切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版)

中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版) ›› 2023, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (05) : 286 -292. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-123X.2023.05.005

临床研究

体外冲击波联合肌电生物反馈对脑卒中后足下垂的影响
廖家权, 吴波†(), 唐昌敏   
  1. 445000　湖北恩施，恩施土家族苗族自治州中心医院康复医学科
    445000　湖北恩施，恩施土家族苗族自治州中心医院骨科
  • 收稿日期:2022-11-01 出版日期:2023-10-15
  • 通信作者: 吴波

Effect of extracorporeal shock wave combined with myoelectric biofeedback on foot drop after stroke

Jiaquan Liao, Bo Wu†(), Changmin Tang   

  1. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture Central Hospital, Enshi 445000, China
    Department of Orthopedics, Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture Central Hospital, Enshi 445000, China
  • Received:2022-11-01 Published:2023-10-15
  • Corresponding author: Bo Wu
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

廖家权, 吴波, 唐昌敏. 体外冲击波联合肌电生物反馈对脑卒中后足下垂的影响[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(05): 286-292.

Jiaquan Liao, Bo Wu, Changmin Tang. Effect of extracorporeal shock wave combined with myoelectric biofeedback on foot drop after stroke[J]. Chinese Journal of Brain Diseases and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2023, 13(05): 286-292.

目的

探讨体外冲击波治疗（ESWT）联合肌电生物反馈治疗（EMG-BFT）对脑卒中后足下垂的影响。

方法

选取恩施土家族苗族自治州中心医院康复医学科自2019年5月至2022年5月收治的90例脑卒中后足下垂患者，按照随机数字表法分为观察组、BFT组和对照组，每组30例。对照组患者接受常规康复治疗，BFT组在对照组基础上接受EMG-BFT，观察组在对照组基础上采用ESWT联合EMG-BFT，3组患者均治疗4周。3组患者分别在治疗前及治疗4周后行踝关节背屈活动度、综合痉挛量表（CSS）和Fugl-Meyer运动功能量表下肢部分（FMA-LE）评定及表面肌电图测定，观察踝关节活动度、踝关节痉挛、下肢运动功能及关键肌表面肌电改善情况。

结果

3组患者治疗前踝关节活动度、CSS评分、FMA-LE评分、胫骨前肌iEMG、腓肠肌iEMG和足背屈CR比较，差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。3组患者治疗后踝关节活动度、CSS评分、FMA-LE评分均较治疗前有明显改善，观察组和BFT组患者胫骨前肌iEMG、腓肠肌iEMG和足背屈CR结果均较治疗前有明显改善，且观察组踝关节活动度、CSS评分、胫骨前肌iEMG、足背屈CR优于BFT组和对照组，差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05）。

结论

联合运用ESWT和EMG-BFT治疗脑卒中后足下垂效果良好，可提高患侧踝关节主被动活动度，改善痉挛和下肢运动功能。

关键词: 体外冲击波, 肌电生物反馈, 脑卒中, 足下垂
Objective

To investigate the effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) combined with electromyography biofeedback therapy (EMG-BFT) on foot drop after stroke.

Methods

Ninety patients with poststroke foot drop admitted to the Rehabilitation Medicine Department of Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture Central Hospital from May 2019 to May 2022 were randomly divided into 3 group using a random number table method: observation group, BFT group, and control group, 30 patients in each group. The control group received routine rehabilitation treatment, the BFT group received EMG-BFT on the basis of the control group, and the observation group received ESWT combined with EMG-BFT on the basis of the control group. All 3 groups were treated for 4 weeks. The ankle dorsiflexion mobility, comprehensive spasticity scale (CSS) and Fugl-Meyer motor function scale lower extremity (FMA-LE) and surface electromyography were performed before and after 4 weeks of treatment for all patients. The improvement of ankle range of motion, ankle spasms, lower limb motor function, and key muscle surface electromyography were observed.

Results

The differences in ankle mobility, CSS score, FMA-LE score, anterior tibial muscle iEMG, gastrocnemius muscle iEMG and foot dorsiflexion CR before treatment in the 3 groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05). After treatment, ankle mobility, CSS score, and FMA-LE score in all three groups improved significantly compared with those before treatment (P<0.05); the results of tibialis anterior muscle iEMG, gastrocnemius muscle iEMG and foot dorsiflexion CR in patients in the observation group and BFT group improved significantly compared with those before treatment (P<0.05), and after treatment, the ankle mobility, CSS score, anterior tibialis iEMG, and foot dorsiflexion CR were better in the observation group than in the BFT group and the control group (P<0.05).

Conclusion

The combined use of ESWT and EMG-BFT was significantly more effective in improving the active and passive mobility of the affected ankle joint, improving spasticity, and improving motor function of the lower extremity than the absence of both treatments or the use of EMG-BFT alone.

Key words: Extracorporeal shock wave, Electromyography biofeedback, Stroke, Foot drop
表1 3组患者的一般资料比较
Tab.1 Comparison of general information among three groups
组别 例数 性别 年龄（岁，Mean±SD） 病程（d，Mean±SD） 病变部位 偏瘫侧别 Brunnstrom分期
男 女 脑梗死 脑出血 左侧 右侧
对照组 26 14 12 48.76±8.27 39.65±14.72 17 9 15 11 2.92±1.01
BFT组 30 21 9 48.87±10.29 38.43±13.52 16 14 16 14 3.13±0.86
观察组 29 17 12 49.86±9.79 35.76±14.35 18 11 13 16 3.24±0.87
χ2/F值   1.651 0.114 0.551 0.921 0.954 0.851
P值   0.438 0.892 0.579 0.631 0.621 0.431
表2 3组患者治疗前后踝关节主动活动度比较（°，Mean±SD）
Tab.2 Comparison of ankle joint active range of motion before and after treatment among 3 groups (°, Mean±SD)
组别 例数 治疗前 治疗后 t值 P值
对照组 26 10.85±2.57 13.69±2.23 -4.341 <0.001
BFT组 30 10.57±2.49 17.10±2.69a -10.919 <0.001
观察组 29 10.31±3.22 20.14±2.60ab -12.050 <0.001
F值   0.254 53.110    
P值   0.776 <0.001    
表3 3组患者治疗前后踝关节被动活动度比较（°，Mean±SD）
Tab.3 Comparison of passive ankle range of motion before and after treatment among 3 groups (°, Mean±SD)
组别 例数 治疗前 治疗后 t值 P值
对照组 26 48.38±5.43 52.35±3.37 -3.357 0.003
BFT组 30 49.47±4.54 56.27±2.77a -7.597 <0.001
观察组 29 50.17±4.17 59.69±3.44ab -12.520 <0.001
F值   0.996 36.176    
P值   0.374 <0.001    
表4 3组患者治疗前后综合痉挛量表评分比较（分，Mean±SD）
Tab.4 Comparison of comprehensive spasticity scale scores before and after treatment among 3 groups (score, Mean±SD)
组别 例数 治疗前 治疗后 t值 P值
对照组 26 11.42±1.30 9.27±1.66 5.943 <0.001
BFT组 30 11.54±1.98 7.57±2.46a 6.723 <0.001
观察组 29 11.72±1.65 5.76±2.01ab 11.991 <0.001
F值   0.221 17.318    
P值   0.802 <0.001    
表5 3组患者治疗前后Fugl-Meyer运动功能量表下肢部分评分比较（分，Mean±SD）
Tab.5 Comparison of lower extremity portion of the Fugl-Meyer motor assessment scores before and after treatment among 3 groups (score, Mean±SD)
组别 例数 治疗前 治疗后 t值 P值
对照组 26 18.85±2.56 23.58±3.04 -4.771 <0.001
BFT组 30 19.40±3.96 26.01±2.19a -8.399 <0.001
观察组 29 18.83±3.85 27.17±3.22a -8.221 <0.001
F值   0.213 11.336    
P值   0.808 <0.001    
表6 3组患者治疗前后胫骨前肌最大积分肌电值比较（μV，Mean±SD）
Tab.6 Comparison of tibialis anterior muscle integral electromyography signal before and after treatment among 3 groups (μV, Mean±SD)
组别 例数 治疗前 治疗后 t值 P值
对照组 26 53.86±13.33 57.97±18.50 -0.974 0.339
BFT组 30 52.78±16.32 84.17±14.50a -8.591 <0.001
观察组 29 48.06±16.09 102.39±14.22ab -15.383 <0.001
F值   1.132 54.875    
P值   0.328 <0.001    
表7 3组患者治疗前后腓肠肌最大积分肌电值比较（μV，Mean±SD）
Tab.7 Comparison of gastrocnemius muscle integral electromyography signal before and after treatment among 3 groups (μV, Mean±SD)
组别 例数 治疗前 治疗后 t值 P值
对照组 26 64.49±19.83 48.60±16.03 3.253 0.003
BFT组 30 60.19±16.77 38.53±12.31a 6.486 <0.001
观察组 29 60.71±13.18 32.17±12.37a 7.950 <0.001
F值   0.538 10.141    
P值   0.587 <0.001    
表8 3组患者治疗前后踝关节背屈协同收缩率比较（%，Mean±SD）
Tab.8 Comparison of co-contraction ration of ankle dorsiflexion before and after treatment among 3 groups (%, Mean±SD)
组别 例数 治疗前 治疗后 t值 P值
对照组 26 48.96±4.01 45.03±3.15 4.456 <0.001
BFT组 30 47.21±4.16 41.47±4.36a 5.086 <0.001
观察组 29 49.07±3.31 34.36±4.31ab 17.048 <0.001
F值   2.143 50.909    
P值   0.128 <0.001    
[1]
Wang W, Jiang B, Sun H, et al. Prevalence, incidence, and mortality of stroke in China: results from a nationwide population-based survey of 480 687 adults[J]. Circulation, 2017, 135(8): 759-771. DOI: 10.1161/circulationaha.116.025250.
[2]
Stewart JD. Foot drop: where, why and what to do?[J]. Pract Neurol, 2008, 8(3): 158-169. DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.2008.149393.
[3]
Spence JD, Azarpazhooh MR, Larsson SC, et al. Stroke prevention in older adults: recent advances[J]. Stroke, 2020, 51(12): 3770-3777. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.120.031707.
[4]
Mori L, Marinelli L, Pelosin E, et al. Shock waves in the treatment of muscle hypertonia and dystonia[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2014, 2014: 637450. DOI: 10.1155/2014/637450.
[5]
Knutson JS, Chae J. A novel neuromuscular electrical stimulation treatment for recovery of ankle dorsiflexion in chronic hemiplegia: a case series pilot study[J]. Am J Phys Med Rehabil, 2010, 89(8): 672-682. DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e3181e29bd7.
[6]
中华医学会神经病学分会,中华医学会神经病学分会脑血管病学组.中国各类主要脑血管病诊断要点2019[J].中华神经科杂志, 2019, 52(9): 710-715. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1006-7876.2019.09.003.
[7]
李亚梅,冯荣建,黄林,等.不同输出压力体外冲击波对脑卒中后小腿三头肌痉挛的影响[J].中国康复理论与实践, 2019, 25(5): 518-523. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2019.05.004.
[8]
段好阳,闫兆红,刘娜,等.不同时间间隔体外冲击波治疗脑卒中后小腿三头肌痉挛的疗效观察[J].中国康复医学杂志, 2018, 33(12): 1444-1447. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-1242.2018.12.013.
[9]
Yoon SH, Shin MK, Choi EJ, et al. Effective site for the application of extracorporeal shock-wave therapy on spasticity in chronic stroke: muscle belly or myotendinous junction[J]. Ann Rehabil Med, 2017, 41(4): 547-555. DOI: 10.5535/arm.2017.41.4.547.
[10]
Schleenbaker RE, Mainous AG 3rd. Electromyographic biofeedback for neuromuscular reeducation in the hemiplegic stroke patient: a meta-analysis[J]. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1993, 74(12): 1301-1304. DOI: 10.1016/0003-9993(93)90083-m.
[11]
Mihai EE, Dumitru L, Mihai IV, et al. Long-term efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on lower limb post-stroke spasticity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. J Clin Med, 2020, 10(1): 86. DOI: 10.3390/jcm10010086.
[12]
Błażkiewicz M, Wiszomirska I, Kaczmarczyk K, et al. Mechanisms of compensation in the gait of patients with drop foot[J]. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 2017, 42: 14-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2016.12.014.
[13]
张洪宇,夏清,魏露,等.脑卒中后偏瘫足下垂患者廓清障碍的步态特征分析[J].中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2022, 44(3): 204-208. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-1424.2022.03.003.
[14]
Lee JY, Kim SN, Lee IS, et al. Effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on spasticity in patients after brain injury: a meta-analysis[J]. J Phys Ther Sci, 2014, 26(10): 1641-1647. DOI: 10.1589/jpts.26.1641.
[15]
Taheri P, Vahdatpour B, Mellat M, et al. Effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on lower limb spasticity in stroke patients[J]. Arch Iran Med, 2017, 20(6): 338-343.
[16]
张伟,李瑞青,谷玉静,等.局部振动与体外冲击波治疗对脑卒中后偏瘫患者小腿三头肌痉挛和步行能力的影响[J].中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2022, 44(4): 318-323. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-1424.2022.04.006.
[17]
Daliri SS, Forogh B, Emami Razavi SZ, et al. A single blind, clinical trial to investigate the effects of a single session extracorporeal shock wave therapy on wrist flexor spasticity after stroke[J]. NeuroRehabilitation, 2015, 36(1): 67-72. DOI: 10.3233/NRE-141193.
[18]
Kenmoku T, Ochiai N, Ohtori S, et al. Degeneration and recovery of the neuromuscular junction after application of extracorporeal shock wave therapy[J]. J Orthop Res, 2012, 30(10): 1660-1665. DOI: 10.1002/jor.22111.
[19]
Megna M, Marvulli R, Farì G, et al. Pain and muscles properties modifications after botulinum toxin type A (BTX-A) and radial extracorporeal shock wave (rESWT) combined treatment[J]. Endocr Metab Immune Disord Drug Targets, 2019, 19(8): 1127-1133. DOI: 10.2174/1871530319666190306101322.
[20]
Dymarek R, Ptaszkowski K, Słupska L, et al. Effects of extracorporeal shock wave on upper and lower limb spasticity in post-stroke patients: a narrative review[J]. Top Stroke Rehabil, 2016, 23(4): 293-303. DOI: 10.1080/10749357.2016.1141492.
[21]
Knutson JS, Chae J. A novel neuromuscular electrical stimulation treatment for recovery of ankle dorsiflexion in chronic hemiplegia: a case series pilot study[J]. Am J Phys Med Rehabil, 2010, 89(8): 672-682. DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e3181e29bd7.
[22]
陈建,李硕,闫成龙.表面肌电生物反馈结合本体感觉神经肌肉促进技术治疗脑卒中患者足下垂的临床观察[J].中国康复医学杂志, 2016, 31(8): 899-902. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-1242.2016.08.014.
[23]
张阿康.体外冲击波治疗脑卒中患者小腿三头肌痉挛的表面肌电特征分析[D].合肥:安徽医科大学, 2022.
[1] 吴俊贤, 曾俊杰, 许有银, 苑博. 体外冲击波疗法辅助治疗肩袖修补术后关节僵硬[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 571-576.
[2] 邬春虎, 马玉海, 陈长松, 尹华东, 朱晓峰, 何剑星, 刘彧. 冲击波联合富血小板血浆对骨关节炎软骨损伤的疗效[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 334-339.
[3] 徐慧新, 刘波, 唐立钧. 体外冲击波治疗>1 cm输尿管上段结石失败的预测模型建立[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 506-511.
[4] 尚慧娟, 袁晓冬. 机械取栓术后应用依达拉奉右崁醇对急性缺血性脑卒中预后的改善[J]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2023, 09(05): 295-301.
[5] 徐红莉, 杨钰琳, 薛清, 张茜, 马丽虹, 邱振刚. 体外冲击波治疗非特异性腰痛疗效的系统评价和Meta分析[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(05): 307-314.
[6] 胡霁云, 谢树才, 张丽娜. S100钙结合蛋白B与重症神经研究进展[J]. 中华重症医学电子杂志, 2023, 09(03): 298-303.
[7] 许方军, 曹晓光, 王修敏, 董学超, 刘云卫, 彭云飞, 周康. 虚拟情景互动技术联合肩胛骨运动控制强化训练对偏瘫患者上肢功能及日常生活活动能力的影响[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(04): 222-228.
[8] 侯牧韶, 刘子渤, 李红玲. 局部振动疗法治疗脑卒中后运动障碍的研究进展[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(04): 246-250.
[9] 陈蝶, 关莹, 韩笑, 冼少荣. 颈动脉彩色多普勒联合经颅彩色多普勒评估缺血性脑卒中疗效的临床价值[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 297-302.
[10] 孙畅, 赵世刚, 白文婷. 脑卒中后认知障碍与内分泌激素变化的关系[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 471-476.
[11] 张许平, 刘佳成, 张舸, 杜艳姣, 李韶, 商丹丹, 王浩, 李艳, 段智慧. CYP2C19基因多态性联合血栓弹力图指导大动脉粥样硬化型非致残性缺血性脑血管事件患者抗血小板治疗的效果[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 477-481.
[12] 杨海华, 袁景林, 周晓梅, 牛军伟. RNF213基因突变所致烟雾病一家系病例临床分析并文献复习[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 495-498.
[13] 李昕, 李永凯, 江树青, 夏来百提姑·赛买提, 杨建中. 急性缺血性脑卒中静脉溶栓后出血转化相关危险因素分析[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 331-336.
[14] 邓颖, 黄山, 胡慧秀, 孙超. 老年缺血性脑卒中患者危险因素聚集情况分析[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 344-349.
[15] 祁研, 张岩, 陈雪, 刘颖, 史楠. 探讨高低频交互rTMS对老年脑卒中偏瘫患者肢体功能、吞咽功能及日常生活活动能力的影响[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 359-363.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号