检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:范展[1] 张海霞[1] 杨淑晴 刘秋霞[1] FAN Zhan;ZHANG Haixia;YANG Shuqing;LIU Qiuxia(Department of Outpatient Therapeutic Room, Nanyang Central Hospital, Nanyang 473000, Henan, Chin)
机构地区:[1]南阳市中心医院门诊综合治疗室
出 处:《中华中医药学刊》2018年第4期952-954,共3页Chinese Archives of Traditional Chinese Medicine
基 金:河南省科技支撑计划项目(20152177)
摘 要:目的:探讨推拿结合头穴透刺对脑外伤功能性偏瘫疗效影响性。方法:选取2011年6月—2015年12月共98例脑外伤功能性偏瘫患者为研究对象,按住院号单双平均分成两组,对照组49例,常规康复治疗,研究组49例,加用推拿结合头穴透刺治疗,观察不同治疗方法后在疗效和相关指标变化情况。结果:疗效上,研究组显效率42.86%、总有效率85.72%,对照组显效率26.53%、总有效率67.35%,研究组显著优于对照组(P〈0.05),治疗后较治疗前均显著升高(P〈0.05),治疗1、2、3、4个月研究组Fugl-Meyer评分显著高于对照组(P〈0.05)。结论:推拿结合头穴透刺能改善脑外伤功能性偏瘫症状,提高生活能力,促进功能恢复。Objective: To investigate the effect of massage combined with scalp point penetration needling on functional hemiplegia after brain trauma. Methods: From June 2011 to December 2015,a total of 98 cases of traumatic brain injury patients with hemiplegia function as the research object,according to the number of single and double hospital were divided into 2 groups,49 cases in the control group( conventional rehabilitation therapy),the study group 49 cases( scalp acupuncture combined with massage therapy). We observed different treatment methods after changes in efficacy and related index. Results: The effective rate was 42. 86% and the total effective rate was 85. 72%. The effective rate was 26. 53% in the control group and the total effective rate was 67. 35%. The study group's were significantly better than that of the control group( P 〈 0. 05). Barthel indexes after 4 months,including eating,bathing,dressing,control of stool and urine,using toilet,bed-chair transferring,walking and up and down stairs of the control group were( 7. 18 ± 1. 67)points,( 7. 81 ± 1. 45) points,( 7. 94 ± 1. 64) points,( 8. 11 ± 1. 56) points,( 8. 56 ± 1. 47) points,( 8. 71 ± 1. 52)points,( 7. 68 ± 1. 61) points,( 7. 12 ± 1. 34) points,( 6. 85 ± 1. 28) points,( 6. 91 ± 1. 47) points,( 8. 71 ± 1. 74)points,( 9. 01 ± 1. 58) points,( 9. 12 ± 1. 61) points,( 9. 46 ± 1. 71) points,( 8. 91 ± 1. 71) points and the total score was( 71. 34 ± 14. 34) points. Those of the study group were respectively( 8. 91 ± 1. 71) points,( 8. 79 ± 1. 74) points,( 9. 01 ± 1. 58) points,( 9. 12 ± 1. 61) points,( 9. 46 ± 1. 51) points,( 9. 35 ± 1. 61) points,( 9. 01 ± 1. 72) points,( 9. 04± 1. 65) points,( 9. 12 ± 1. 59) points and( 9. 14 ± 1. 49) points and the total score was( 90. 12 ± 14. 17) points( P 0. 05). There was no significant difference in the Fugl-Meyer score between the two groups( P 〈 0.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.79