The effect of a high-quality nursing model employing low-frequency pulse electrical stimulation combined with early systemic functional exercises on the function of the affected limb in brachial plexus injury patients
OBJECTIVETo explore the effect of a high-quality nursing model employing low-frequency pulse electrical stimulation combined with early systemic functional exercises on the function of the affected limb in brachial plexus injury patients. METHODSA total of 98 brachial plexus injury patients admitted...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | American journal of translational research 2021-01, Vol.13 (5), p.4939-4948 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | OBJECTIVETo explore the effect of a high-quality nursing model employing low-frequency pulse electrical stimulation combined with early systemic functional exercises on the function of the affected limb in brachial plexus injury patients. METHODSA total of 98 brachial plexus injury patients admitted to our hospital were recruited as the research cohort. All the patients were treated with surgery to repair, release, and transfer or transplant nerves according to each patient's condition. After the operations, the patients were randomly divided into one of two groups: the control group (n=49) or the research group (n=49). The control group did early systemic functional exercises, while the research group was administered low frequency pulse electrical stimulation in addition to doing the early systemic functional exercises. The clinical efficacy, the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores before and after the treatment, the brachial plexus function scores, the nerve conduction velocities and amplitudes, the SF-36 questionnaires, the incidences of complications, and the nursing satisfaction were compared between the two groups. RESULTSAfter the treatment, the overall response rate to the treatment in the research group was significantly higher than it was in the control group (95.92% vs 81.63%, P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1943-8141 1943-8141 |