User Guide
Why can I only view 3 results?
You can also view all results when you are connected from the network of member institutions only. For non-member institutions, we are opening a 1-month free trial version if institution officials apply.
So many results that aren't mine?
References in many bibliographies are sometimes referred to as "Surname, I", so the citations of academics whose Surname and initials are the same may occasionally interfere. This problem is often the case with citation indexes all over the world.
How can I see only citations to my article?
After searching the name of your article, you can see the references to the article you selected as soon as you click on the details section.
 Views 6
 Downloands 1
Hemiplejik omuzda bantlama ile nöromüsküler elektrik stimülasyon sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması: randomize kontrollü çalışma
2020
Journal:  
Journal of Exercise Therapy and Rehabilitation
Author:  
Abstract:

Amaç: Omuz fonksiyonu, inme sonrası hayatta kalanların bağımsızlık kazanmaları için önemli bir rol oynar. Bu çalışmanın amacı, inme geçiren hastalarda omuz bantlama (Tp) ve nöromüsküler elektrik stimülasyonunun (NMES) omuz fonksiyonu, motor aktivite ve ağrı üzerindeki etkilerini karşılaştırmaktır. Yöntem: Çalışmaya üst ekstremite tutulumu olan inme hastaları alındı. Altmış hasta, inmeden 1-3 ay sonra bantlama grubu (TpG), NMES veya kontrol gruplarına (CG) rasgele ayrıldı. Tedavi süresi 4 hafta idi. Omuz fonksiyonel değerlendirmede Fugl– Meyer Duyu Motor Değerlendirme Ölçeği (FMDDÖ) ve Motor Aktivite Log-28 (MAL) kullanıldı. Omuz ağrısı değerlendirmesinde Görsel Analog Skala kullanıldı. Bulgular: Grup içi karşılaştırmalarda FMDDÖ (TpG p≤0,001; NMES p=0,002; CG p≤0,001) ve MAL skorlarında (TpG p≤0,001; NMES p≤0,001; CG p ≤0,001) istatistiksel açıdan anlamlı gelişmeler bulundu. Grup içi karşılaştırmalar hem istirahatte omuz ağrısı yoğunluğunda (TpG p=0,007 ve NMES p=0,014) hem de aktivite ile (TpG p≤0,01 ve NMES p=0,016) anlamlı bir azalma gösterirken, CG’de hem istirahatte hem de aktivite ağrısı ile anlamlı bir azalma saptanmadı (her ikisi için p=0,054). Gruplar arası karşılaştırmalar, FMDDÖ'lerde TpG lehine önemli bir değişiklik (p=0,0026) gösterdi (p≤0,001). Grup karşılaştırmalarında MAL'de fark saptanmadı (p>0,05). Sonuç: İnme hastalarının konservatif tedavisinde, etkilenen omuzda izole motor aktivitesini arttırmak için bantlama ve NMES kullanılabilir; ancak, fonksiyon için destekleyici bantlama daha etkili olacaktır.

Keywords:

Comparison of results of neuromuscular electrical stimulation with hemiplegic shoulder bandage: randomized controlled study
2020
Author:  
Abstract:

Purpose: Aim of this study is to compare the effects of shoulder taping (Tp) and neuromuscular electric stimulation (NMES) on shoulder function, motor activity, and pain in patients with hemiplegia. Methods: Outpatients with ischemic stroke with upper extremity involvement were enrolled in the study. Sixty patients were randomly assigned to supported taping (TpG), NMES, or control groups (CG) within 1-3 months of stroke. Treatment duration was 4 weeks. The Fugl-Meyer Sensorimotor Assessment Scale (FMSAS) and the Motor Activity Log-28 (MAL) were used for shoulder functional assessment. A Visual Analog Scale was used for shoulder pain assessment. Results: Statistically significant improvements in the FMSAS (TpG p ≤ 0.001; NMES p=0.002; CG p ≤ 0.001) and MAL scores (TpG p ≤ 0.001; NMES p ≤ 0. 001; CG p ≤ 0.001) were found in within-group comparisons. Within-group comparisons showed a significant decrease in shoulder pain intensity both at rest (TpG p = 0.007 and NMES p = 0.014) and with activity (TpG p≤ 0.01 and NMES p= 0.016), whereas no significant decrease was found in the CG either at rest or with activity pain (p = 0.054 for both). Between-group comparisons revealed a significant change (p=0.0026) in the FMSAS in favor of TpG (p ≤ 0.001). No difference was found in the MAL in between-group comparisons (p>0.05). Conclusion: In the treatment of symptomatic shoulders in patients with hemiplegia, both options could be used to increase isolated motor activity; however, if function is desired, supportive taping would be more effective.

Keywords:

A Comparison Of Taping and Neuromuscular Electric Stimulation Outcomes In Hemiplegic Shoulder: A Randomized Controlled Trial
2020
Author:  
Abstract:

Purpose: Aim of this study is to compare the effects of shoulder taping (Tp) and neuromuscular electric stimulation (NMES) on shoulder function, motor activity, and pain in patients with hemiplegia. Methods: Outpatients with ischemic stroke with upper extremity involvement were enrolled in the study. Sixty patients were randomly assigned to supported taping (TpG), NMES, or control groups (CG) within 1-3 months of stroke. Treatment duration was 4 weeks. The Fugl–Meyer Sensorimotor Assessment Scale (FMSAS) and the Motor Activity Log-28 (MAL) were used for shoulder functional assessment. A Visual Analog Scale was used for shoulder pain assessment. Results: Statistically significant improvements in the FMSAS (TpG p ≤ 0.001; NMES p=0.002; CG p ≤ 0.001) and MAL scores (TpG p ≤ 0.001; NMES p ≤ 0.001; CG p ≤ 0.001) were found in within-group comparisons. Within-group comparisons showed a significant decrease in shoulder pain intensity both at rest (TpG p = 0.007 and NMES p = 0.014) and with activity (TpG p≤ 0.01 and NMES p= 0.016), whereas no significant decrease was found in the CG either at rest or with activity pain (p = 0.054 for both). Between-group comparisons revealed a significant change (p=0.0026) in the FMSAS in favor of TpG (p ≤ 0.001). No difference was found in the MAL in between-group comparisons (p>0.05). Conclusion: In the treatment of symptomatic shoulders in patients with hemiplegia, both options could be used to increase isolated motor activity; however, if function is desired, supportive taping would be more effective.

Keywords:

Citation Owners
Information: There is no ciation to this publication.
Similar Articles










Journal of Exercise Therapy and Rehabilitation

Field :   Sağlık Bilimleri

Journal Type :   Uluslararası

Metrics
Article : 244
Cite : 325
2023 Impact : 0.035
Journal of Exercise Therapy and Rehabilitation