疗的一种新方法。
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
Efficiency of pulsed electromagnetic field and neuromuscular electrical stimulation on painful shoulder following stroke
INTRODUCTION: Shoulder pain after stroke, a complication with a prevalence of up to 16–84% usually occurs after 2–3 months and leads to patients withdrawing from rehabilitation programs, staying in the hospital longer, having less limb function and having a great negative impact on their quality of life. The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of PEMF and NMES in reducing shoulder pain in patients with stroke. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized controlled trial included 51 patients with shoulder pain following stroke. The patients were randomly assigned to three groups (17 people in each group): Pulsed Electromagnetic Field (PEMF), Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) and Control group. The outcome measures were Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) and Fugl Meyer Assessment–Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Active and Passive Range of Motion (AROM/PROM) assessed at the baseline, six weeks into the intervention, and one week into the follow-up. RESULTS: VAS score for pain showed a mean change of 1.60, 1.60 and 4.94 in PEMF, NMES, and control respectively after 20 sessions. It showed pain was significantly improved in all the groups (p<0.001), but the effectiveness of the PEMF and NMES groups was superior to the control group. CONCLUSION: The current literature showed that PEMF & NMES are effective in improving post-stroke shoulder pain, spasticity, range of motion and motor function and a novel method for stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation.
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
Revista Pesquisa em Fisioterapia
Revista Pesquisa em Fisioterapia Health Professions-Occupational Therapy
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊最新文献
Effects of pulsed electromagnetic field and retrowalking in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain: a pilot study Comparison of the clinical effectiveness of Class IV Laser therapy and therapeutic ultrasound in patients with chronic neck pain: a randomized controlled trial Efficiency of pulsed electromagnetic field and neuromuscular electrical stimulation on painful shoulder following stroke Efficacy of pulmonary telerehabilitation on exercise tolerance, fatigue, perceived exertion, depression, and quality of life in COVID-19 survivors Improving walking via real-time visual feedback after stroke in treadmill training (RE-VISIT): a protocol for randomized controlled trial
×
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