請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/45978
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 林克忠(Keh-Chung Lin) | |
dc.contributor.author | Wan-Wen Liao | en |
dc.contributor.author | 廖婉彣 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T04:50:20Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2010-09-13 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2010-09-13 | |
dc.date.issued | 2010 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2010-08-03 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Ansari, N. N., Naghdi, S., Hasson, S., Mousakhani, A., Nouriyan, A., & Omidvar, Z. (2009). Inter-rater reliability of the Modified Modified Ashworth Scale as a clinical tool in measurements of post-stroke elbow flexor spasticity. NeuroRehabilitation, 24, 225-229.
Ashford, S., Slade, M., Malaprade, F., & Turner-Stokes, L. (2008). Evaluation of functional outcome measures for the hemiparetic upper limb: a systematic review. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 40, 787-795. Bayona, N. A., Bitensky, J., Salter, K., & Teasell, R. (2005). The role of task-specific training in rehabilitation therapies. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation,12, 58-65. Bohannon, R. W., & Smith, M. B. (1987). Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Physical Therapy, 67, 206-207. Bonita, R., Solomon, N., & Broad, J. B. (1997). Prevalence of stroke and stroke-related disability. Estimates from the Auckland stroke studies. Stroke, 28, 1898-1902. Butefisch, C., Hummelsheim, H., Denzler, P., & Mauritz, K. H. (1995). Repetitive training of isolated movements improves the outcome of motor rehabilitation of the centrally paretic hand. Journal of Neurological Science, 130, 59-68. Calautti, C., & Baron, J. C. (2003). Functional neuroimaging studies of motor recovery after stroke in adults: A review. Stroke, 34, 1553-1566. Carignan, C. R., & Krebs, H. I. (2006). Telerehabilitation robotics: bright lights, big future? Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 43, 695-710. Carod-Artal, F. J., Coral, L. F., Trizotto, D. S., & Moreira, C. M. (2008). The stroke impact scale 3.0: evaluation of acceptability, reliability, and validity of the Brazilian version. Stroke, 39, 2477-2484. Chemerinski, E., Robinson, R. G., & Kosier, J. T. (2001). Improved recovery in activities of daily living associated with remission of poststroke depression. Stroke, 32, 113-117. Chen, K. Y., & Bassett, D. R., Jr. (2005). The technology of accelerometry-based activity monitors: current and future. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 37, 490-500. Cherubini, A., Ruggiero, C., Polidori, M. C., & Mecocci, P. (2005). Potential markers of oxidative stress in stroke. Free Radical Biology & Medicine, 39, 841-852. Colombo, R., Pisano, F., Micera, S., Mazzone, A., Delconte, C., Carrozza, M. C., et al. (2008). Assessing mechanisms of recovery during robot-aided neurorehabilitation of the upper limb. Neurorehabilitation & Neural Repair, 22, 50-63. Crouter, S. E., Churilla, J. R., & Bassett, D. R., Jr. (2006). Estimating energy expenditure using accelerometers. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 98, 601-612. Daly, J. J., Hogan, N., Perepezko, E. M., Krebs, H. I., Rogers, J. M., Goyal, K. S., Dohring M. E., Fredrickson E., Nethery J., & Ruff R. L. (2005). Response to upper-limb robotics and functional neuromuscular stimulation following stroke. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 42, 723-736. Davis, J. Z. (2006). Task selection and enriched environments: a functional upper extremity training program for stroke survivors. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 13, 1-11. Desrosiers, J., Rochette, A., Noreau, L., Bourbonnais, D., Bravo, G., & Bourget, A. (2006). Long-term changes in participation after stroke. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 13, 86-96. Dipietro, L., Krebs, H. I., Fasoli, S. E., Volpe, B. T., & Hogan, N. (2009). Submovement changes characterize generalization of motor recovery after stroke. Cortex, 45, 318-324. Dobkin, B. H. (2007). Confounders in rehabilitation trials of task-oriented training: lessons from the designs of the EXCITE and SCILT multicenter trials. Neurorehabilitation & Neural Repair, 21, 3-13. Dromerick, A. W., Lum, P. S., & Hidler, J. (2006). Activity-based therapies. NeuroRx, 3, 428-438. Duncan, P. W., Bode, R. K., Min Lai, S., & Perera, S. (2003). Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the Stroke Impact Scale. Archives of Physical Medical Rehabilitation, 84, 950-963. Fugl-Meyer, A. R., Jaasko, L., Leyman, I., Olsson, S., & Steglind, S. (1975). The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 7, 13-31. Gebruers, N., Truijen, S., Engelborghs, S., Nagels, G., Brouns, R., & De Deyn, P. P. (2008). Actigraphic measurement of motor deficits in acute ischemic stroke. Cerebrovascular Disease, 26, 533-540. Gebruers, N., Vanroy, C., Truijen, S., Engelborghs, S., & De Deyn, P. P. (2010). Monitoring of physical activity after stroke: a systematic review of accelerometry-based measures. Archives of Physical Medical Rehabilitation, 91, 288-297. Gladstone, D. J., Danells, C. J., & Black, S. E. (2002). The fugl-meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 16, 232-240. Gregson, J. M., Leathley, M. J., Moore, A. P., Smith, T. L., Sharma, A. K., & Watkins, C. L. (2000). Reliability of measurements of muscle tone and muscle power in stroke patients. Age Ageing, 29, 223-228. Hackett, M. L., Duncan, J. R., Anderson, C. S., Broad, J. B., & Bonita, R. (2000). Health-related quality of life among long-term survivors of stroke : results from the Auckland Stroke Study, 1991-1992. Stroke, 31, 440-447. Harris, C., DeBeliso, M. A., Spitzer-Gibson, T. A., & Adams, K. J. (2004). The effect of resistance-training intensity on strength-gain response in the older adult. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 18, 833-838. Harris, J. E., & Eng, J. J. (2010). Strength training improves upper-limb function in individuals with stroke: a meta-analysis. Stroke, 41, 136-140. Hartman-Maeir, A., Soroker, N., Ring, H., Avni, N., & Katz, N. (2007). Activities, participation and satisfaction one-year post stroke. Disability & Rehabilitation, 29, 559-566. Hesse, S., Werner, C., Pohl, M., Rueckriem, S., Mehrholz, J., & Lingnau, M. L. (2005). Computerized arm training improves the motor control of the severely affected arm after stroke: A single-blinded randomized trial in two centers. Stroke, 36, 1960-1966. Hogan, N., Krebs, H. I., Rohrer, B., Palazzolo, J. J., Dipietro, L., Fasoli, S. E., Stein J., Hughes R., Frontera W. R., Lynch D., & Volpe B. T. (2006). Motions or muscles? Some behavioral factors underlying robotic assistance of motor recovery. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 43, 605-618. Housman, S. J., Scott, K. M., & Reinkensmeyer, D. J. (2009). A randomized controlled trial of gravity-supported, computer-enhanced arm exercise for individuals with severe hemiparesis. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 23, 505-514. Kalapotharakos, V. I., Michalopoulos, M., Tokmakidis, S. P., Godolias, G., & Gourgoulis, V. (2005). Effects of a heavy and a moderate resistance training on functional performance in older adults. Journal of Strength & Condition Research, 19, 652-657. King, A. C., Baumann, K., O'Sullivan, P., Wilcox, S., & Castro, C. (2002). Effects of moderate-intensity exercise on physiological, behavioral, and emotional responses to family caregiving: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, 57, 26-36. Krakauer, J. W. (2006). Motor learning: Its relevance to stroke recovery and neurorehabilitation. Current Opinion of Neurology, 19, 84-90. Krebs, H. I., Volpe, B. T., Williams, D., Celestino, J., Charles, S. K., Lynch, D., et al. (2007). Robot-aided neurorehabilitation: a robot for wrist rehabilitation. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 15, 327-335. Kwakkel, G., Kollen, B. J., & Krebs, H. I. (2008). Effects of robot-assisted therapy on upper limb recovery after stroke: A systematic review. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 22, 111-121. Kwakkel, G., Wagenaar, R. C., Twisk, J. W., Lankhorst, G. J., & Koetsier, J. C. (1999). Intensity of leg and arm training after primary middle-cerebral-artery stroke: A randomised trial. Lancet, 354, 191-196. Lang, C. E., Macdonald, J. R., Reisman, D. S., Boyd, L., Jacobson Kimberley, T., Schindler-Ivens, S. M., et al. (2009). Observation of amounts of movement practice provided during stroke rehabilitation. Archives of Physical Medical Rehabilitation, 90, 1692-1698. Liepert, J., Bauder, H., Wolfgang, H. R., Miltner, W. H., Taub, E., & Weiller, C. (2000). Treatment-induced cortical reorganization after stroke in humans. Stroke, 31, 1210-1216. Liepert, J., Miltner, W. H., Bauder, H., Sommer, M., Dettmers, C., Taub, E., & Weiller C. (1998). Motor cortex plasticity during constraint-induced movement therapy in stroke patients. Neuroscience Letters, 250, 5-8. Lin, K. C., Wu, C. Y., Liu, J. S., Chen, Y. T., & Hsu, C. J. (2009). Constraint-induced therapy versus dose-matched control intervention to improve motor ability, basic/extended daily functions, and quality of life in stroke. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 23, 160-165. Lincoln, N. B., & Gladman, J. R. (1992). The Extended Activities of Daily Living scale: a further validation. Disability & Rehabilitation, 14, 41-43. Luft, A. R., McCombe-Waller, S., Whitall, J., Forrester, L. W., Macko, R., Sorkin, J. D., Schulz J. B., Goldberg A. P., & Hanley D. F. (2004). Repetitive bilateral arm training and motor cortex activation in chronic stroke: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 292, 1853-1861. Mayo, N. E., Wood-Dauphinee, S., Cote, R., Durcan, L., & Carlton, J. (2002). Activity, participation, and quality of life 6 months poststroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 83, 1035-1042. Mehrholz, J., Platz, T., Kugler, J., & Pohl, M. (2009). Electromechanical and Robot-Assisted Arm Training for Improving Arm Function and Activities of Daily Living After Stroke. Stroke. Stroke, 40, 392-393. Moran, D. S., Heled, Y., & Gonzalez, R. R. (2004). Metabolic rate monitoring and energy expenditure prediction using a novel actigraphy method. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 10, 117-120. Muellbacher, W., Richards, C., Ziemann, U., Wittenberg, G., Weltz, D., Boroojerdi, B., et al. (2002). Improving hand function in chronic stroke. Archives of Neurology, 59, 1278-1282. Nakayama, H., Jorgensen, H. S., Raaschou, H. O., & Olsen, T. S. (1994). Recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients: The Copenhagen Stroke Study. Archives of Physical Medical Rehabilitation, 75, 394-398 Nudo, R. J., Wise, B. M., SiFuentes, F., & Milliken, G. W. (1996). Neural substrates for the effects of rehabilitative training on motor recovery after ischemic infarct. Sciences, 272, 1791-1794. Page, S. J., Sisto, S., Johnston, M. V., Levine, P., & Hughes, M. (2002). Modified constraint-induced therapy in subacute stroke: a case report. Archives of Physical Medical Rehabilitation, 83, 286-290. Penta, M., Tesio, L., Arnould, C., Zancan, A., & Thonnard, J. L. (2001). The ABILHAND questionnaire as a measure of manual ability in chronic stroke patients: Rasch-based validation and relationship to upper limb impairment. Stroke, 32, 1627-1634. Reinkensmeyer, D. J., Pang, C. T., Nessler, J. A., & Painter, C. C. (2002). Web-based telerehabilitation for the upper extremity after stroke. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 10, 102-108. Reiterer, V., Sauter, C., Klosch, G., Lalouschek, W., & Zeitlhofer, J. (2008). Actigraphy--a useful tool for motor activity monitoring in stroke patients. European Neurology, 60, 285-291. Schmid, A. A., & Rittman, M. (2007). Fear of falling: an emerging issue after stroke. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 14, 46-55. Schmidt R. A., & Lee T. D., (1999). Motor control and learning (3rd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers. Taub, E., Miller, N. E., Novack, T. A., Cook, E. W., 3rd, Fleming, W. C., Nepomuceno, C. S., Connell J. S., Crago J. E. (1993). Technique to improve chronic motor deficit after stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 74, 347-354. Uswatte, G., Foo, W. L., Olmstead, H., Lopez, K., Holand, A., & Simms, L. B. (2005). Ambulatory monitoring of arm movement using accelerometry: an objective measure of upper-extremity rehabilitation in persons with chronic stroke. Archives of Physical Medical Rehabilitation, 86, 1498-1501. Uswatte, G., Giuliani, C., Winstein, C., Zeringue, A., Hobbs, L., & Wolf, S. L. (2006). Validity of accelerometry for monitoring real-world arm activity in patients with subacute stroke: evidence from the extremity constraint-induced therapy evaluation trial. Archives of Physical Medical Rehabilitation, 87, 1340-1345. Van der Lee, J. H., Beckerman, H., Knol, D. L., de Vet, H. C., & Bouter, L. M. (2004). Clinimetric properties of the motor activity log for the assessment of arm use in hemiparetic patients. Stroke, 35, 1410-1414. Van der Lee, J. H., Wagenaar, R. C., Lankhorst, G. J., Vogelaar, T. W., Deville, W. L., & Bouter, L. M. (1999). Forced use of the upper extremity in chronic stroke patients: Results from a single-blind randomized clinical trial. Stroke, 30, 2369-2375. Van de Port, I. G., Kwakkel, G., Schepers, V. P., Heinemans, C. T., & Lindeman, E. (2007). Is fatigue an independent factor associated with activities of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living and health-related quality of life in chronic stroke? Cerebrovascular Diseases, 23, 40-45. Volpe, B. T., Lynch, D., Rykman-Berland, A., Ferraro, M., Galgano, M., Hogan, N., & Krebs H. I. (2008). Intensive sensorimotor arm training mediated by therapist or robot improves hemiparesis in patients with chronic stroke. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 22, 305-310. Ward, N. S., & Cohen, L. G. (2004). Mechanisms underlying recovery of motor function after stroke. Archives of Neurology, 61, 1844-1848. Wolf, S. L., Winstein, C. J., Miller, J. P., Taub, E., Uswatte, G., Morris, D., Giuliani C., Light K. E., & Nichols-Larsen D. (2006). Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: The EXCITE randomized clinical trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 296, 2095-2104. World Health Organization. (2001). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO. 廖建彰、李采娟、林瑞雄、宋鴻樟(2006)。2000年臺灣腦中風發生率與盛行率 的城鄉差異。臺灣公共衛生學會雜誌,25,頁223-230。 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/45978 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 背景:機器輔助治療是新興的神經復健療法,提供中風患者高密集重複性且精確控制的治療。近年來臨床試驗產量漸增,但目前尚乏定量適宜的訓練強度、頻率及治療方式。過去文獻回顧顯示機器輔助治療改善中風患者日常生活功能的證據仍有限。
目的:本研究採納不同強度之機器輔助療法,旨在探討訓練強度是否對慢性中風患者的動作功能、肌肉力量及日常活動產生不等療效。本研究合併機器輔助療法及功能性活動,企圖討論此合併療法是 否對中風患者之日常功能有提升的助益。 研究設計:本研究是單盲、多中心的隨機分派試驗。 受試者:20位中風時間超過6個月之慢性患者 治療介入:受試者隨機分派至三組,分別為:高密度機器輔助療法暨功能性活動組、低密度機器輔助療法暨功能性活動組及劑量配對復健治療組。受試者參與每次90至105分鐘、每週5天、持續4周的療程。 評估工具:主要的評估工具有:(1) 傅格梅爾量表(Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale of the upper extremity);(2) 修正式亞許沃夫量表(Modified Ashworth Scale);(3) 上肢肌力量表(Medical Research Council)。次要評估工具包含:(1) 動作活動記錄量表(Motor Activity Log);(2) 諾丁漢延伸性日常活動量表(Nottingham Extended ADL scale);(3) 中風衝擊量表(Stroke Impact scale)及腕動計(Accelerometer)。由未被告知受試組別的職能治療師在受訓後執行評估。 結果:機器輔助療法組在動作功能及肌肉力量改善優於劑量配對復健治療組,並且高密度機器輔助療法組與劑量配對復健治療組達到顯著差異 (p <.05)。高低密度機器輔助療法組於日常生活之患側使用量增加,達到高度效果值。腕動計數值顯示機器輔助療法組患者習得廢用現象呈現降低之趨勢。在生活品質方面,機器輔助療法組於中風衝擊量表(身體功能)改善顯著優於劑量配對復健治療組 ( p <.05)。並且,低密度機器輔助療法組在社交參與層面改善程度最大,達到高度效果值;反之,劑量配對復健治療組較治療前下降。此外,高密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組於治療後疲憊現象上升;反之,低密度組則是下降。 結論:機器輔助療法合併功能性活動相較於劑量配對復健治療可有效改善慢性中風患者之動作功能及肌肉力量,促進偏癱測的使用量,改善動作品質、工具性日常功能及提升生活品質。機器輔助療法的訓練強度為影響療效的重要因子,不同訓練強度的機器輔助療法對中風患者影響層面不一。高訓練強度可顯著提升中風患者的動作功能及肌肉力量,但是卻可能產生疲憊效應。而在日常功能及生活品質等自覺層面,治療強度則未必是同等重要的影響因子。我們認為若治療的目的是在促進功能性恢復及提升生活品質時,低密度的機器輔助療法搭配功能性活動既不造成患者負擔,也能達到預期的效果。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Robot-assisted therapy is a brand-new neuro-rehabilitation technique. Randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of robot-assisted therapy (RAT) in stroke survivors have accumulated in recent years, but the optimal dose of treatment intensity, treatment frequency and protocol still not be established. Besides, Previous systematic review showed that benefits of RAT for enhancing daily functions were less conclusive.
Purpose: To compare the treatment effects of different intensity robot-assisted therapy and dose-matched usual rehabilitation on motor functions, muscle functions, daily functions and quality of life in stroke survivors with moderate to severe paresis. This study also explored changes in daily functions and patient-reported, health-related quality of life associated with robot-assisted therapy combined with functional task training. Design and Setting: A single-blind, multisite, randomized controlled trial was conducted. Participants: Twenty individuals who were six months post-stroke participated. Intervention: Stroke survivors participated in one of the three groups: (1) high intensity robot-assisted therapy; (2) low intensity robot-assisted therapy; (3) dose-matched usual rehabilitation. Both robot-assisted therapy groups combined with 15 to 20 minutes of functional task training in each session. All participants engaged in 90 to 105 minutes of training in each session, 5 times a week for 4 weeks. Measurements: Primary outcome measures were Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale of the upper extremity, Modified Ashworth Scale and Medical Research Council. Secondary outcome measures were Motor Activity Log, Nottingham Extended ADL scale, Stroke Impact scale and Accelerometer. Results: High intensity robot-assisted therapy group not only had significant greater increase in rating of Fugl-Meyer Motor scale than dose-matched usual rehabilitation group, but also in Medical research council. Stroke patients in robot-assisted therapy groups improved affected arm-use and quality of movements in their daily routines. Furthermore, the results of accelerometers showed the declining of learned-use phenomenon in participants of robot-assisted therapy group. However, the dose-matched usual rehabilitation group showed little evidence of increasing affected hand use. Surprisingly, both robot-assisted therapy groups reported improvements in IADL and quality of life, especially in the physical functions of Stroke Impact scale. Stroke survivors in low intensity robot-assisted therapy group enhanced more in social participation than other groups. In order to monitor potential adverse effects, we adopted the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory (general). Among the three groups, high intensity robot-assisted therapy and dose-matched usual rehabilitation group demonstrated an increasing tendency in fatigue symptoms after undergone interventions. On the contrary, participants receiving low intensity robot-assisted therapy felt fatigue being relieved and much more energetic than before. Conclusion: Robot-assisted therapy combined with functional task training, in comparison with dose-matched usual rehabilitation, improved more on motor functions, muscle functions, daily functions and quality of life. Training intensity could be an important factor of efficacy, especially in the domains of motor and muscle functions. However, this may not be a crucial factor that related to patient-perceived quality of life. High intensity training may induce muscle fatigue, resulting in decreased self-perceived welling. In contrast, a just enough intensity of robot-assisted therapy not only could improve motor and muscle functions but also quality of life. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T04:50:20Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-99-R97429009-1.pdf: 3184884 bytes, checksum: 8f7aa997a0ba920cc18225e307804e22 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 摘要 i
Abstract iv 目 錄 vii 表目錄 x 圖目錄 xi 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 前言 1 第二節 研究目的 4 第三節 研究假設 4 第二章 研究方法 6 第一節 研究設計 6 第二節 受試者 6 第三節 介入方式 7 壹、機器輔助療法組 7 一、機器簡介 7 二、受試者姿勢 7 三、機器輔助療法內容 8 四、高密度機器輔助療法組 8 五、低密度機器輔助療法組 9 六、功能性活動 9 貳、劑量配對復健治療組 9 壹、主要評估工具 (primary outcome measures) 10 貳、次要評估工具 (secondary outcome measures) 11 参、腕動計 13 一、腕動計使用方式 14 二、腕動計資料分析 14 第五節 統計分析方法 14 第三章 結果 16 第一節 受試者人口學特徵 16 第二節 動作功能量表 16 第三節 肌肉功能量表 16 第四節 日常生活功能量表 17 第五節 腕動計 18 第六節 工具性日常生活功能及生活品質量表 18 第七節 不良反應 19 第四章 討論 20 第一節 治療強度效應-動作功能及肌肉力量 20 第二節 治療強度效應-肌肉張力 21 第三節 日常生活功能及生活品質 22 第四節 治療強度效應-日常生活功能及生活品質 23 第五節 腕動計 24 第五章 結論 26 第六章 研究限制 27 參考文獻 28 表目錄 表1:受試者人口學特質比較 40 表2:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之組間共變數分析 41 表2:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之組間共變數分析(續) 42 表3:腕動計 (Accelerometer) 比值之組間變異數分析 43 圖目錄 圖1:Bi-Manu-track 44 圖2-1:受試者治療過程 45 圖2-2:受試者姿勢 45 圖3:腕動計 (Accelerometer) 46 圖4:研究流程圖 47 圖5: 高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之傅格梅爾量表分數改變量 48 圖6:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之醫學研究會議肌力量表之分數改變量 49 圖7:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之修正式艾許沃夫量表之分數改變量 50 圖8-1:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之動作活動日誌(患側使用量表)之分數改變量 51 圖8-2:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之動作活動日誌(患側使用品質)之分數改變量 51 圖9:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組介入過程之雙側手功能精細度測驗之分數改變量 52 圖10:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之腕動計比值改變量 53 圖11-1:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之諾丁漢衍伸性日常生活量表之分數改變量 54 圖11-2:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之諾丁漢衍伸性日常生活量表移行能力之分數改變量 54 圖12-1:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之中風衝擊量表之分數改變量 55 圖12-2:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之中風衝擊量表之身體功能次量表分數改變量 55 圖12-3:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之中風衝擊量表肌力強度次量表分數改變量 56 圖12-4:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之中風衝擊量表之社會參與次量表分數改變量 56 圖13:高密度機器輔助療法組、低密度機器輔助療法組及劑量配對復健治療組之短型多軸向疲倦測量次量表分數改變量 57 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 機器輔助療法改善中風病患肌肉功能與日常活動的成效:治療強度效應之研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Robot-Assisted Therapy for Improving Muscle Functions and Daily Life Activities in Patients with Stroke:The Effects of Treatment Intensity | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 98-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 吳菁宜(Ching-Yi Wu),張雅如(Ya-Ju Chang) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 機器輔助療法,強度,中風,腕動計,日常功能, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | robot-assisted therapy,stroke,intensity,accelerometer,daily life activities, | en |
dc.relation.page | 57 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2010-08-03 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 醫學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 職能治療研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 職能治療學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-99-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 3.11 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。