ISSN 1674-3865  CN 21-1569/R
主管:国家卫生健康委员会
主办:中国医师协会
   辽宁省基础医学研究所
   辽宁中医药大学附属医院

中国中西医结合儿科学 ›› 2018, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (1): 44-47.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-3865.2018.01.013

• 临床研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

运动疗法结合电刺激治疗痉挛型脑性瘫痪患儿疗效分析

杜颖,娄丹   

  1. 471000 河南 洛阳,河南科技大学临床医学院2015级儿科学专业研究生(杜颖);河南科技大学第一附属医院儿科(娄丹)
  • 出版日期:2018-02-25 发布日期:2018-03-23
  • 通讯作者: 娄丹,E-mail:loudan69@163.com
  • 作者简介:杜颖(1979-),女,河南科技大学临床医学院2015级硕士研究生在读。研究方向:小儿神经疾病的研究

Efficacy analysis of exercise therapy combined with electrical stimulation in treatment of spastic cerebral palsy

DU Ying,LOU Dan   

  1. School of Clinical Medicine, Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471009,China
  • Online:2018-02-25 Published:2018-03-23

摘要:
目的
探讨运动疗法结合电刺激对治疗痉挛型脑性瘫痪(简称脑瘫)患儿的有效性,观察其对脑瘫患儿粗大运动功能、肌张力、日常生活能力的影响,以期提高临床治疗水平。
方法
选取2016年1月至2017年5月河南科技大学第一附属医院儿科康复病区就诊的痉挛型脑瘫患儿120例作为研究对象,随机分为运动疗法组、电刺激组、运动电刺激结合组各40例。运动组根据GMFM 5个功能得分制定运动疗法目标和训练方案;电刺激组对患儿多部位肌群进行电刺激;运动电刺激结合组将运动疗法设计及电刺激组治疗方案同时应用于患儿。分别在治疗前后采用粗大运动功能评定量表、Ashworth痉挛评定量表、日常生活活动能力评定量表对3组患儿进行评定。
结果
3组脑瘫患儿治疗前后粗大运动功能评分、改良Ashworth痉挛评分、日常生活活动能力评分比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);运动电刺激结合组3种评分均优于运动疗法组及电刺激组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);运动疗法组与电刺激组3种评分比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。
结论
3组治疗方法都能改善脑瘫患儿的粗大运动功能、肌张力、日常生活能力,运动疗法结合电刺激治疗痉挛型脑瘫患儿能明显提高了粗大运动功能、肌张力和日常生活能力,治疗效果优于另外两组,值得临床推广应用。

关键词: 脑性瘫痪, 痉挛型, 运动疗法, 电刺激, 儿童

Abstract:
Objective
To explore the effect of exercise therapy combined with electrical stimulation in the treatment of children with spastic cerebral palsy, and to observe its effect on the gross motor function, muscle tone and daily living ability in children with cerebral palsy, in order to improve the clinical treatment level.
Methods
A total of 120 children with spastic cerebral palsy treated at the First Affiliated Hospital of Henan University of Science and Technology from January 2016 to May 2017 were randomly divided into exercise therapy group, electrical stimulation group, exercise-electrical stimulation combination group, 40 cases each. Exercise group developed exercise therapy goals and training programs based on five functional scores of the GMFM; electrical stimulation group received multi-part muscle stimulation; the combination group received exercise therapy and electrical stimulation at the same time. Three groups of patients were evaluated by using the gross motor function rating scale, the Ashworth spasm rating scale, and the children's assessment scale of daily living ability respectively before and after treatment.
Results
The gross motor function scores, modified Ashworth spasticity scores and scores of daily living ability in children with cerebral palsy before and after treatment in three groups were significantly different(P<0.05); compared with exercise therapy group and electric stimulation group, the three kinds of scores of the combination group were significantly better(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the three kinds of scores between exercise therapy group and electrical stimulation group(P>0.05).
Conclusion
The three kinds of treatment can improve the gross motor function, muscle tone and daily living ability of children with cerebral palsy. Exercise combined with electrical stimulation for children with spastic cerebral palsy can obviously improve the gross motor function, joint activities and daily living ability, and the treatment effect is better than the other two groups, so it is worthy of clinical popularization and application.

Key words: Cerebral palsy, Spasm type cerebral palsy, Exercise therapy, Electrical stimulation, Child