脑卒中后吞咽功能障碍患者两种治疗效果比较

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (901 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要目的观察呼吸训练联合低频电刺激对脑卒中后吞咽功能障碍患者的吞咽功能及呼吸功能的影响。方法选取2018-04至2019-08我院收治的102例脑卒中后吞咽功能障碍患者为研究目标,按随机数字表法分为对照组和观察组,每组51例,对照组采用常规治疗即吞咽功能训练,观察组在对照组基础上加用呼吸训练与低频电刺激。采用洼田饮水试验评价两组临床疗效,以呼气峰流速(PEF)、一秒用力呼气量(FEV)、用力肺活量(FVc)、吞咽功能为观察指标,判断并比较两组患者的治疗效果。结果治疗前观察组患者和对照组患者的肺功能测定PEF、FEV1、FVC三项指标均差异无统计学意义,治疗1个月后观察组患者PEF=5.46±1.01(L/s),FEV₁=2.92±0.59(L/s),FVC=3.76±0.83(L),较治疗前三项指标明显增高(P＜0.05),而对照组患者治疗后PEF=4.27±0.94(L/s),FEV₁=2.38±0.66(L/s),FVC=2.67±0.61(L),较治疗前相比基本没有变化,观察组肺功能改善情况明显优于对照组(P＜0.05);治疗前观察组患者和对照组患者的吞咽造影检查(VFSS)评分差异无统计学意义,治疗1个月后,两组患者的VFSS评分较治疗前相比均明显提高(P＜0.05),且观察组(VFSS=9.01±0.67)显著高于对照组(VFSS=7.98±0.87)(P＜0.05);治疗后观察组患者的治疗显效率84.31%,对照组患者的显效率为60.78%,观察组的治疗效果明显高于对照组(P＜0.05)。结论在吞咽功能训练的基础上加以呼吸训练联合低频电刺激能够明显改善脑卒中后吞咽功能障碍患者的吞咽功能和呼吸功能,促进神经功能重塑,治疗效果较好。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	陆善恒
	江文宇
	吴娟
	薛丽
	高敏
	庞杏菲
	吴圣婕

关键词 ：呼吸训练, 低频电刺激, 脑卒中, 吞咽功能障碍, 疗效

Abstract：Objective To observe the effect of respiratory training combined with low-frequency electrical stimulation on swallowing function and respiratory function of patients with dysphagia after stroke.Methods One hundred and two patients with dysphagia after stroke admitted to our hospital between April 2018 and August 2019 were selected as the subjects and divided into the control group and the observation group using the random number table method, with 51 cases in each. The control group received conventional treatment, namely, swallowing function training, while the observation group additionally received breathing training and low-frequency electrical stimulation.The clinical efficacy of the two groups was evaluated by the bottom-field drinking water test, and the therapeutic effect in the two groups was assessed and compared with PEF, FEV, FVC and swallow function as observation indexes.Results There was no significant difference in pulmonary function measurements of PEF, FEV₁ and FVC between the two groups before treatment (P>0.05). After one month of treatment, the pulmonary function of the observation group was as follows: PEF=5.46±1.01(L/s), FEV₁=2.92±0.59(L/s), and FVC=3.76±0.83(L), which were significantly higher than 4.27±0.94(L/s), FEV₁=2.38±0.66(L/s) and FVC=2.67±0.61(L)in the control group (P＜ 0.05). Lung function in the observation group was more significantly improved than in the control group (P＜0.05).There was no significant difference in the score of VFSS between the two groups before treatment. After one month of treatment, the score of VFSS in both groups was significantly higher (P＜0.05), especially in the observation group (VFSS=9.01±0.67).After treatment, the apparent therapeutic efficiency of the observation group was 84.31%, compared with 60.78% in the control group. The therapeutic effect of the observation group was significantly better than that of the control group (P＜0.05).Conclusions On the basis of swallowing function training, breathing training combined with low-frequency electrical stimulation can significantly improve the swallowing function and respiratory function of patients with swallowing function dysfunction after stroke, promote the remodeling of nerve function, and have a good therapeutic effect.

Key words： breathing training low-frequency electrical stimulation stroke dysphagia curative effect

收稿日期: 2020-01-15

ZTFLH:	R743
	R49

基金资助:广西自然科学基金(2016GXNSFAA380110)

作者简介: 陆善恒,本科学历,主治医师。

引用本文:

陆善恒, 江文宇, 吴娟, 薛丽, 高敏, 庞杏菲, 吴圣婕. 脑卒中后吞咽功能障碍患者两种治疗效果比较[J]. 武警医学, 2020, 31(10): 834-838. LU Shanheng, JIANG Wenyu, WU Juan, XUE Li, GAO Min, PANG Xingfei, WU Shengjie. Effects of respiratory training combined with low-frequency electrical stimulation on swallowing and respiratory function in patients with dysphagia after stroke. Med. J. Chin. Peop. Armed Poli. Forc., 2020, 31(10): 834-838.

链接本文:

http://journal08.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_wjyx/CN/ 或 http://journal08.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_wjyx/CN/Y2020/V31/I10/834

[1]	董大伟, 袁定新, 王建民,等. 动脉粥样硬化性脑梗死发病机制的特征及远期预后[J]. 暨南大学学报(自然科学与医学版), 2013, 34(6):640-645.
[2]	樊文香. 缺血性脑卒中的机制研究进展[J]. 中国药科大学学报, 2018, 49(6):121-129.
[3]	黄岳, 崔利华, 刘丽旭,等. 脑卒中患者的呼吸功能障碍及其康复[J]. 中国康复理论与实践, 2015, 21(9):1055-1057.
[4]	唐李莹, 陈炳, 张垣, 等. 吞咽康复训练对老年脑卒中吞咽功能障碍患者生活质量的影响[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2019, 39(9):44-47.
[5]	刘艳萍, 谢明, 封蔚彬, 等. 低频电刺激和吞咽训练配合康复护理干预治疗脑卒中后吞咽障碍的疗效观察[J]. 中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2011, 33(8):616-617.
[6]	章志超, 周芳, 乔娜,等. 呼吸训练治疗脑卒中后吞咽功能障碍患者的疗效观察[J]. 中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2017, 39(10):742-746.
[7]	朱亚芳, 张晓梅, 肖瑞,等. 经口摄食功能评估量表与洼田饮水试验应用于急性脑卒中患者中的信效度研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2018, 21(3):318-321.
[8]	Kim S Y, Kim T U, Hyun J K, et al. Differences in videofluoroscopic swallowing study (VFSS) findings according to the vascular territory involved in stroke.[J]. Dysphagia, 2014, 29(4):444-449.
[9]	杜新新, 王强, 孟萍萍, 等. 肌电生物反馈强化训练对脑卒中后吞咽障碍患者吞咽功能的影响[J]. 中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2019, 41(6):411-415.
[10]	Devine M J, Bentley P, Jones B, et al. The role of the right inferior frontal gyrus in the pathogenesis of post-stroke psychosis[J].JNeurol, 2014, 261(3):600-603.
[11]	孟阳, 顾莹, 王欣. 爱荷华口肌训练仪配合吞咽功能训练治疗脑卒中后吞咽功能障碍的临床观察[J]. 中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2015, 37(12):934-936.
[12]	Pongpipatpaiboon K, Inamoto Y, Saitoh E, et al. Pharyngeal swallowing in older adults: Kinematic analysis using three-dimensional dynamic computed tomography[J]. JORAL REHABIL, 2018, 45(12):959-966.
[13]	马明,杨玺,蔡倩,等.重复性外周磁刺激联合吞咽功能训练治疗脑卒中后咽期吞咽障碍的疗效观察[J].中华物理医学与康复杂志,2017,39(10):749-752.
[14]	李舜,宋成宪,李太良,等. 腹式呼吸训练联合耻骨调整技术对产后耻骨联合功能障碍的治疗效果[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2019, 35(9):1442-1444.
[15]	中华医学会呼吸病学分会肺功能专业组. 肺功能检查指南——呼气峰值流量及其变异率检查[J]. 中华结核和呼吸杂志, 2017, 40(6):426-430.
[16]	崔冬清, 严梅. 肺功能检测中用力肺活量替代指标的选择分析[J]. 中国全科医学, 2014, 17(11):1311-1313.
[17]	Xu T, Hou J, Cheng J, et al. Estimated individual inhaled dose of fine particles and indicators of lung function: A pilot study among Chinese young adults[J]. ENVIRONPOLLUT, 2018, 235:505-513.
[18]	刘艳,潘丽,王宏媛, 等.低频电刺激和吞咽训练配合康复护理干预治疗脑卒中后吞咽障碍的疗效观察[J].糖尿病天地,2019,16(1):266-267.
[19]	彭源, 燕铁斌, 金冬梅,等. 低频电刺激对急性局灶性脑梗死大鼠运动功能及梗死边缘区胶质纤维酸性蛋白表达的影响[J]. 中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2009, 31(10):655-658.
[20]	Liao X, Xing G, Guo Z, et al. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation as an alternative therapy for dysphagia after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J].CLIN REHABIL, 2016, 31(3):289-298.