Материалы доступны только для специалистов сферы здравоохранения. Авторизуйтесь или зарегистрируйтесь.
Использование метода роботизированной кинезиотерапии у пациентов с последствиями инсульта
________________________________________________
Bronnikov V.A., Smychek V.B., Mavlikaeva Yu.A. et al. The use of the method of robotic kinesitherapy in patients with sequelae of stroke. Consilium Medicum. 2017; 19 (2.1): 49–52.
Материалы доступны только для специалистов сферы здравоохранения. Авторизуйтесь или зарегистрируйтесь.
Ключевые слова: инсульт, реабилитация, роботизированная кинезиотерапия.
________________________________________________
Recovering gait skills is one of the most important tasks of rehabilitation of post-stroke patients. In recent years robotic devices have been used extensively in physical rehabilitation for the gait recovery. The article presents the results of the study of efficiency of using robotic kinesiotherapy in complex rehabilitation of patients after stroke. There were organized medical examinations of 50 patients, including 50 in the main group with the use of the robotic complex ‘Locomat’ and 42 patient in control group with the use of conventional physical therapy. As a result, there are statistical differences in regard to the indices of mobility, motor skills and sensitivity in paretic limb, strength and muscle tone in paretic limbs, as well as the overall improvement of daily activity. It has been determined that the use of robotic devices has positive impact in rehabilitation of post-stroke patients.
Key words: stroke, rehabilitation, robotic kinesiotherapy.
2. Плотникова О.А., Мавликаева Ю.А. Анализ инвалидности взрослого населения Пермского края вследствие инсульта. Проблемы соц. гигиены, здравоохранения и истории медицины. 2014; 2: 17–9. / Plotnikova O.A., Mavlikaeva Iu.A. Analiz invalidnosti vzroslogo naseleniia Permskogo kraia vsledstvie insul'ta. Problemy sots. gigieny, zdravookhraneniia i istorii meditsiny. 2014; 2: 17–9. [in Russian]
3. Westlake K, Patten C. Pilot study of Lokomat versus manual-assisted treadmill training for locomotor recovery post-stroke. J NeuroEngineering Rehabilitation 2009; 6 (1): 18. DOI: 10.1186/1743-0003-6-18
4. Huang V, Krakauer J. Robotic neurorehabilitation: a computational motor learning perspective. J NeuroEngineering Rehabilitation 2009; 6 (1): 5. DOI:10.1186/1743-0003-6-5
5. Кравцов Ю.И., Бронников В.А., Вильдеман А.В. и др. Эффективность комплексной кинезиотерапии у пациентов с тяжелыми двигательными нарушениями. Физиотерапия, бальнеология и реабилитация. 2013; 5: 48–9. / Kravtsov Iu.I., Bronnikov V.A., Vil'deman A.V. i dr. Effektivnost' kompleksnoi kinezioterapii u patsientov s tiazhelymi dvigatel'nymi narusheniiami. Fizioterapiia, bal'neologiia i reabilitatsiia. 2013; 5: 48–9. [in Russian]
6. Husemann B, Muller F, Krewer C et al. Effects of Locomotion Training With Assistance of a Robot-Driven Gait Orthosis in Hemiparetic Patients After Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study. Stroke 2007; 38 (2): 349–54. DOI: 10.1161/01.str.0000254607.48765.cb
7. Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurology 2009; 8 (8): 741–54. DOI:10.1016/s1474-4422(09)70150-4
8. Mehrholz J, Elsner B, Werner C et al. Electromechanical-Assisted Training for Walking After Stroke: Updated Evidence. Stroke 2013; 44 (10): e127-e128. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.113.003061
9. Meiner Z, Fisher I, Katz-Leurer M et al. The Effectiveness of Locomotor Therapy Using Robotic-assisted Gait Training in Subacute Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial. PM&R 2009; 1 (9): S99. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2009.08.004
10. Geroin C, Mazzoleni S, Smania N et al. Systematic review of outcome measures of walking training using electromechanical and robotic devices in patients with stroke. J Rehabilitation Med 2013; 45 (10): 987–96. DOI:10.2340/16501977-1234
11. Van Nunen M, Gerrits K, Konijnenbelt M et al. Recovery of walking ability using a robotic device in subacute stroke patients: a randomized controlled study. Disabil Rehabil: Assistive Technology 2015; 10 (2): 141–8. DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2013.873489
12. Dundar U, Toktas H, Solak O et al. A Comparative Study of Conventional Physiotherapy Versus Robotic Training Combined with Physiotherapy in Patients with Stroke. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 2014; 21 (6): 453–61. DOI:10.1310/tsr2106-453
13. Черникова Л.А., Клочков А.С. Влияние тренировок на роботизированной системе Lokomat на мобильность при ходьбе у пациентов с постинсультными гемипарезами. Вопросы курортологии, физиотерапии и лечебной физической культуры. 2014; 3: 13–7. / Chernikova L.A., Klochkov A.S. Vliianie trenirovok na robotizirovannoi sisteme Lokomat na mobil'nost' pri khod'be u patsientov s postinsul'tnymi gemiparezami. Voprosy kurortologii, fizioterapii i lechebnoi fizicheskoi kul'tury. 2014; 3: 13–7. [in Russian]
14. Bronnikov VA, Sklyannaya KA. Possibilities of Medical and Social Rehabilitation After Stroke; International Neurorehabilitation Symposium 2013; September 11–13, 2013; Zurich, Switzerland. http://www.inrs2013.com/fileadmin/user_upload/posters/12_Bronnikov_et_al_INRS_2013.pdf
15. Rosa M, Marques A, Demain S, Metcalf C. Knee posture during gait and global functioning post-stroke: a theoretical ICF framework using current measures in stroke rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2015; 37 (10): 904–13. DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2014.948132
16. Sivan M, O’Connor R, Makower S et al. Systematic review of outcome measures used in the evaluation of robot-assisted upper limb exercise in stroke. J Rehabilitation Med 2011; 43 (3): 181–9. DOI:10.2340/16501977-0674
________________________________________________
1. Lozano R, Naghavi M, Foreman K et al. Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012; 380 (9859): 2095–128. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61728-0.
2. Plotnikova O.A., Mavlikaeva Iu.A. Analiz invalidnosti vzroslogo naseleniia Permskogo kraia vsledstvie insul'ta. Problemy sots. gigieny, zdravookhraneniia i istorii meditsiny. 2014; 2: 17–9. [in Russian]
3. Westlake K, Patten C. Pilot study of Lokomat versus manual-assisted treadmill training for locomotor recovery post-stroke. J NeuroEngineering Rehabilitation 2009; 6 (1): 18. DOI: 10.1186/1743-0003-6-18
4. Huang V, Krakauer J. Robotic neurorehabilitation: a computational motor learning perspective. J NeuroEngineering Rehabilitation 2009; 6 (1): 5. DOI:10.1186/1743-0003-6-5
5. Kravtsov Iu.I., Bronnikov V.A., Vil'deman A.V. i dr. Effektivnost' kompleksnoi kinezioterapii u patsientov s tiazhelymi dvigatel'nymi narusheniiami. Fizioterapiia, bal'neologiia i reabilitatsiia. 2013; 5: 48–9. [in Russian]
6. Husemann B, Muller F, Krewer C et al. Effects of Locomotion Training With Assistance of a Robot-Driven Gait Orthosis in Hemiparetic Patients After Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study. Stroke 2007; 38 (2): 349–54. DOI: 10.1161/01.str.0000254607.48765.cb
7. Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A. Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurology 2009; 8 (8): 741–54. DOI:10.1016/s1474-4422(09)70150-4
8. Mehrholz J, Elsner B, Werner C et al. Electromechanical-Assisted Training for Walking After Stroke: Updated Evidence. Stroke 2013; 44 (10): e127-e128. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.113.003061
9. Meiner Z, Fisher I, Katz-Leurer M et al. The Effectiveness of Locomotor Therapy Using Robotic-assisted Gait Training in Subacute Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial. PM&R 2009; 1 (9): S99. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2009.08.004
10. Geroin C, Mazzoleni S, Smania N et al. Systematic review of outcome measures of walking training using electromechanical and robotic devices in patients with stroke. J Rehabilitation Med 2013; 45 (10): 987–96. DOI:10.2340/16501977-1234
11. Van Nunen M, Gerrits K, Konijnenbelt M et al. Recovery of walking ability using a robotic device in subacute stroke patients: a randomized controlled study. Disabil Rehabil: Assistive Technology 2015; 10 (2): 141–8. DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2013.873489
12. Dundar U, Toktas H, Solak O et al. A Comparative Study of Conventional Physiotherapy Versus Robotic Training Combined with Physiotherapy in Patients with Stroke. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 2014; 21 (6): 453–61. DOI:10.1310/tsr2106-453
13. Chernikova L.A., Klochkov A.S. Vliianie trenirovok na robotizirovannoi sisteme Lokomat na mobil'nost' pri khod'be u patsientov s postinsul'tnymi gemiparezami. Voprosy kurortologii, fizioterapii i lechebnoi fizicheskoi kul'tury. 2014; 3: 13–7. [in Russian]
14. Bronnikov VA, Sklyannaya KA. Possibilities of Medical and Social Rehabilitation After Stroke; International Neurorehabilitation Symposium 2013; September 11–13, 2013; Zurich, Switzerland. http://www.inrs2013.com/fileadmin/user_upload/posters/12_Bronnikov_et_al_INRS_2013.pdf
15. Rosa M, Marques A, Demain S, Metcalf C. Knee posture during gait and global functioning post-stroke: a theoretical ICF framework using current measures in stroke rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2015; 37 (10): 904–13. DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2014.948132
16. Sivan M, O’Connor R, Makower S et al. Systematic review of outcome measures used in the evaluation of robot-assisted upper limb exercise in stroke. J Rehabilitation Med 2011; 43 (3): 181–9. DOI:10.2340/16501977-0674
1 ФГБОУ ВО «Пермский государственный медицинский университет им. академика Е.А.Вагнера» Минздрава России. 614990, Россия, Пермь, ул. Петропавловская, д. 26;
2 КГАУ «Центр комплексной реабилитации инвалидов». 614094, Россия, Пермь, ул. Связистов, д. 11а;
3 ГУ «Республиканский научно-практический центр медицинской экспертизы и реабилитации». 223027, Республика Беларусь, Минская обл., Минский р-н, пос. Городище;
4 ФКУ «Главное бюро медико-социальной экспертизы» по Пермскому краю Минтруда России. 614010, Россия, Пермь, ул. Комсомольский пр-т, д. 77
*bronnikov66@mail.ru
________________________________________________
V.A.Bronnikov*1,2, V.B.Smychek1, Yu.A.Mavlikaeva3, Yu.I.Kravtzov1, K.A.Sklyannaya1,2
1 Academician E.A.Wagner Perm State University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. 614990, Russian Federation, Perm, ul. Petropavlovskaia, d. 26;
2 Perm Regional Complex Rehabilitation Centre. 614094, Russian Federation, Perm, ul. Sviazistov, d. 11a;
3 Republican Scientific and Practical Centre of Medical Expertise and Rehabilitation. 223027, Republic of Belarus, Minskaia obl., Minskii r-n, pos. Gorodishche;
4 Main Bureau of Medical and Social Expertise Krai in Perm. 614010, Russian Federation, Perm, ul. Komsomol'skii pr-t, d. 77
*bronnikov66@mail.ru