Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34777531

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Recently, the brain-computer interface (BCI) has seen rapid development, which may promote the recovery of motor function in chronic stroke patients. METHODS: Twelve stroke patients with severe upper limb and hand motor impairment were enrolled and randomly assigned into two groups: motor imagery (MI)-based BCI training with multimodal feedback (BCI group, n = 7) and classical motor imagery training (control group, n = 5). Motor function and electrophysiology were evaluated before and after the intervention. The Fugl-Meyer assessment-upper extremity (FMA-UE) is the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures include an increase in wrist active extension or surface electromyography (the amplitude and cocontraction of extensor carpi radialis during movement), the action research arm test (ARAT), the motor status scale (MSS), and Barthel index (BI). Time-frequency analysis and power spectral analysis were used to reflect the electroencephalogram (EEG) change before and after the intervention. RESULTS: Compared with the baseline, the FMA-UE score increased significantly in the BCI group (p = 0.006). MSS scores improved significantly in both groups, while ARAT did not improve significantly. In addition, before the intervention, all patients could not actively extend their wrists or just had muscle contractions. After the intervention, four patients regained the ability to extend their paretic wrists (two in each group). The amplitude and area under the curve of extensor carpi radialis improved to some extent, but there was no statistical significance between the groups. CONCLUSION: MI-based BCI combined with sensory and visual feedback might improve severe upper limb and hand impairment in chronic stroke patients, showing the potential for application in rehabilitation medicine.

2.
Ophthalmology ; 119(4): 659-67, 2012 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22365066

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To examine possible differences in the clinical outcomes of topical anesthesia (TA) and regional anesthesia including retrobulbar anesthesia (RBA) and peribulbar anesthesia (PBA) in phacoemulsification. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Patients from previously published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of phacoemulsification under TA and RBA/PBA reporting clinical outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed according to the Cochrane Collaboration method to identify RCTs that compare TA and RBA/PBA in phacoemulsification. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome parameters investigated were pain score during and after surgery, intraoperative difficulties and inadvertent ocular movement, intraoperative necessity to administer additional anesthesia, and patient preference. Secondary outcome parameters investigated were postoperative visual acuity, anesthesia-related complications, intraoperative complications, and severe local or systemic complications. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were identified and analyzed to compare TA (1084 eyes) with RBA/PBA (1121 eyes) in phacoemulsification. Data synthesis showed that intraoperative and postoperative pain perception was significantly higher in the TA group (P < 0.05). The TA group showed more frequent inadvertent ocular movement (P < 0.05) and a greater intraoperative need for supplementary anesthesia (P = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in intraoperative difficulties as assessed by the surgeons (P > 0.05). Patients significantly preferred TA (P < 0.00001). The RBA/PBA group had more frequent anesthesia-related complications, such as chemosis, periorbital hematoma, and subconjunctival hemorrhage (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in surgery-related complications (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with RBA/PBA, TA does not provide the same excellent pain relief in cataract surgery; however, it achieves similar surgical outcomes. Topical anesthesia reduces injection-related complications and alleviates patients' fear of injection. The choice of TA is not suitable for patients with a higher initial blood pressure or greater pain perception.


Assuntos
Anestesia por Condução/métodos , Anestesia Local/métodos , Facoemulsificação , Anestesia por Condução/efeitos adversos , Anestesia Local/efeitos adversos , Anestésicos Locais/administração & dosagem , Dor Ocular/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Complicações Intraoperatórias , Órbita , Medição da Dor , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Resultado do Tratamento , Acuidade Visual/fisiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA