Clinical Studies On The Effects Of Standardized Three-staged Rehabilitation Treatment For Function Recovery Of Stroke

Part I:Effects of Standardized Three-staged Rehabilitation Treatment on Motor functional Recovery in Stroke PatientsObjective:To explore the effects of standardized three-staged rehabilitation treatment on motor function disability in stroke patients. Methods:259 stroke patients were randomized to standardize rehabilitation group and non-standardized rehabilitation group. The simplified Fugl-Meyer assessment, Brunnstrom motor function assessment and modified Ashworth scale were evaluated and analyzed at the immediate treatment, after 1,2,3 and 6 months, and 12-month follow-up were assessed. Results:There was no statistical difference of the general situation and the FMA score, Brunnstrom stage, modified Ashworth score between standardized three-staged rehabilitation group and non-standardized rehabilitation group at the immediate treatment. At 2,3,6 months and 12-month follow-up, both groups’ FMA score, upper extremity Brunnstrom stage, lower extremity Brunnstrom stage, biceps and quadriceps Modified Ashworth score were improved gradually as time progressing. Standardized three-staged rehabilitation group’s FMA score, lower extremity Brunnstrom stage and lower extremity muscles (quadriceps) Modified Ashworth scores were higher than those of non-standardized rehabilitation group at 2, 3,6 months and 12-month follow-up. The difference between the groups was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no statistical difference between standardized three-staged rehabilitation group and non-standardized rehabilitation group in shoulder Brunnstrom staging, elbow Brunnstrom staging and upper biceps Modified Ashworth scores at 2,3,6 months and 12-month follow-up. Conclusion: Compared with non-standardized rehabilitation, standardized three-staged rehabilitation is more conducive to recovery in patients with motor dysfunction.Part Ⅱ:Effects of Standardized Three-staged Rehabilitation Treatment on Cognitive Function in Stroke PatientsObjective:To explore the effects of standardized three-staged rehabilitation treatment on cognitive function disability in stroke patients. Methods:259 stroke patients were randomized to standardize rehabilitation group and non-standardized rehabilitation group. Mini mental state examination (MMSE) was used to evaluate the patients’ cognitive function at the immediate enrollment,1,2,3,6 months after treatment, and 12 months follow-up. Results:At 1,2,3,6 months and 12-month follow-up, both groups’ MMSE scores were significantly increasing gradually as time progressing. But the ratings were not statistically different between standardized three-staged rehabilitation group and non-standardized rehabilitation group at all of the time points. Conclusion:In this study, there is no clear evidence that standardized three-staged rehabilitation is superior to non-standardized rehabilitation in cognition improving.Part III:Effects of Standardized Three-staged Rehabilitation Treatment on Activities of Daily Living and Quality of Life in Stroke PatientsObjective:To explore the effects of standardized three-staged rehabilitation treatment on activities of daily living(ADL) and quality of life in stroke patients. Methods:259 stroke patients were randomized to standardize rehabilitation group and non-standardized rehabilitation group. Modified Barthel Index (MBI) and the MOS 36-item short form health survey (SF-36) were used to evaluate the patients’ ADL and quality of life at the immediate enrollment,1,2,3,6 months after treatment, and 12 months follow-up. Results:At 1,2,3,6 months and 12-month follow-up, both groups’MBI and SF-36 scores were significantly increasing gradually as time progressing(P<0.05). The MBI score was no significant difference between standardized three-staged rehabilitation group and non-standardized rehabilitation group at 1 and 2 months. While at 3,6 months after treatment, and 12 months follow-up, standardized three-staged rehabilitation group’s MBI scores were significantly higher than for non-standardized rehabilitation treatment group (P<0.05). The SF-36 score was no significant difference between standardized three-staged rehabilitation group and non-standardized rehabilitation group at 1 month. While at 2,3,6 months after treatment, and 12 months follow-up, standardized three-staged rehabilitation group’s SF-36 scores were significantly higher than for non-standardized rehabilitation treatment group (P<0.05). Conclusion:Standardized three-staged rehabilitation has more advantages than non-standardized rehabilitation in improving ADL capacity and the quality of life in stroke patients.Part IV:Effects of Standardized Three-staged Rehabilitation Treatment on Comprehensive Functional Capabilities in Stroke PatientsObjective:To explore the effects of standardized three-staged rehabilitation treatment on comprehensive functional capabilities in stroke patients. Methods:259 stroke patients were randomized to standardize rehabilitation group and non-standardized rehabilitation group. Functional comprehensive assessment (FCA) was used to evaluate the patients’comprehensive functional capabilities at the immediate enrollment,1,2,3,6 months after treatment, and 12 months follow-up. Results:At 1,2,3,6 months and 12-month follow-up, both groups’FCA scores were significantly increasing gradually as time progressing(P<0.05). The FCA scores were no significant difference between standardized three-staged rehabilitation group and non-standardized rehabilitation group at 1,2 and 3 months. While at 6 months after treatment, and 12 months follow-up, standardized three-staged rehabilitation group’s FCA scores were significantly higher than for non-standardized rehabilitation treatment group (P<0.05). Conclusion:Standardized three-staged rehabilitation has more advantages than non-standardized rehabilitation in improving comprehensive functional capabilities in stroke patients.