基于DEA模型评价电针联合神经肌肉电刺激对肩袖修补术患者的康复效果  

Evaluation of the rehabilitation efficacy of electroacupuncture combined with neuromuscular electrical stimulation for patients undergoing rotator cuff repair based on the DEA model

作　　者：谢尚能 赖剑萍 黄祖辉[1] 李征[1] 叶仲森 XIE Shang-neng;LAI Jian-ping;HUANG Zu-hui(Second Department of Osteology,Dongguan Hospital of Guangzhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Dongguan 523000,China)

机构地区：[1]广州中医药大学东莞医院骨二科,523000 [2]广州中医药大学东莞医院针灸科,523000

出　　处：《中国现代药物应用》2025年第2期19-25,共7页Chinese Journal of Modern Drug Application

基　　金：广东省中医药局科研课题(项目编号:20221422)项目名称:电针联合神经肌肉电刺激对肩袖修补术后功能康复影响的研究。

摘　　要：目的 探索基于数据包络分析(DEA)模型评价电针联合神经肌肉电刺激对肩袖修补术患者的康复效果。方法 选取135例肩袖修补术患者为研究对象,根据随机双盲原则分为电针组、神经肌肉电刺激组及联合组,每组45例。三组均进行常规康复运动,电针组进行电针治疗,神经肌肉电刺激组进行神经肌肉电刺激治疗,联合组进行神经肌肉电刺激联合电针治疗。对比三组疼痛程度,肩关节功能[美国肩肘外科医师学会(ASES)评分、Constant-Murley肩关节评分量表(Constant)评分],肩关节活动范围(前屈、外展、后伸),三角肌和冈上肌横截面积、厚度,经DEA模型分析的治疗方式经济效益。结果 术后6、12周,电针组视觉模拟评分法(VAS)评分分别为(4.76±0.80)、(2.69±0.79)分,神经肌肉电刺激组VAS评分分别为(5.13±0.94)、(3.00±0.80)分,联合组VAS评分分别为(4.00±0.90)、(1.96±0.77)分。术后6、12周,三组VAS评分对比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),且联合组VAS评分均低于电针组、神经肌肉电刺激组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后6、12周,三组前屈活动度、外展活动度对比,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后12周,三组后伸活动度对比,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后6、12周,联合组前屈活动度、外展活动度均优于电针组、神经肌肉电刺激组;术后12周,联合组后伸活动度优于电针组、神经肌肉电刺激组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后6、12周,三组ASES、Constant评分对比,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);且联合组ASES、Constant评分均高于电针组、神经肌肉电刺激组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。手术前后,三组冈上肌厚度、横截面积对比,无统计学差异性(P>0.05);术前,三组三角肌前束厚度、三角肌中束厚度、三角肌后束厚度、三角肌横截面积对比,无统计学差异性(P>0.05);术后12周,三组三角肌中束厚度对比,无统计学差异性(P>0.05)。术后12周,�Objective To evaluate the rehabilitation efficacy of electroacupuncture combined with neuromuscular electrical stimulation for patients undergoing rotator cuff repair based on the data envelopment analysis(DEA) model.Methods 135 patients undergoing rotator cuff repair were selected as study subjects.According to the principle of randomized double blindness,they were divided into electric acupuncture group,neuromuscular electrical stimulation group and combined group,each with 45 cases.All three groups underwent routine rehabilitation exercise.The electroacupuncture group received electroacupuncture treatment,the neuromuscular electrical stimulation group received neuromuscular electrical stimulation treatment,and the combined group received neuromuscular electrical stimulation combined with electroacupuncture treatment.Comparison was made on pain level,shoulder joint function[ American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons(ASES)score,Constant score],shoulder range of motion(flexion,abduction,extension),cross-sectional area and thickness of deltoid and supraspinatus,economic benefit analyzed by DEA model among the three groups.Results At 6 and 12 weeks after surgery,the VAS scores of the electroacupuncture group were(4.76±0.80)and(2.69±0.79) points,those of the neuromuscular electrical stimulation group were(5.13±0.94) and(3.00±0.80) points,and those the combined group were(4.00±0.90) and(1.96±0.77) points.At 6 and 12 weeks after surgery,there was statistically significant difference in VAS score among the three groups(P<0.05);the VAS score of the combined group was lower than that of the electroacupuncture group and neuromuscular electrical stimulation group,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).At 6 and 12 weeks after surgery,there were statistically significant differences in range of motion for flexion and abduction among the three groups(P<0.05).At 12 weeks after surgery,the range of motion for extension of the three groups was compared,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).A

关 键 词：数据包络分析模型 电针 神经肌肉电刺激 肩袖修补术 

分 类 号：R687.4[医药卫生—骨科学]