| Literature DB >> 27630403 |
Hyun-Ju Jeon1, Sangjoon An2, Jinwoo Yoo3, No-Hyun Park4, Kyu Hoon Lee5.
Abstract
[Purpose] A simple rehabilitation device system for strengthening upper limb muscles in hemiplegic patients was developed. This system, which stimulates active exercise while accounting for intensity, time, and frequency, was examined in the present pilot study.Entities:
Keywords: Monkey Chair and Band system; Stroke; Upper extremity
Year: 2016 PMID: 27630403 PMCID: PMC5011567 DOI: 10.1589/jpts.28.2232
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Phys Ther Sci ISSN: 0915-5287
The general characteristics of participants
| Characteristics Group | Gender (n) | Age (years) | Period (months) | Stroke type (n) | Hemiparetic side (n) | Height (cm) | Weight (kg) | BMI (kg/m2) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | F | M ± SD | M ± SD | cerebral hemorrhage | ischemic stroke | right | left | M ± SD | M ± SD | M ± SD | |
| Experimental | 3 | 3 | 58.0 ± 13.6 | 15.8 ± 8.9 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 162.7 ± 12.5 | 56.5 ± 15.8 | 21.1 ± 3.7 |
| Control | 4 | 2 | 50.5 ± 8.9 | 14.9 ± 7.6 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 165.0 ± 10.5 | 63.4 ± 10.2 | 23.6 ± 1.6 |
M: male; F: female; M: mean; SD: standard deviation; BMI: body mass index
The Monkey Chair and Band program
The statistical comparison of shoulder ROM on the paralyzed side between the experimental and control groups at different time points
| Variable | Experimental group (n=6) | Control group (n=6) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shoulder | |||
| ROM for flexion | baseline | 130.0 ± 29.5 | 127.8 ± 4.0 |
| week 4 | 150.0 ± 27.8 | 127.0 ± 4.0 | |
| week 8 | 159.2 ± 20.4 | 126.2 ± 3.8 | |
| week 12 | 165.0 ± 19.5 * | 126.2 ± 3.8 | |
| ROM for extension | baseline | 25.8 ± 10.7 | 36.3 ± 13.2 |
| week 4 | 36.7 ± 16.6 | 36.3 ± 13.2 | |
| week 8 | 40.0 ± 20.0 | 36.5 ± 13.2 | |
| week 12 | 41.7 ± 20.9 | 36.5 ± 13.2 | |
| ROM for abduction | baseline | 123.3 ± 33.7 | 117.8 ± 18.3 |
| week 4 | 143.3 ± 32.0 | 118.7 ± 18.3 | |
| week 8 | 160.0 ± 22.8 | 118.7 ± 18.3 | |
| week 12 | 166.7 ± 21.6 * | 118.7 ± 18.3 | |
| ROM for adduction | baseline | 21.7 ± 7.5 | 20.0 ± 4.9 |
| week 4 | 27.5 ± 4.2 | 20.3 ± 5.2 | |
| week 8 | 30.0 ± 6.3 | 20.8 ± 4.9 | |
| week 12 | 30.8 ± 5.9 * | 20.8 ± 4.9 | |
M: mean; SD: standard deviation; ROM: range of motion; *p<0.05 significant difference at this time point in the group
The statistical comparison of pain VAS scores between the experimental and control groups at different time points
| Variable | Experimental group (n=6) | Control group (n=6) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| VAS score | baseline | 48.3 ± 24.0 | 45.0 ± 10.5 |
| week 4 | 40.0 ± 27.6 | 43.3 ± 8.2 | |
| week 8 | 33.3 ± 26.6 | 35.0 ± 10.5 | |
| week 12 | 10.0 ± 11.0 * | 35.0 ± 12.2 | |
M: mean; SD: standard deviation; VAS: visual analogue scale; *p<0.05 significant difference at this time point in the group
The statistical comparison of MMAS scores between the experimental and control groups
| Variable | Experimental group (n=6) | Control group (n=6) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMAS score | 5 | Before | 2.7 ± 1.9 | 2.7 ± 2.3 |
| After | 4.3 ± 1.5 ** | 3.5 ± 2.0 | ||
| 6 | Before | 2.0 ± 2.4 | 2.0 ± 2.3 | |
| After | 3.2 ± 2.3 ** | 2.2 ± 2.4 | ||
| 8 | Before | 4.0 ± 1.1 | 3.5 ± 1.4 | |
| After | 5.3 ± 0.5 * | 3.7 ± 1.2 | ||
M: mean; SD: standard deviation; MMAS: modified motor assessment scale; 5: upper arm function; 6: hand movement; 8: walking; *p<0.05, **p<0.01 between scores before and after program