ObjectiveTo explore the clinical effect of the end-traction upper limb rehabilitation training system on patients with upper limb motor dysfunction after stroke.MethodsPatients with upper limb motor dysfunction who were admitted to the Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from September to November 2019 were selected. According to the software, the patients were randomly divided into the experimental group and the control group. Both groups received conventional medical treatment, basic rehabilitation, and activities of daily living training. In addition, the control group received traditional occupational therapy, while the experimental group received end-traction upper limb rehabilitation training. The training time of both groups was 30 min/ (times ·d) and 5 days per week. Rehabilitation evaluation and recording were performed before and after the four-week treatment in both groups using the simplified upper extremity Fugl-Meyer assessment (FMA) and the modified Barthel index (MBI).ResultsA total of 36 patients were enrolled, with 18 in each group. All patients completed the experiment, and no special discomfort was observed. Before the treatment, there was no statistically significant difference in FMA and MBI between the experimental group [(13.22±3.13) and (49.66±6.81) points] and the control group [(14.78±1.70) and (51.67±6.65) points] (t=1.858, 0.896; P=0.072, 0.377). After four-week treatment, FMA and MBI in both groups improved significantly (P<0.05); the difference between the experimental group [(27.56±15.68) and (73.55±8.72) points] and the control group [(17.67±6.73) and (65.33±9.20) points] was statistically significant (t=2.459, 2.751; P=0.019, 0.009).ConclusionsThe end-traction upper limb rehabilitation training system can significantly improve the upper limb motor function of patients with upper limb motor dysfunction after stroke and improve the patients’ daily life ability. It is worthy of clinical promotion and application.
Objective To discuss the effectiveness of breast reconstruction with dual plane prosthesis implantation or anterior pectoralis prosthesis implantation under endoscopy by using prospective comparative study, in order to provide a reference for clinical surgical selection. Methods A total of 54 female patients with breast cancer admitted between January 2023 and December 2023 and met the selection criteria were selected as research subjects. According to the random number table, 54 patients were divided into trial group and control group with 27 cases in each. The patients in the trial group and control group were treated with dual plane prosthesis implantation and anterior pectoralis prosthesis implantation for breast reconstruction after glandular resection under endoscopy, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05) in the terms of age, body mass index, affected side, breast clinical stages, molecular typing, disease duration, breast volume of healthy side, breast ptosis of affected side, and preoperative Breast-Q score (social mental health, sexual health, breast satisfaction, chest somatic health). The operation-related indicators (operation time, total volume of drainage within 7 days after operation, extubation time, and hospital stay), occurrence of complications, breast reconstruction efficacy related indicators (transverse and longitudinal distance difference), and the pre- and post-operative differences (change values) of Breast-Q scores for each item were compared between the two groups. Results There was no significant difference in operation time, total volume of drainage within 7 days after operation, extubation time, and hospital stay between the two groups (P>0.05). All patients of the two groups were followed up 3-12 months (mean, 6.3 months). Three patients (11.11%) in trial group and 5 patients (18.52%) in control group experienced complications, and there was no significant difference in the occurrence of complications (P>0.05). At 7 days after operation, the transverse and longitudinal distance differences were significantly less in trial group than in control group (P<0.05). The Breast-Q scores of the two groups at 7 days after operation were significantly higher in all items than those before operation (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in all change values between the two groups (P>0.05). ConclusionFor patients with breast cancer, comparison of breast reconstruction with anterior pectoralis prosthesis implantation, breast reconstruction with dual plane prosthesis implantation has better breast reconstruction effectiveness and higher safety.
