肌电生物反馈仪治疗膝关节僵硬后股四头肌疗效的评价

发布时间：2018-06-24 13:17

本文选题：肌电生物反馈 + 表面肌电图　；参考：《大连医科大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：目的：运用表面肌电图定量分析经肌电生物反馈仪治疗后患侧股直肌、股内侧肌、股外侧肌的肌力,探讨肌电生物反馈仪对膝关节肌力恢复的疗效。方法：膝关节僵硬患者28例,男性19例,女性9例；平均年龄35.53±9.20(18～55岁),身高173.89±8.72(159～183cm),体重71.64±10.07(52～83kg),病程12.82±8.03(3～24周)。随机分成治疗组和对照组,每组14例,治疗组和对照组两组患者的年龄、身高、体重及病程运用统计软件进行比较,均无统计学差异(P0.05),所以两组患者在治疗前一般情况处于同一基线,具有可比性。两组患者均给予常规康复治疗,包括蜡疗、运动疗法、冷疗；对照组采用常规康复治疗；治疗组采用常规康复治疗辅以肌电生物反馈(广州晶冠科技,型号565)治疗。分别于治疗前及治疗后4周利用表面肌电图(海神型号NDI-092)采集股外肌(VL)股直肌(RF)和股内肌(VM)的相对均方根振幅(RMS)进行比较,判断治疗前后患者这三组肌肉肌力的变化,所有数据均进行统计学处理。结果：1、对照组：治疗前股直肌(RF)、股内肌(VM)和股外肌(VL)的相对增长的均方根振幅(RMS)均数为9.641±10.744,13.380±14.308,13.353±14.374,治疗后股直肌(RF)和股内肌(VM)股外肌(VL)的相对增长的均方根振幅(RMS)均数为17.304±7.275,16.738±8.719,37.273±30.945,两组数据行t检验,VL组数据均有统计学意义(P0.05)；其余两组无统计学意义(P0.05).治疗组：治疗前股直肌(RF)、股内肌(VM)和股外肌(VL)的均方根振幅(RMS)均数为13.642±3.193,12.183±9.178,13.486±9.017,治疗后股直肌(RF)、股内肌(VM)和股外肌(VL)的均方根振幅(RMS)均数为32.905±22.213,34.373±25.682,74.499±61.112,三组数据行t检验,均有统计学意义(P0.05)；治疗组评价指标的改善程度明显优于对照组结论：常规康复治疗可以改善患膝的肌力,但配合肌电生物反馈疗法疗效更显著。
[Abstract]:Objective: to study the effect of surface electromyography (EMG) biofeedback instrument on the recovery of muscle strength of knee joint by quantitative analysis of muscle strength of the affected side of rectus femoris, medial femoral muscle and lateral femoral muscle after treatment with electromyoelectric biofeedback instrument (EMG). Methods: there were 28 cases of knee joint stiffness, male 19 and female 9, mean age 35.53 卤9.20 (1855 years), height 173.89 卤8.72 (159~183cm), body weight 71.64 卤10.07 (52~83kg), course of disease 12.82 卤8.03 (3weeks). They were randomly divided into treatment group and control group with 14 cases in each group. The age, height, weight and course of disease of the patients in the treatment group and the control group were compared by statistical software. There is no statistical difference (P0.05), so the two groups of patients in the general situation before treatment at the same baseline, comparable. Two groups of patients were given routine rehabilitation therapy, including wax therapy, exercise therapy, cold therapy; the control group was treated with routine rehabilitation; the treatment group was treated with routine rehabilitation combined with myoelectric biofeedback (Guangzhou Jingguan Technology, Model 565). Surface electromyography (NDI-092) was used to collect the relative root-mean-square amplitude (RMS) of the lateral femoral muscle (VL) and the intrafemoral muscle (VM) before and 4 weeks after treatment. All the data were processed statistically. Results: the mean RMS of relative increase of RMS of rectus femoris (RF), medial femoral muscle (VM) and external femoral muscle (VL) before treatment was 9.641 卤10.744 卤13.380 卤14.308 卤13.353 卤14.374. The mean value of relative increase of root mean square amplitude (RMS) of rectus femoris (RF) and medial femoral muscle (VM) was 13.353 卤14.374 before treatment. The data were 17.304 卤7.275 and 16.738 卤8.719 卤37.273 卤30.945 respectively. The data of VL group were statistically significant (P0.05). The other two groups had no statistical significance (P0.05). The mean root mean amplitude (RMS) of rectus femoris (RF), medial femoral muscle (VM) and lateral femoral muscle (VL) was 13.642 卤3.19312.183 卤9.1781.486 卤9.017 before treatment. After treatment, the mean RMS of rectus femoris (RF), medial femoral muscle (VM) and extrafemoral muscle (VL) were 32.905 卤22.2133t 34.373 卤25.682n 74.499 卤61.112, respectively (P0.05). Conclusion: routine rehabilitation therapy can improve the muscle strength of the affected knee, but the effect of EMG biofeedback therapy is more obvious than that of the control group.
【学位授予单位】：大连医科大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：R684

【相似文献】