[Effect of electroacupuncture on motor function and gait in patients with post-stroke spasticity in lower limbs].

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To observe the effect on motor function, spasticity degree, muscle strength and the relevant parameters of three-dimensional gait analysis in the patients with post-stroke spasticity in the lower limbs treated with the combined therapy of electroacupuncture (EA) and muscle electricity biofeedback or the simple muscle electricity biofeedback therapy on the base of rehabilitation medicine. METHODS: A total of 60 patients with post-stroke spasticity in the lower limbs were randomized into an EA + biofeedback group, a biofeedback group and a rehabilitation group, 20 cases in each one. In the rehabilitation group, the basic rehabilitation training was provided, 45 min each time. In the biofeedback group, on the base of the treatment as the rehabilitation group, the biofeedback therapy was added, 30 min each time. In the EA + biofeedback group, besides the treatment as the biofeedback group, acupuncture was supplemented at Futu (ST 32), Liangqiu (ST 34), Zusanli (ST 36) and Fenglong (ST 40), etc, and EA was applid at Zusanli (ST 36) and Taichong (LR 3) with continuous wave and 5 Hz in frequency. In each group, the treatment was given once daily, 5 times a week, for 6 weeks totally. Separately, before and after treatment, the score of Fugle-Meyer assessment (FMA), the score of clinical spasticity index (CSI) in the lower limbs and the strength of the anterior tibial muscle on the affected side were assessed, and the spatial-temporal parameters (step frequency and steep speed) in the three-dimensional gait analysis and the kinematic parameters (maximum dorsal flexion and maximum plantar flexion of ankle joint on the affected side) were measured in the patients of three groups. RESULTS: After treatment, FMA score was increased as compared with that before treatment in all of three groups (P<0.05). FMA score in the EA + biofeedback group and the biofeedback group was higher than the rehabilitation group respectively (P<0.05). CSI score in the EA + biofeedback group and the biofeedback group was lower than that before treatment respectively (P<0.05), and lower than the rehabilitation group (P<0.05). After treatment, the step frequency and speed were all improved and the angles of maximum dorsal flexion and maximum plantar flexion of ankle joint on the affected side were all increased as compared with those before treatment in the patients of three groups separately (P<0.05). The step frequency and speed, as well as the angles of maximum dorsal flexion and maximum plantar flexion of ankle joint on the affected side in either the EA + biofeedback group or the biofeedback group were all higher than the rehabilitation group (P<0.05), and the step speed in the EA + biofeedback group was higher than the biofeedback group (P<0.05). After treatment, the strength of the anterior tibial muscle on the affected side was increased as compared with that before treatment in the patients of each group (P<0.05); and the strength of the anterior tibial muscle in the EA + biofeedback group and the biofeedback group was larger than the rehabilitation group (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: On the base of rehabilitation treatment, the combined regimen of EA and muscle electricity biofeedback therapy and the simple muscle electricity biofeedback therapy all effectively strengthen the motor functions and reduce spasticity as well as improve step frequency, step speed and the range of motion of ankle joint in the patients with post-stroke spasticity in the lower limbs. Regarding the gait improvement, the combined regimen of EA and muscle electricity biofeedback is better than the simple muscle electricity biofeedback.