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:陈红梅[1] Chen Hongmei(Department of Acupuncture and Rehabilitation,Jiangsu Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Nanjing Jiangsu,210029,China)
机构地区:[1]江苏省中医院针灸康复科,江苏南京210029
出 处:《中外女性健康研究》2024年第9期23-26,共4页Women's Health Research
摘 要:目的:探讨康复理疗措施对中老年妇女漏尿的疗效。方法:将本院于2019年11月份至2023年1月份收治的70例中老年漏尿妇女作为对象进行研究,根据随机数表法对患者进行分组,,其中对照组35例,接受常规盆底康复训练,观察组35例,在常规盆底康复训练的基础上增用康复理疗措施治疗。对比两组盆底肌力[I类肌纤维肌力、Ⅱ类肌纤维肌力]、肌电位、尿动力学参数[腹压漏尿点压(ALPP)、功能性尿道长度(SFL)最大尿道压(MUP)、最大尿道闭合压(MUCP)]、生活质量(自我困扰评分、心理社会影响评分、逃避和行为限制评分)。结果:干预前,两组患者I类肌纤维肌力、Ⅱ类肌纤维肌力以及肌电位指标水平比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);干预后,两组上述指标水平均明显升高,但观察组明显比对照组高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。干预前,两组ALPP、SFL、MUP、MUCP指标水平比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);干预后,两组上述指标水平均明显升高,但观察组明显比对照组高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。干预前,两组自我困扰、心理社会影响、逃避和行为限制等评分比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);干预后,两组上述评分均明显升高,但观察组明显比对照组高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:康复理疗措施可提高中老年漏尿妇女盆底肌力以及肌电位,改善尿动力学参数,提高生活质量。Objective:To explore the efficacy of rehabilitation physiotherapy measures on urine leakage in middle-aged and elder-ly women.Methods:Seventy cases of middle-aged and elderly women with urine leakage admitted to our hospital between No-vember 2019 and January 2023 were taken as objects for the study.The patients were grouped according to the random number table method.Among them,35 cases in the control group received conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation training.In the ob-servation group,35 cases received conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation training,while 35 cases in the observation group were treated with additional rehabilitation and physical therapy measures on the basis of conventional pelvic floor rehabilitation train-ing.The two groups were compared in terms of pelvic floor muscle strength[muscle strength of class I muscle fibers,muscle strength of class I muscle fibers],muscle potential,urodynamic parameters[abdominal leakage point pressure(ALPP),func-tional urethral length(SFL),maximal urethral pressure(MUP),maximal urethral closure pressure(MUCP)],and quality of life(self-distress score,psychosocial impact score,avoidance and behavioral restriction score).Results:Before intervention,the levels of class I muscle fiber muscle strength,class II muscle fiber muscle strength,and muscle potential indexes were com-pared between the two groups,and the difference was not statistically significant(P>0.05);after intervention,the levels of the above indexes were significantly higher in both groups,but the observation group was significantly higher than the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Before intervention,the levels of ALPP,SFL,MUP,MUCP indicators in the two groups were compared,and the difference was not statistically significant(P>0.05);after inter-vention,the levels of the above indicators in the two groups were significantly higher,but the observation group was signifi-cantly higher than the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<o.05).B
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:216.73.216.90