《中国康复理论与实践》

中国康复理论与实践 >

2019 , Vol. 25 >Issue 5: 518 - 523

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2019.05.004

专题 脑卒中并发症康复

不同输出压力体外冲击波对脑卒中后小腿三头肌痉挛的影响

  • 李亚梅 ,
  • 冯荣建 ,
  • 黄林 ,
  • 徐丽 ,
  • 田金艳 ,
  • 余茜
展开
  • 电子科技大学附属医院·四川省人民医院康复医学科，四川成都市 610072
李亚梅(1986-)，女，汉族，四川资阳市人，硕士，主治医师，主要研究方向：神经系统疾病康复。

收稿日期: 2018-11-26

  修回日期: 2018-12-25

  网络出版日期: 2019-05-29

基金资助

四川省医学会科研项目(No. Q14046)

收起

Effects of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in Different Output Pressures on Triceps Surae Spasticity after Stroke

  • LI Ya-mei ,
  • FENG Rong-jian ,
  • HUANG Lin ,
  • XU Li ,
  • TIAN Jin-yan ,
  • YU Qian
Expand
  • Department of Rehabilitation, Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences & Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan 610072, China

Received date: 2018-11-26

  Revised date: 2018-12-25

  Online published: 2019-05-29

Supported by

Sichuan Medical Association Research Project (No. Q14046)

Fold

摘要

目的 观察不同输出压力体外冲击波治疗(ESWT)对脑卒中患者小腿三头肌痉挛的疗效差异及可能的电生理机制。方法 2015年1月至2017年12月，脑卒中后偏瘫侧小腿三头肌痉挛住院患者90例，随机分为对照组、治疗组1和治疗组2，各30例。3组均予基础和常规康复治疗，两个治疗组在此基础上增加ESWT治疗，输出压力分别为1.5 bar和2.0 bar，共4周。治疗前后采用踝关节综合痉挛量表(CSS)、踝关节被动活动度(PROM)、10米步行时间(10MWT)和神经电生理(H反射潜伏期、Hmax/Mmax)进行评定。两个治疗组在每次ESWT治疗结束后，采用视觉模拟评分(VAS)评估治疗时疼痛。结果 治疗后，3组患者CSS评分、PROM和10MWT均较治疗前显著改善(t > 7.261, P < 0.001)，两个治疗组CSS评分和10MWT均低于对照组(P < 0.05)，治疗组2 10MWT低于治疗组1 (P < 0.05)。治疗后，两个治疗组H反射潜伏期显著延长(t > 15.025, P < 0.001)，Hmax/Mmax均显著下降(t > 14.850, P < 0.001)，治疗组1 H反射潜伏期长于对照组(P < 0.01)。两个治疗组VAS评分无显著性差异(t = 0.735, P > 0.05)。结论 2.0 bar和1.5 bar ESWT均可有效改善脑卒中后小腿三头肌痉挛，提高步行功能，2.0 bar较1.5 bar对步行功能的改善更大。其电生理机制尚需进一步研究。

关键词： 脑卒中; 痉挛; 体外冲击波; 输出压力; H反射

本文引用格式

李亚梅 , 冯荣建 , 黄林 , 徐丽 , 田金艳 , 余茜 . 不同输出压力体外冲击波对脑卒中后小腿三头肌痉挛的影响[J]. 中国康复理论与实践, 2019 , 25(5) : 518 -523 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2019.05.004

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the effects of different output pressures of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) on triceps surae spasticity after stroke, and to explore the electrophysiologic mechanism involved.Methods From January, 2015 to December, 2017, 90 hemiplegic stroke patients with triceps surae spasticity were randomly assigned into control group (n = 30), treatment group 1 (n = 30) and treatment group 2 (n = 30). All the patients accepted routine medicine and rehabilitation, while the treatment groups 1 and 2 received ESWT of 1.5 bar and 2.0 bar in addition, respectively, for four weeks. They were assessed with Composite Spasticity Scale (CSS), passive range of motion (PROM), 10-meter walk test (10MWT), and H reflex latency and the Hmax/Mmax ratio before and after treatment, and the two treatment groups were assessed with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) immediately after ESWT. Results All the groups improved in scores of CSS, PROM and 10MWT after treatment (t > 7.261, P < 0.001), and improved more in scores of CSS and 10MWT in the two treatment groups than in the control group (P < 0.05), and the 10MWT was less in the treatment group 2 than in the treatment group 1 (P < 0.05). H reflex latency lengthened (t > 15.025, P < 0.001) and Hmax/Mmax ratio decreased (t > 14.850, P < 0.001) after treatment in the two treatment groups, and the H reflex latency was longer in the two treatment groups than in the control group (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in VAS between the two treatment groups (t = 0.735, P > 0.05). Conclusion ESWT of both 2.0 bar and 1.5 bar can improve triceps surae spasticity after stroke, and ESWT of 2.0 bar may more benefit the ability of walking. Further study is needed to explore the involved electrophysiologic mechanism.

Key words： stroke; spasticity; extracorporeal shock wave therapy; output pressure; H reflex

参考文献

1 XiangJ, WangW, JiangW, et al. Effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on spasticity in post-stroke patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials [J]. J Rehabil Med, 2018, 50(10): 852-859.
2 YelnikA P, SimonO, ParratteB, et al. How to clinically assess and treat muscle overactivity in spastic paresis [J]. J Rehabil Med, 2010, 42(9): 801-807.
3 KatoozianL, TahanN, ZoghiM, et al. The onset and frequency of spasticity after first ever stroke [J]. J Natl Med Assoc, 2018, 110(6): 547-552.
4 KuoC L, HuG C. Post-stroke spasticity: a review of epidemiology, pathophysiology, and treatments [J]. Int J Gerontol, 2018, 12(4): 280-284.
5 SuhH R, HanH C, ChoH Y. Immediate therapeutic effect of interferential current therapy on spasticity, balance, and gait function in chronic stroke patients: a randomized control trial [J]. Clin Rehabil, 2014, 28(9): 885-891.
6 KingB W, RutaD J, IrwinT A. Spastic foot and ankle deformities: evaluation and treatment [J]. Foot Ankle Clin, 2014, 19(1): 97-111.
7 MoriL, MarinelliL, PelosinE, et al. Shock waves in the treatment of muscle hypertonia and dystonia [J]. Biomed Res Int, 2014, 2014: 637450.
8 SantamatoA, NotarnicolaA, PanzaF, et al. SBOTE study: Extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus electrical stimulation after Botulinum toxin type A injection for post-stroke spasticity－a prospective randomized trial [J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2013, 39(2): 283-291.
9 WangT, DuL, ShanL, et al. A prospective case-control study of radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy for spastic plantar flexor muscles in very young children with cerebral palsy [J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2016, 95(19): e3649.
10 LeeJ Y, KimS N, LeeI S, et al. Effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on spasticity in patients after brain injury: a meta-analysis [J]. J Phys Ther Sci, 2014, 26(10): 1641-1647.
11 SohnM K, ChoK H, KimY J, et al. Spasticity electrophysiologic changes after extracorporeal shock wave therapy on gastrocnemius [J]. Ann Rehabil Med, 2011, 35(5): 599-604.
12 MoonS W, KimJ H, JungM J, et al. The effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on lower limb spasticity in subacute stroke patients [J]. Ann Rehabil Med, 2013, 37(4): 461-470.
13 SantamatoA, MicelloM F, PanzaF, et al. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy for the treatment of poststroke plantar-flexor muscles spasticity: a prospective open-label study [J]. Top Stroke Rehabil, 2014, 21(Suppl 1): S17-S24.
14 KimT G, BaeS H, KimG Y, et al. The effects of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on stroke patients with plantar fasciitis [J]. J Phys Ther Sci, 2015, 27(2): 523-526.
15 RadinmehrH, Nakhostin AnsariN, NaghdiS, et al. Effects of one session radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy on post-stroke plantarflexor spasticity: a single-blind clinical trial [J]. Disabil Rehabil, 2017, 39(5): 483-490.
16 SawanS, Abd-AllahF, HegazyM M, et al. Effect of shock wave therapy on ankle planter flexors spasticity in stroke patients [J]. NeuroRehabilitation, 2017, 40(1): 115-118.
17 TaheriP, VahdatpourB, MellatM, et al. Effect of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on lower limb spasticity in stroke patients [J]. Arch Iran Med, 2017, 20(6): 338-343.
18 鲍勇,包兴华,丁旭,等. 气压弹道式体外冲击波对脑卒中腓肠肌痉挛的疗效观察[J]. 中国医学前沿杂志(电子版), 2014, 6(6): 18-20.
19 YoonS H, ShinM K, ChoiE J, et al. Effective site for the application of extracorporeal shock-wave therapy on spasticity in chronic stroke: muscle belly or myotendinous junction [J]. Ann Rehabil Med, 2017, 41(4): 547-555.
20 李亚梅,张晶,黄林,等. 体外冲击波对脑卒中患者小腿三头肌痉挛的影响[J]. 中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2018, 40(4): 272-277.
21 中华神经科学会,中华神经外科学会. 各类脑血管疾病的诊断要点[J]. 中华神经科杂志, 1996, 29(6): 379-380.
22 王玉龙. 康复功能评定学[M].北京:人民卫生出版社, 2013: 220-221.
23 MartinsP C, CoutoT E, GamaA C. Auditory-perceptual evaluation of the degree of vocal deviation: correlation between the Visual Analogue Scale and Numerical Scale [J]. CoDAS, 2015, 27(3): 279-284.
24 SalamaA B, AbouelnagaW A. Effect of radial shock wave on chronic pelvic pain syndrome/chronic prostatitis [J]. J Phys Ther Sci, 2018, 30(9): 1145-1149.
25 MoyaD, RamónS, SchadenW, et al. The role of extracorporeal shockwave treatment in musculoskeletal disorders [J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2018, 100(3): 251-263.
26 LiW, PanY, YangQ, et al. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a retrospective study [J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2018, 97(27): e11418.
27 CarlisiE, LisiC, Dall'angeloA, et al. Focused extracorporeal shock wave therapy combined with supervised eccentric training for supraspinatus calcific tendinopathy [J]. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med, 2018, 54(1): 41-47.
28 中国研究型医院学会冲击波医学专业委员会,国际冲击波医学学会中国部. 骨肌疾病体外冲击波疗法中国专家共识(第2版)[J]. 中国医学前沿杂志(电子版), 2017, 9(2): 25-33.
29 DymarekR, PtaszkowskiK, SlupskaL, et al. Effects of extracorporeal shock wave on upper and lower limb spasticity in post-stroke patients: a narrative review [J]. Top Stroke Rehabil, 2016, 23(4): 293-303.
30 LeeS, TodaT, KiyamaH, et al. Weakened rate-dependent depression of Hoffmann's reflex and increased motoneuron hyperactivity after motor cortical infarction in mice [J]. Cell Death Dis, 2014, 5: e1007.
31 BurkeD, WisselJ, DonnanG A. Pathophysiology of spasticity in stroke [J]. Neurology, 2013, 80(3 Suppl2): S20-S26.
32 ManganottiP, AmelioE. Long-term effect of shock wave therapy on upper limb hypertonia in patients affected by stroke [J]. Stroke, 2005, 36(9): 1967-1971.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉