MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.jht.2015.12.002

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of hand therapy : official journal of the American Society of Hand Therapists · 2015

Evaluation of muscle strength and manual dexterity in patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease.

Kobesova Alena, Nyvltova Marcela, Kraus Josef, Kolar Pavel, Sardina Angela, Mazanec Radim, Andel Ross

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

STUDY

DESIGN

Matched pair study.

INTRODUCTION

Differences in hand-muscle strength/dexterity between dominant (DH) and non-dominant (NDH) hand in Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMT) are not well understood.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To compare muscle strength/dexterity between DH and NDH and to correlate manual dexterity, strength and sensory function.

PATIENTS AND

METHODS

Thirty CMT patients were studied using functional muscle testing (FMT) and strength (dynamometry), dexterity (the Nine Hole Peg Test [NHPT]), and Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function [JTT]), and sensory function (the Nottingham Sensory Assessment [NSA]).

RESULTS

Scores were worse for DH than NDH on FMT (p = 0.043) and NHPT (p = 0.014) but not on JTT (p = 0.098), handgrip strength (p = 0.710) or tripod pinch (p = 0.645). NSA did not correlate significantly with any tests (p's0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In CMT disease, DH appears more impaired than NDH in terms of function and dexterity. Greater muscle weakness in DH may also emerge as CMT progresses.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b.

Для цитирования: Kobesova Alena, Nyvltova Marcela, Kraus Josef, Kolar Pavel, Sardina Angela, Mazanec Radim, Andel Ross. Evaluation of muscle strength and manual dexterity in patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease.. Journal of hand therapy : official journal of the American Society of Hand Therapists. 2015. DOI: 10.1016/j.jht.2015.12.002.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.