设为首页
加入收藏
联系我们
Email-Alert
 

    首页 | 杂志介绍 | 编委成员 | 审稿专家名录 | 投稿指南 | 订阅指南 | 过刊浏览 | 论著模板 | 综述模板 | 帮助

 
谭炎全,戴慧寒,蔡奇芳,林 奕,王 健.脑卒中患者下肢肌肉动态运动负荷下表面肌电信号特征研究[J].中国康复医学杂志,2008,23(8):711~714
脑卒中患者下肢肌肉动态运动负荷下表面肌电信号特征研究    点此下载全文
谭炎全  戴慧寒  蔡奇芳  林 奕  王 健
佛山市顺德区第一人民医院康复科,广东顺德大良蓬莱路1号,528300
基金项目:广东省科学事业费计划项目(2005B36001099);广东省佛山市科技发展专项资金资助项目(佛科 2004,55)
DOI:
摘要点击次数: 1591
全文下载次数: 1359
摘要:
      目的:观察动态运动负荷对脑卒中患者下肢肌肉表面肌电信号变化的影响,探讨在动态运动负荷下脑卒中患者下肢肌肉表面肌电信号特征。方法:11例脑卒中患者和14例正常人(对照组)参加本实验研究,利用动态运动负荷诱发双侧下肢屈伸膝关节,采用表面电极引导和记录肌电信号并进行线性时、频分析。结果:两组各活动肢体间比较除AEMG斜率均值外MF、MPF、AEMG及Mf斜率及MPF斜率均值差异无显著性意义;各活动肌肉间比较MF、MPF、AEMG均值差异有显著性意义,而Mf斜率、MPF斜率及AEMG斜率均值无显著性差异;活动肢体因素四个水平间比较除偏瘫组患侧与健侧之间的MF和AEMG、AEMG斜率均值和偏瘫组患侧与正常组左侧的MPF斜率均值有显著性差异外,其余参数在偏瘫组与正常组组内、组间的差异无显著性差异;活动肌肉因素4组肌肉间对比:主动肌与拮抗肌以及协同肌AEMG、MPF差异有显著性,协同肌之间MF、MPF差异有非常显著性,拮抗肌与协同肌差异无显著性。结论:采用快速傅立叶变换方法进行线性功率谱分析和平均肌电值及疲劳试验分析并不能很好地反映动态运动负荷下脑卒中患者下肢肌肉表面肌电信号变化,特别是活动肢体因素,原因尚待深入研究。
关键词:脑卒中  下肢肌肉  动态运动负荷  表面肌电图
The study on the characters of surface myoelectric signals of stroke patients′ lower limb muscles contracting dynamically    Download Fulltext
Dept. of Rehabilitation Medicine,The First People′s Hospital of Shunde City,Guangdong,528300
Fund Project:
Abstract:
      Objective:To explore the characters of surface myoelectric signals of stroke patients′ lower limb muscles contracting dynamically. Method: Eleven stroke patients and 14 health individuals were compared. All the subjects had to perform dynamic contraction for knee flexion and extension. The surface myoelectric signals were collected by surface electrodes and then processed by linear time-and frequency-domain method. Result: There was no significant difference about the value of MF, MPF, AEMG, MF slope and MPF slope expect AEMG slope among the motion limbs. There were very significant differences about the values of MP, MPF and AEMG among the motion muscles, but there was no significant difference about the singals of MF slope, MPF slope and AEMG slope. In patients group there were significant differences about the values of MF, AEMG, AEMG slope of motion limb between paretic side and non-paretic side. There were also significant differences about the values of MPF slope between paretic side of the patients and left side of the health. But there was no significant difference about other parameters in groups or among groups. Compared the activity muscles of four groups, there were significant difference about the values of AEMG and MPF among initiative muscles, antagonistic muscles and co-contraction muscles. There were very significant differences about the values of MF and MPF among co-contraction muscles, but there was no significant difference between initiative muscle and antagonistic muscle. Conclusion:The method of analyzing linearity power chart and AEMG and Fatigue test with fast fourier transform could not well reflect the changes characters of surface myoelectric signals of the lower limb muscles contracting dynamically.
Keywords:stroke  limb muscle  dynamic contraction  surface EMG
查看全文  查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器

您是本站第 20713593 位访问者

版权所有:中国康复医学会
主管单位:国家卫生健康委员会 主办单位:中国康复医学会
地址:北京市朝阳区樱花园东街,中日友好医院内   邮政编码:100029   电话:010-64218095   

本系统由北京勤云科技发展有限公司设计 京ICP备18060696号-2