RÉSUMÉ
This paper interprets the content and recommendations of the guidelines on infection prevention and control in long-term care facilities put forward by the World Health Organization （WHO） during the 2019 coronavirus disease （COVID-19） pandemic， and actively explores the key points of nursing and infection prevention and control measures for the long-term care facilities under the background of repeated outbreaks， with the aim of providing care measures and infection prevention and control measures that suit our national conditions to improve the living standards of the elderly and protect them from viral infection amid the recurring pandemic.
RÉSUMÉ
Objective:To compare the application effectiveness of conventional rehabilitation combined with thoracic spine mobility exercises and conventional rehabilitation in postoperative rehabilitation of patients with rotator cuff injury.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was conducted to analyze the clinical data of 204 patients with rotator cuff injury admitted to First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University from February 2019 to February 2022, including 88 males and 116 females; aged 18-87 years [(54.1±11.8)years]. Initial unilateral arthroscopic rotator cuff repair was performed on all the patients. A total of 98 patients received a conventional rehabilitation plan (conventional rehabilitation group), and 106 patients received additional thoracic spine mobility exercises as well as conventional rehabilitation (additional exercise rehabilitation group). The visual analog scale (VAS), Constant shoulder joint score, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder joint score, and shoulder range of motion (forward flexion, abduction, and external rotation) before surgery and at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery were compared between the two groups. The occurrence of complications after rehabilitation was observed.Results:All the patients were followed up for 6-18 months [(8.4±3.5)months]. The VAS score, Constant shoulder joint score, UCLA shoulder joint score, and shoulder joint range of motion of both groups were improved significantly at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery compared with those before surgery (all P<0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in VAS score between the two groups before surgery and at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery respectively (all P>0.05). At 3 and 6 months after surgery, the values of the Constant shoulder joint score of the additional exercise rehabilitation group were (77.7±5.8)points and (88.4±7.7)points respectively, which were higher than those of the conventional rehabilitation group [(73.7±6.6)points and (85.5±4.9)points] (all P<0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in the Constant shoulder joint score between the two groups before and at 1 month after surgery (all P>0.05). At 3 months after surgery, the value of the UCLA shoulder joint score of the additional exercise rehabilitation group was (25.5±3.7)points, significantly higher than that of the conventional rehabilitation group [(21.8±5.6)points] ( P<0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in the UCLA shoulder joint score between the two groups before surgery and at 1 and 6 months after surgery (all P>0.05). At 3 and 6 months after surgery, the forward flexion angles of the additional exercise rehabilitation group were (135.5±12.8)° and (165.1±11.3)° respectively, which were higher than those of the conventional rehabilitation group [(129.3±12.3)° and (151.1±11.2)°]; the abduction angles of the additional exercise rehabilitation group were (102.3±12.9)° and (130.4±15.1)° respectively, which were higher than those of the conventional rehabilitation group [(93.2±11.0)° and (123.5±13.7)°]; the external rotation angles of the additional exercise rehabilitation group were (57.2±13.1)° and (72.3±12.3)°respectively, which were higher than those of the conventional rehabilitation group [(46.4±8.8)° and (67.4±14.1)°] (all P<0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in the forward flexion, abduction and external rotation angles between the two groups before surgery and at 1 month after surgery (all P>0.05). At 6 months after surgery, recurrent rotator cuff tear occurred in 1 patient (1.0%) in the conventional rehabilitation group and in 2 (1.9%) in the additional exercise rehabilitation group; shoulder joint adhesion deveplpoed in 5 patients (5.1%) in the conventional rehabilitation group and in 3 (2.8%) in the additional exercise rehabilitation group. No statistically significant difference was found in the incidence rate of postoperative complications between the two groups (all P>0.05). Conclusion:Compared with the conventional rehabilitation plan, addition of thoracic spine mobility exercise to the rehabilitation after arthroscopic repair surgery in patients with rotator cuff injury can achieve better joint function and range of motion, with no increase in the incidence of complications.