| Literature DB >> 35845459 |
Jiming Tao1, Shuaipan Zhang2, Lingjun Kong3, Qingguang Zhu3, Chongjie Yao3, Qingjuan Guo1, Jiajia Wu1, Chunlei Shan1, Min Fang1,3,4.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the effectiveness and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) outcomes of Tuina therapy in patients with post-stroke depression (PSD).Entities:
Keywords: Tuina; cognitive function; functional magnetic resonance imaging; post-stroke depression; traditional Chinese medicine
Year: 2022 PMID: 35845459 PMCID: PMC9281445 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.923721
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychiatry ISSN: 1664-0640 Impact factor: 5.435
Demographic and clinical characteristics of the two groups.
|
|
|
|
|
| Age, years | 62.40 ± 11.91 | 62.86 ± 12.91 | 0.43 |
| Disease duration (months) | 15.38 ± 9.29 | 13.14 ± 10.74 | 0.46 |
| Sex: Male /Female(n) | 25 (17) | 18 (24) | 0.5 |
| Duration of education (year) | 11.50 ± 3.96 | 12.48 ± 3.19 | 0.22 |
| Current use of a monoamine oxidase inhibitor, n (%) | 16(38%) | 21(50%) | 0.27 |
| Use of tricyclic drugs, n (%) | 13(30.9%) | 10(23.8%) | 0.63 |
| Adverse events, n (%) | 5(13.8%) | 3(8.3%) | 0.45 |
| HAMD | 16.14 ± 4.52 | 15.00 ± 4.27 | 0.47 |
| FMA | 57.88 ± 19.24 | 56.29 ± 18.94 | 0.7 |
| MBI | 61.19 ± 13.47 | 58.33 ± 15.91 | 0.38 |
| MMSE | 19.43 ± 5.19 | 18.93 ± 5.41 | 0.67 |
HAMD, Hamilton Depression Scale; FMA, Fugl-Mayer scale; MBI, Modified Barthel index; MMSE, Minimum Mental State Examination.
Independent samples t-test and chi-square test were used for statistical analysis.
P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Figure 1Flow chart of the research.
Comparison of scale scores between and within groups*.
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||||
| HAMD | 16.14 ± 4.52 | 15.00 ± 4.27 | 9.90 ± 4.61 | 13.24 ± 4.36 | 2.9 (1.07–4.73)& | 8.76 (6.83–10.69)& | 5.85 (2.54–9.16)& |
| FMA | 57.88 ± 19.24 | 56.29 ± 18.94 | 60.38 ± 17.50 | 59.38 ± 17.82 | 2.5 (−6.64–1.64) | 2.71 (−8.32–2.89) | 0.21 (−7.2–7.2) |
| MBI | 61.19 ± 13.47 | 58.33 ± 15.91 | 62.50 ± 13.57 | 60.36 ± 13.94 | 1.3 (−4.4–1.78) | 2.0 (−7–2.96) | 0.71 (−5.16–6.62) |
| MMSE | 19.43 ± 5.19 | 18.93 ± 5.41 | 21.79 ± 5.00 | 19.31 ± 5.07 | 2.35 (1.8–2.9)& | 0.38 (−093–0.16) | 1.97 (1.19–2.76)& |
HAMD, Hamilton Depression Scale; FMA, Fugl-Mayer scale; MBI, Modified Barthel index; MMSE, Minimum Mental State Examination.
95% CI: 95% confidence interval.
& P < 0.05.
# Adjusted for baseline values; two-sided T test was used for between-group comparisons.
Comparison of the post-intervention zALFF values of the two groups.
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tuina therapy group> routine rehabilitation group | Region Label | Extent | t-value | x | y | z |
| Caudate-R | 34 | 4.488 | 15 | 21 | 9 | |
| Putamen-R | 106 | 4.357 | 33 | 3 | 6 | |
| Insula-R | 106 | 4.313 | 36 | −15 | 15 | |
| Temporal-Sup-L | 22 | 4.234 | −54 | −9 | 6 | |
| ParaHippocampal-R | 99 | 3.980 | 33 | −42 | −9 | |
| Hippocampus-R | 99 | 3.422 | 33 | −18 | −21 | |
| Temporal-Mid-L | 29 | 3.657 | −54 | −60 | 21 | |
| Angular-L | 22 | 3.229 | −51 | −63 | 36 | |
| Thalamus-L | 14 | 2.572 | −9 | −21 | 12 | |
| Tuina therapy group < routine rehabilitation group | OFCant-L | 33 | −4.942 | −24 | 63 | −15 |
| OFCpost-L | 21 | −4.049 | −30 | 21 | −18 | |
| Frontal-Sup-Medial-R | 103 | −3.948 | 3 | 30 | 60 | |
| Frontal-Sup-2-R | 103 | −3.49 | 15 | 12 | 72 | |
| Cingulate-Ant-R | 59 | −3.897 | 12 | 33 | 18 | |
| Frontal-Sup-2-L | 24 | −3.87 | −12 | 54 | 30 | |
| Frontal-Mid-2-L | 43 | −3.84 | −30 | 42 | 33 | |
| Amygdala-R | 13 | −2.777 | 30 | 3 | −24 | |
Right caudate nucleus, right putamen, right insula, left superior temporal gyrus, right parahippocamal gyrus, zALFF values of the right hippocampus, left middle temporal gyrus, left angular gyrus, and left thalamus were more dominant in the Tuina group than in the conventional rehabilitation group.
Functional connectivity of the brain regions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMYG-R |
| 0.029 | |||||||
| CAU-L |
| 0.012 | |||||||
| CAU-R | 0.029 |
| 0.045 | 0.005 | |||||
| HIP-L |
| 0.003 | |||||||
| HIP-R |
| 0.035 | |||||||
| PHG-R |
| 0.030 | |||||||
| PUT-R | 0.035 | 0.030 |
| 0.018 | |||||
| THA-L | 0.012 | 0.045 |
| ||||||
| THA-R | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
|
Two-sample t-test of the functional connectivity correlation coefficient between the two groups.
P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Figure 2Correlation analysis of left hippocampal zALFF value and HAMD score.