| Abstract [eng] |
Stroke survival patients gait function lost or huge dysfunction in gait parameters leads to calmer, more settle way of life. It also leads to restriction of patient daily physical activities, which reduce cardiovascular capacity. Recent research reveals that the integration of robotic devices to physiotherapy improves patients after stroke gait, balance, and mobility The aim of research work: To compare different body weight support system (BWSS) methods influence on after stroke patient balance, mobility and gait using a mechanical gait trainer. Tasks of work: 1. To assess the effectiveness of different robotic devices on patients after stroke gait during study. 2. To investigate different robotic devices efficiency on patients after stroke balance changes during the study. 3. Identify the different robotic devices efficiency on patient after stroke mobility during study. Materials and methods: An experimental randomized study was conducted at VšĮ Vilnius University Hospital of Rehabilitation, Physical and Sports Medicine Centre II inpatient rehabilitation department 2014 - 2017 year. The research study included 34 patients after the first stroke. During the study, patients were divided into two treatment groups (Group I and Group II), according to a random sampling method. Both groups of patients were performed two individual physical therapy procedures (basic and functional) per day for 30 minutes 5 times a week on weekdays. Group I patients were taught to walk an additional 30 minutes using a mechanical gait trainer 5 times a week. Group II patients an additional 30 8 minutes practicing with stationary robotic device MotoMed 5 times a week. Patients were tested 3 times filling the protocol (Annex 1): the beginning of the study, after two weeks and the end of the study. Data analysis was performed using statistical analysis, SPSS 22 and Excel 2010 programs. Results: Evaluating patients covered distance results between the groups at the beginning of the study showed no statistically significant differences (p = 1). During II and III testing Group I demonstrated a statistically significantly better results (p <0.05). Evaluating patients walking speed results between the groups at the beginning of the study showed no statistically significant differences (p> 0.05). During II and III testing Group I demonstrated a statistically significantly result (p <0.05). Evaluating patients Berg balance scale results between the groups at the beginning of the study showed no statistically significant differences (p> 0.05). During II and III testing Group I demonstrated a statistically significantly better result (p <0.05). Evaluating patients Tinetti balance test scores between the groups at the beginning of the study showed no statistically significant differences (p> 0.05). During II and III testing Group I demonstrated a statistically significantly better result (p <0.05). Evaluating Rivermead assessment outcomes between the groups at the beginning of the study showed no statistically significant differences (p> 0.05). During II and III testing no statistically significant difference was found (p> 0.05). Conclusions: Mechanical gait trainer and a stationary robotic device MotoMed statistically significant improve after stroke patients gait, balance and mobility. Mechanical gait trainer is more effective in patients after the first stroke covering distance, walking speed, and balance rehabilitation. |
