Effect of Peroneal Electrical Stimulation Versus an Ankle-Foot Orthosis on Obstacle Avoidance Ability in People With Stroke-Related Foot Drop
Effect of Peroneal Electrical Stimulation Versus an Ankle-Foot Orthosis on Obstacle Avoidance Ability in People With Stroke-Related Foot Drop
复制标题
腓骨电刺激与踝足矫形器对中风相关足下垂患者避障能力的影响
DOI：
10.2522/ptj.20100405
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
V. Weerdesteyn
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. van Swigchem;Hanneke J. R. van Duijnhoven;J. D. den Boer;A. Geurts;V. Weerdesteyn
背景：中风后慢性期足下垂患者在腓神经功能性电刺激（FES）下的行走能力优于不使用矫形器的患者。然而，在这方面，文献并不确定腓骨FES是否也优于踝足矫形器（AFO）。目的本研究旨在确定腓骨FES与AFO相比在通过突发障碍物能力方面的潜在优势。设计：研究设计是使用重复测量对FES和AFO进行受试者内比较。方法24名社区卒中患者（平均年龄=52.6岁，SD=12.7），他们定期使用聚丙烯AFO，并配备了经皮FES装置。在2周和8周后测试参与者的避障能力。他们必须避开30个障碍物，这些障碍物在使用FES或AFO行走时突然落在受影响腿前面的跑步机上。确定避障成功率。结果FES的成功率高于AFO，特别是在调整个体腿部肌肉力量后。肌肉力量相对较低（运动指数评分<64）的参与者最有可能从FES中获得避障能力。限制需要进一步的工作来确定结果是否可以推广到其他中风人群。结论在社区卒中患者的避障能力方面，腓骨FES似乎上级优于AFO。观察到的避障能力的增加似乎与腿部肌肉力量相对较低的人临床上最相关。
Background Walking ability of people with foot drop in the chronic phase after stroke is better with functional electrical stimulation (FES) of the peroneal nerve than without an orthotic device. However, the literature is not conclusive on whether peroneal FES also is better than an ankle-foot orthosis (AFO) in this regard. Objective This study aimed to identify potential benefits of peroneal FES over an AFO with respect to the ability to negotiate a sudden obstacle. Design The study design was a within-subject comparison between FES and AFO using repeated measures. Methods Twenty-four community-dwelling people with stroke (mean age=52.6 years, SD=12.7) who regularly used a polypropylene AFO were fitted with a transcutaneous FES device. The participants' obstacle avoidance ability was tested after 2 and 8 weeks. They had to avoid 30 obstacles that were suddenly dropped on a treadmill in front of the affected leg while walking with either FES or an AFO. The obstacle avoidance success rates were determined. Results Success rates were higher with FES than with an AFO, especially after adjustment for individual leg muscle strength. Participants with relatively low muscle strength (Motricity Index score <64) were most likely to benefit from FES regarding obstacle avoidance ability. Limitation Further work is needed to determine whether the results may be generalized to other groups of people with stroke. Conclusions Peroneal FES seems to be superior to an AFO with regard to obstacle avoidance ability in community-dwelling people with stroke. The observed gains in obstacle avoidance ability appear to be clinically most relevant in the people with relatively low leg muscle strength.
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Hausdorff, JM;Rios, DA;Edelberg, HK
通讯作者：
Edelberg, HK