Treatment of Stroke Patients with Shoulder-wrist Syndrome by Acupoint Catgut Embedding and Surface Electromyogram Biofeedback Therapy
10.13702/j.1000-0607.170491
- Author:
Rong-Hua ZHU
1
Author Information
1. Department of Rehabilitation, Tongling Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Acupoint catgut embedding;
Daily life activities;
Limb motor function;
Pain;
Stroke patients with shoulder-hand syndrome;
Surface electromyographic biofeedback therapy
- From:
Acupuncture Research
2018;43(6):380-383
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: To observe the clinical effectiveness of acupoint catgut embedding and surface electromyogram biofeedback therapy (sEMGBF) in the treatment of stroke patients complicated with shoulder-hand syndrome (SHS). METHODS: A total of 90 stroke patients with SHS were randomly divided into acupoint catgut embedment (ACE), sEMGBF and ACE+sEMGBF (combined treatment) groups (n=30 cases/group). The catgut embedment was performed at Jianliao (LI 14), Jianyu (LI 15), Quchi (LI 11), Waiguan (TE 5) on the affected side, once every 3 weeks, twice altogether. The electromyographic biofeedback therapy (30-50 Hz, pulse duration 200 µs, 6 s-on and 10 s-off, appropriate strength) was applied to the skin area co-vering the deltoid muscle, flexor muscle of wrist and wrist extensor for 20 min, once per day, 5 times/week, for 6 weeks. The total effective rate was assessed by using Liao's and Zhu's methods (1996), the pain severity assessed using visual analogue scale (VAS), and Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA, 66-points) scale and the patients' activities of daily living function (ADL, 100-points) were also scored. RESULTS: Before treatment, the VAS, FMA and ADL points of the three groups were not significantly different (P>0.05). After the treatment, the total effective rate (93.33%), FMA and ADL scores of the combined treatment group were significantly higher than those of the ACE and sEMGBF groups (P<0.05), while the VAS score of the combined treatment group was significantly lower than those of the ACE and sEMGBF groups (P<0.05). The total effective rates, FMA and ADL scores of the ACE and sEMGBF groups were comparable (P>0.05). The VAS score of the ACE group was markedly lower than that of the sEMGBF group (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The combined administration of ACE and sEMGBF has a better therapeutic effect for stroke patients complicated with SHS relevant to simple ACE and simple sEMGBF therapy in improving the upper limb function, relieving pain, and enhancing the daily life quality.
