| Research Objective: To compare the therapeutic effects and compliance of Schroth hospital-home rehabilitation mode and traditional rehabilitation mode on mild adolescent idiopathic scoliosis(AIS)patients.Research Method: The study included 60 patients diagnosed with mild AIS from June2020 to October 2022 in the Rehabilitation Medicine Department of Tianjin Hospital.According to the treatment preferences of patients and their families,the patients were divided into the experimental group(n=30),receiving hospital-home rehabilitation,and the control group(n=30),receiving traditional rehabilitation.General information of all patients was collected before formal training.Relevant indicators were evaluated before and after 24 weeks of intervention,including imaging parameters,spinal mobility,trunk rotation angle,quality of life,and training compliance.Imaging parameters included coronal and sagittal parameters of full-length standing X-ray films of the spine.Sagittal parameters included T1 slope and C7 sagittal vertical axis(C7SVA);coronal parameters included major curve Cobb angle(MCC),apical vertebral translation(AVT),and distance between C7 plumb line and center sacral vertical line(C7PL-CSVL).Spinal mobility was assessed by the mobility of thoracic and lumbar vertebrae in six positions,including flexion,extension,left and right bending,and left and right rotation.Trunk rotation angle was measured using a scoliometer.Quality of life was evaluated using the Scoliosis Research Society-22 questionnaire,which investigated patients’ functional activities,pain,self-image,mental health,and treatment satisfaction.Differences within and between groups before and after intervention were statistically analyzed using SPSS 26.0,and patient compliance levels under the two modes were analyzed.Research Results:1.Imaging parameters evaluation showed that in the experimental group,the MCC and AVT improved significantly after intervention,with a statistically significant difference(P<0.05),and the degree of deviation of the apical vertebra was reduced compared to before intervention.In the control group,the MCC,AVT,and C7PL-CSVL improved significantly after intervention,with a statistically significant difference(P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference between the experimental and control groups in terms of MCC,AVT,and C7PL-CSVL after intervention(P>0.05).The T1 slope of both groups improved significantly after intervention,with a statistically significant difference(P<0.05),but there was no statistically significant difference in T1 slope and C7 SVA between the experimental and control groups after intervention(P>0.05).2.Spinal mobility assessment showed that in the experimental group,there was a statistically significant difference in thoracic spine left bending,left rotation,and extension before and after intervention(P<0.05).In the control group,there was a statistically significant difference in thoracic spine left bending,right bending,right rotation,and extension before and after intervention(P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in spinal mobility between the experimental and control groups after intervention(P>0.05).3.Assessment of trunk rotation angle showed that compared to the control group,both the experimental group and the control group showed improvements in the differences in back convexity and concavity before and after intervention within the ATR group,and the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in trunk rotation angle between the experimental and control groups after intervention(P>0.05).4.Quality of life assessment showed that compared to before intervention,the experimental group showed significant improvement in psychological health within the group after intervention(P<0.05),and the control group showed significant improvement in psychological health and self-image within the group after intervention(P<0.05).After intervention,there was no significant difference in quality of life indicators between the groups(P>0.05).5.Compliance analysis showed no significant difference between the experimental and control groups after intervention(P>0.05).In the experimental group,the proportion of complete compliance was 46.7%,partial compliance was 43.3%,and non-compliance was 10%.In the control group,the proportion of complete compliance was 63.3%,partial compliance was 20.0%,and noncompliance was 16.6%.Although there was no significant difference in training compliance between the two groups after intervention,the proportion of compliance in the experimental group was higher than that in the control group.Conclusion: Research has shown that there is no significant difference between schroth hospital-home rehabilitation mode and traditional rehabilitation mode in the clinical efficacy of AIS intervention.This mode plays an important role in further preventing arc progression,improving posture and spinal motion,and improving patients’ quality of life,and patients’ compliance is relatively high. |
PDF Full Text Request