Stroke research and treatment · 2023
Evaluation of Contralateral Limb Cross Education and High-Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Functional Indices of the Affected Upper Limb in Subacute Phase of Stroke.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Rezaei Katayoon, Kordi Yoosefinejad Amin, Moslemi Haghighi Farzaneh, Razeghi Mohsen
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Stroke is one of the causes of long-term morbidity. Despite rehabilitation strategies, most survivors live with motor deficits in the upper limbs.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to compare the effect of contralateral cross education (CE) and high-frequency repetitive magnetic stimulation (HF-rTMS) on the function of upper extremity in subacute phase of stroke.
METHODS: Forty patients were randomly assigned into 4 groups. Group "A" received physical therapy (PT) for 10 sessions, 3 times per week. Group "B" received PT and HF-rTMS as follows: stimulation of 20 Hz for 5 s, intertrain interval for 50 s, 20 trains, 2000 pulses at 90% resting motor threshold, and conventional PT. Group "C" was treated with CE and PT. In group "D," HF-rTMS, CE, and PT were administered.
RESULTS: Significant differences were found in the Fugl-Meyer scale between "A" and "C" (P = 0.01), "A" and "D" (P = 0.02), and "B" and "C" groups (P = 0.01). In the box-block test, there were significant differences between "A" and "B" (P = 0.01), "A" and "C" (P < 0.001), "B" and "D" (P = 0.001), and "B" and "C" groups (P = 0.01). Statistical differences were observed in grip strength between "A" and "B" (P = 0.01) and "A" and "C" groups (P = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that clinicians select the therapeutic methods in line with their expected goal. When the goal is to improve upper extremity function, CE+PT could be more effective than HF-rTMS+PT. Also, CE+PT and HF-rTMS+PT were more effective than CE+HF-rTMS+PT at improving grip strength. Therefore, combining several methods would not always lead to better results.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to compare the effect of contralateral cross education (CE) and high-frequency repetitive magnetic stimulation (HF-rTMS) on the function of upper extremity in subacute phase of stroke.
METHODS: Forty patients were randomly assigned into 4 groups. Group "A" received physical therapy (PT) for 10 sessions, 3 times per week. Group "B" received PT and HF-rTMS as follows: stimulation of 20 Hz for 5 s, intertrain interval for 50 s, 20 trains, 2000 pulses at 90% resting motor threshold, and conventional PT. Group "C" was treated with CE and PT. In group "D," HF-rTMS, CE, and PT were administered.
RESULTS: Significant differences were found in the Fugl-Meyer scale between "A" and "C" (P = 0.01), "A" and "D" (P = 0.02), and "B" and "C" groups (P = 0.01). In the box-block test, there were significant differences between "A" and "B" (P = 0.01), "A" and "C" (P < 0.001), "B" and "D" (P = 0.001), and "B" and "C" groups (P = 0.01). Statistical differences were observed in grip strength between "A" and "B" (P = 0.01) and "A" and "C" groups (P = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that clinicians select the therapeutic methods in line with their expected goal. When the goal is to improve upper extremity function, CE+PT could be more effective than HF-rTMS+PT. Also, CE+PT and HF-rTMS+PT were more effective than CE+HF-rTMS+PT at improving grip strength. Therefore, combining several methods would not always lead to better results.