切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版) ›› 2025, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (04) : 208 -213. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-123X.2025.04.003

临床研究

基于倾向性评分匹配分析重症脑血管疾病患者早期康复物理治疗的临床效果
胡贤瑞, 马惠, 赵科洪, 陈港琳, 何竟()   
  1. 610041 成都,四川大学华西医院康复医学中心
  • 收稿日期:2024-12-26 出版日期:2025-08-15
  • 通信作者: 何竟

Effectiveness of early rehabilitation physical therapy for critical cerebrovascular disease patients based on propensity score matching

Xianrui Hu, Hui Ma, Kehong Zhao, Gangling Chen, Jing He()   

  1. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China
  • Received:2024-12-26 Published:2025-08-15
  • Corresponding author: Jing He
  • Supported by:
    National Key Research and Development Program of China(2022YFC3601101)
引用本文:

胡贤瑞, 马惠, 赵科洪, 陈港琳, 何竟. 基于倾向性评分匹配分析重症脑血管疾病患者早期康复物理治疗的临床效果[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2025, 15(04): 208-213.

Xianrui Hu, Hui Ma, Kehong Zhao, Gangling Chen, Jing He. Effectiveness of early rehabilitation physical therapy for critical cerebrovascular disease patients based on propensity score matching[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Brain Diseases and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2025, 15(04): 208-213.

目的

基于倾向性评分匹配分析早期康复物理治疗对重症脑血管疾病患者疗效的有效性。

方法

回顾性分析2011—2019年四川大学华西医院康复医学中心收治的重症脑血管疾病患者的临床资料。根据是否在重症监护室(ICU)住院期内接受早期康复物理治疗干预,将重症脑血管疾病患者分为康复物理治疗组和非康复物理治疗组,采用倾向性评分匹配(1∶1,卡钳值0.02)平衡基线差异。采用线性回归或分位数回归分析比较2组患者的ICU住院时长、末次GCS评分差异,二元Logistic回归分析出院转归差异,采用多因素Logistic回归法分析出院转归的独立影响因素。

结果

共纳入患者1211例,其中474例(39.1%)接受早期康复物理治疗,余737例未进行早期康复物理治疗。倾向性评分匹配后,2组各390例且基线均衡可比。匹配后2组患者的ICU住院天数、GCS评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。早期康复物理治疗组患者的良好结局发生率为67.4%,显著高于非早期康复物理治疗组(49.5%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。多因素Logistic回归分析显示未接受康复治疗、脑梗死伴出血、感染为不良结局的独立危险因素,接受头部手术为独立保护因素。

结论

早期康复物理治疗显著提高了重症脑血管疾病患者出院时获得良好结局的可能性,在改善患者预后方面具有重要的临床价值。

Objective

To explore the effectiveness of early rehabilitation physical therapy in patients with critical cerebrovascular disease based on propensity score matching.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on clinical data from patients with critical cerebrovascular disease admitted to the Rehabilitation Medicine Department of West China Hospital of Sichuan University from 2011 to 2019. According to whether early rehabilitation physical therapy was administered during the intensive care unit (ICU) stay, patients were divided into an early rehabilitation physical therapy group and a non-early rehabilitation physical therapy group. Propensity score matching (1∶1, caliper 0.02) was used to balance baseline differences. Linear regression or quantile regression was used to compare ICU length of stay and final GCS scores between the groups, while binary logistic regression was used to analyze differences in discharge outcomes. Multivariate Logistic regression was performed to assess the independent impact on discharge outcomes.

Results

A total of 1211 patients were included, of which 474 (39.1%) received early rehabilitation physical treatment and the remaining 737 did not receive early rehabilitation physical therapy. After propensity score matching, there were 390 cases in each of the two groups, and the baseline characteristics between the two groups were balanced and comparable. There were no statistically significant differences in ICU length of stay or GCS scores between the matched groups (P>0.05). The incidence of favorable outcomes in the early rehabilitation physical therapy group was 67.4%, which was significantly higher than that in the non-early rehabilitation group (49.5%) (P<0.05). Multivariate Logistic analysis showed that not receiving rehabilitation therapy, cerebral infarction with hemorrhage, and infection were independent risk factors for unfavorable outcomes, while cranial surgery was identified as an independent protective factor.

Conclusions

Early rehabilitation physical therapy significantly increased the likelihood of achieving a favorable outcome at discharge in patients with critical cerebrovascular disease and has important clinical value in improving patient outcomes.

图1 患者纳入流程图
Fig.1 Flowchart of patient inclusion process
表1 2组重症脑血管疾病患者匹配前后的一般资料比较
Tab.1 Comparison of general information between two groups of patients with critical cerebrovascular disease before and after matching
项目 匹配前 匹配后
康复物理治疗组(n=474) 非康复物理治疗组(n=737) t/χ2/W P 康复物理治疗组(n=390) 非康复物理治疗组(n=390) t/χ2/W P
年龄(岁,mean±SD 56.97±14.70 57.17±15.27 -0.228 0.817 57.79±14.88 56.78±15.75 0.921 0.360
性别[例(%)]     0.656 0.418     0.259 0.611
277(58.4) 412(55.9)     225(57.7) 233(59.7)    
197(41.6) 325(44.1)     165(42.3) 157(40.3)    
体质量指数(kg/m2,mean±SD 24.14±7.38 24.41±8.22 -0.594 0.563 24.36±7.54 24.83±8.64 -0.809 0.419
首次GCS评分[分,MP25P75)] 3(3,7) 3(3,7) 183 506 0.342 3(3,6) 3(3,7) 77 126 0.707
疾病类型[例(%)]                
缺血性 148(31.2) 182(24.7) 5.916 0.015 116(29.7) 117(30.0) 0.000 1.000
出血性 382(80.6) 622(84.4) 2.690 0.101 315(80.8) 321(82.3) 0.214 0.644
梗死伴出血 59(12.4) 71(9.6) 2.103 0.147 44(11.3) 50(12.8) 0.303 0.582
头部手术[例(%)] 308(65.0) 526(71.4) 5.169 0.023 261(66.9) 256(65.6) 0.092 0.762
机械通气[例(%)] 453(95.6) 714(96.9) 1.065 0.302 377(96.7) 382(97.9) 0.784 0.376
镇静药物[例(%)] 437(92.2) 672(91.2) 0.265 0.607 359(92.1) 362(92.8) 0.073 0.787
镇痛药物[例(%)] 311(65.6) 509(69.1) 1.416 0.234 259(66.4) 270(69.2) 0.588 0.443
血管活性药物[例(%)] 278(58.6) 409(55.5) 1.044 0.307 233(59.7) 235(60.3) 0.005 0.942
抗生素[例(%)] 392(82.7) 538(73.0) 10.993 <0.001 319(81.8) 324(83.1) 0.141 0.707
合并症[例(%)]                
糖尿病 67(14.1) 79(10.7) 2.857 0.091 45(11.5) 44(11.3) 0.000 1.000
高血压 260(54.9) 347(47.1) 6.635 0.010 209(53.6) 193(49.5) 1.153 0.283
心脏病 67(14.1) 87(11.8) 1.212 0.271 56(14.4) 57(14.6) 0.000 1.000
并发症[例(%)]                
癫痫 30(6.3) 36(4.9) 0.903 0.342 20(5.1) 26(6.7) 0.578 0.447
肾功能障碍 39(8.2) 79(10.7) 1.765 0.184 38(9.7) 39(10.0) 0.000 1.000
肝功能异常 60(12.7) 73(9.9) 1.965 0.161 53(13.6) 46(11.8) 0.416 0.519
感染 372(78.5) 447(60.7) 11.823 <0.001 296(75.9) 295(75.6) 0.000 1.000
静脉血栓 302(63.7) 290(39.3) 10.896 <0.001 223(57.2) 226(57.9) 0.021 0.885
压疮 22(4.6) 16(2.2) 5.024 0.025 14(3.6) 13(3.3) 0.000 1.000
表2 2组重症脑血管疾病患者倾向得分匹配后的主要研究结果比较
Tab.2 Comparison of primary study outcomes after propensity score matching between two groups of patients with critical cerebrovascular disease
表3 影响重症脑血管疾病不良出院结局的多因素Logistic回归分析
Tab.3 Multivariate Logistic regression analysis of factors influencing poor discharge outcomes in critical cerebrovascular disease patients
[1]
喻鹏铭,何成奇,魏全, 等. 重症监护室中早期重症康复方案初探[J]. 中国康复医学杂志, 2021, 36(2): 223-226. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-1242.2021.02.020.
[2]
Maia TFLD, Magalhães PAF, Santos DTS, et al. Current concepts in early mobilization of critically ill patients within the context of neurologic pathology[J]. Neurocrit Care, 2024, 41(1): 272-284. DOI: 10.1007/s12028-023-01934-8.
[3]
Borsellino B, Schultz MJ, Gama de Abreu M, et al. Mechanical ventilation in neurocritical care patients: a systematic literature review[J]. Expert Rev Respir Med, 2016, 10(10): 1123-1132. DOI: 10.1080/17476348.2017.1235976.
[4]
Newman ANL, Gravesande J, Rotella S, et al. Physiotherapy in the neurotrauma intensive care unit: a scoping review[J]. J Crit Care, 2018, 48: 390-406. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.09.037.
[5]
Takara H, Suzuki S, Satoh S, et al. Association between early mobilization and functional outcomes in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a multicenter retrospective propensity score-matched study[J]. Neurocrit Care, 2024, 41(2): 445-454. DOI: 10.1007/s12028-024-01946-y.
[6]
Schweickert WD, Pohlman MC, Pohlman AS, et al. Early physical and occupational therapy in mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients: a randomised controlled trial[J]. Lancet, 2009, 373(9678): 1874-1882. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60658-9.
[7]
Arias-Fernández P, Romero-Martin M, Gómez-Salgado J, et al. Rehabilitation and early mobilization in the critical patient: systematic review[J]. J Phys Ther Sci, 2018, 30(9): 1193-1201. DOI: 10.1589/jpts.30.1193.
[8]
Lynch E, Hillier S, Cadilhac D. When should physical rehabilitation commence after stroke: a systematic review[J]. Int J Stroke, 2014, 9(4): 468-478. DOI: 10.1111/ijs.12262.
[9]
AVERT Trial Collaboration Group. Efficacy and safety of very early mobilisation within 24 h of stroke onset (AVERT): a randomised controlled trial[J]. Lancet, 2015, 386(9988): 46-55. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60690-0. Erratum in: Lancet, 2015, 386(9988): 30. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61204-1. Erratum in: Lancet, 2017, 389(10082): 1884. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31213-8.
[10]
Diringer MN, Bleck TP, Claude Hemphill J 3rd, et al. Critical care management of patients following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: recommendations from the Neurocritical Care Society's Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference[J]. Neurocrit Care, 2011, 15(2): 211-240. DOI: 10.1007/s12028-011-9605-9.
[11]
Bahouth MN, Power MC, Zink EK, et al. Safety and feasibility of a neuroscience critical care program to mobilize patients with primary intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2018, 99(6): 1220-1225. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2018.01.034.
[12]
潘冬生,梁国标. 颅脑创伤治疗的最新进展与未来趋势[J]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(4): 193-197. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9141.2024.04.001
[13]
Hickmann CE, Castanares-Zapatero D, Bialais E, et al. Teamwork enables high level of early mobilization in critically ill patients[J]. Ann Intensive Care, 2016, 6(1): 80. DOI: 10.1186/s13613-016-0184-y.
[14]
Liu K, Ogura T, Takahashi K, et al. The safety of a novel early mobilization protocol conducted by ICU physicians: a prospective observational study[J]. J Intensive Care, 2018, 6: 10. DOI: 10.1186/s40560-018-0281-0.
[15]
Alaparthi GK, Gatty A, Samuel SR, et al. Effectiveness, safety, and barriers to early mobilization in the intensive care unit[J]. Crit Care Res Pract, 2020, 2020: 7840743. DOI: 10.1155/2020/7840743.
[16]
Schaller SJ, Scheffenbichler FT, Bein T, et al. Guideline on positioning and early mobilisation in the critically ill by an expert panel[J]. Intensive Care Med, 2024, 50(8): 1211-1227. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-024-07532-2.
[1] 钟兴明. 神经重症多模态颅内压管理与治疗[J/OL]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 18(01): 1000-1000.
[2] 杨琳, 尹如铁. 外阴白色病变病因研究及治疗现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(02): 157-165.
[3] 尹燕燕, 刘爱贤. 多重耐药菌感染呼吸机相关性肺炎的危险因素及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 83-90.
[4] 程传丽, 曾慧, 周静, 孙凌霞, 吴敏, 钱明江, 陈武, 万洁, 周仁佳. 超声引导下胸肺物理治疗对机械通气患者膈肌功能的疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(04): 563-565.
[5] 张松涛, 李世金, 凌霄, 吴文辉. 胸部物理治疗联合布地奈德雾化对多发伤患者并发ARDS的临床分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(03): 373-375.
[6] 潘冬生, 梁国标. 颅脑创伤治疗的最新进展与未来趋势[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(04): 193-197.
[7] 吴天宇, 刘子璇, 杨浦鑫, 贾思明, 丁凯, 程晓东, 李泳龙, 陈伟, 吕红芝, 张奇. 腰椎间盘突出症保守治疗进展[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2024, 10(06): 379-384.
[8] 鲁悦, 李伟, 庄宗, 王娟, 赵鹏来, 杭春华. 脑出血继发吉兰-巴雷综合征二例报道并文献复习[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(02): 120-123.
[9] 杨梦琦, 马慧芬, 訾阳, 王楠, 杜冰玉, 常万鹏, 于少泓. 马黛茶对脑血管疾病防治作用的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(04): 235-240.
[10] 万晨昕, 龚雨舒, 许美霞, 许涛. 苯磺酸瑞马唑仑用于神经重症患者抢救性气管插管的有效性和安全性[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(12): 1104-1110.
[11] 张克, 杨占奇, 闫维, 张二明, 向平超. 持续气道正压通气对阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征患者发生心脑血管事件的影响[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 433-440.
[12] 闵志群, 苏杭. 广州地区人群ALDH2多态性分布特征与心脑血管疾病的相关性研究[J/OL]. 中华临床实验室管理电子杂志, 2024, 12(02): 97-102.
[13] 王国峰, 吕舒, 肖金潭, 刘国力, 刘伯芹. 体重变异性与泛血管疾病关系的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华肥胖与代谢病电子杂志, 2025, 11(02): 135-141.
[14] 马高亭, 左颖婷, 雷少元, 莫然, 吴宜凡, 孟舒娟, 姜子颖, 吴月, 任怡, 王平平, 张倩, 马青峰, 宋海庆, 钟莲梅, 郝峻巍. 模仿目标临床试验在脑血管疾病领域的应用现状及展望[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 277-280.
[15] 贾诗琪, 荣冬梅, 叶晖, 温齐平, 唐芬, 李雪娇, 王伟. 颅内血管壁磁共振成像序列综述[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 185-189.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?