| Literature DB >> 35371277 |
Xiaoxia Gou1, Xian Zhang1, Xiaxia Zheng1, Yaozhong Zhang2, Hongxiang Ma1.
Abstract
Objective: To analyze the effect of hand intensive training on upper limb function of stroke patients with hemiplegia.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35371277 PMCID: PMC8975671 DOI: 10.1155/2022/6844680
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.238
Figure 1Analysis results of admission diagnosis and etiology of stroke patients.
Clinical history of stroke patients.
| Clinical features | Total (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Age, | ≤38 | 22 (14.8) |
| >55 | 26 (17.2) | |
| Gender | Male | 69 (62.72) |
| Female sex | 41 (37.27) | |
| Smoking history, | Smoking history | 58 (52.72) |
| No smoking history | 52 (47.27) | |
| Hypertension, | History of hypertension | 11 (20.61) |
| Diabetes, | Diabetes history | 10 (22.13) |
| Hyperlipidemia, | History of hyperlipidemia | 9 (18.24) |
| Other diseases, | History of complications | 6 (10.12) |
Comparison of upper limb FMA function results between the two groups before and after treatment (x ± s).
| Group |
| Before treatment | After treatment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Observer | 55 | 32.4 ± 2.5 | 58.6 ± 1.9 |
| Reference group | 55 | 30.9 ± 2.6 | 49.5 ± 2.1 |
|
| 8.796 | 9.248 | |
|
| 0.008 | 0.009 |
Figure 2Visual comparison of FMA function results of the upper limbs between the two groups before and after treatment.
Comparison results of upper limb function test UEFT between the two groups (x ± s).
| Group |
| Before nursing | After nursing |
|---|---|---|---|
| Observer | 55 | 47.1 ± 6.5 | 69.8 ± 3.2 |
| Reference group | 55 | 40.6 ± 6.2 | 58.3 ± 2.5 |
|
| 8.791 | 8.543 | |
|
| 0.007 | 0.008 |
Figure 3Visualization of evaluation and comparison results of upper limb function test UEFT between the two groups.
Comprehensive comparison of exercise ability results between the two groups.
| Group |
| Flexibility | Fineness | Coordination |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observer | 55 | 65.3 (71.3) | 70.9 (52.4) | 58.3 (51.4) |
| Reference group | 55 | 50.4 (61.4) | 54.2 (52.4) | 49.7 (31.5) |
|
| 8.749 | 9.137 | 9.543 | |
|
| 0.008 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
Figure 4Visual diagram of comprehensive comparison of exercise ability results between the two groups.