摘要
目的探究康复训练对前庭神经炎(VN)患者急性期与恢复期的治疗效果。方法本研究为前瞻性研究。收集2021年6月—2022年7月于白银市第二人民医院耳鼻喉科就诊的98例VN患者的病例资料,按照电脑随机数字表法分为急性期组(34例)、恢复期组(34例)、单纯药物组(30例)。按照患者的治疗意愿,急性期组和恢复期组采用药物联合康复训练治疗,单纯药物组仅使用药物治疗。比较3组患者治疗前、治疗1个月与3个月的疗效,分别采用眩晕障碍量表(DHI)与前庭康复获益量表(VRBQ)的各项指标评分及总评分进行评估。评分结果中符合正态分布的计量资料,采用独立样本t检验,非正态分布的采用Wilcoxon秩和检验;组间二分类变量采用χ^(2)检验,组内比较采用单因素方差分析。结果3组患者治疗前的DHI、VRBQ总评分及各项评分比较,差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05);3组患者的DHI、VRBQ总评分及各项评分在治疗前、治疗1个月与3个月后比较,差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05)。治疗1个月:(1)急性期组和恢复期组DHI、VRBQ量表总评分及功能、运动诱发的眩晕评分与单纯药物组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.05);其余指标与单纯药物组比较,差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。急性期组的DHI与VRBQ各项评分与恢复期组比较,差异均无统计学意义(P均>0.05)。(2)治疗3个月:急性期组与恢复期组DHI、VRBQ量表中,除头晕、焦虑、生活质量评分,其余各项评分及总评分与单纯药物组比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。急性期组的DHI总评分、躯体评分均显著低于恢复期组,差异均有统计学意义(t值分别为2.450、2.028,P均<0.05);VRBQ量表中,急性期组运动诱发的眩晕评分明显低于恢复期组,差异有统计学意义(t=3.182、P=0.002)。结论VN患者急性期采用药物和前庭康复训练联合治疗,比恢复期更能改善眩晕障碍以及减少由运动诱发的眩晕症
Objective To investigate the therapeutic effect of rehabilitation training on patients with vestibular neuritis(VN)in the acute and recovery phases.Methods This was a prospective study that collected the medical records of 98 VN patients who visited the otolaryngology department of the Second People's Hospital of Baiyin City from June 2021 to July 2022.They were divided into an acute phase group(34 cases),a recovery phase group(34 cases),and a medication-only group(30 cases)using computer-generated random numbers.According to the patients'treatment preferences,the acute and recovery phase groups received combined medication and rehabilitation training,while the medication-only group only received medication treatment.The efficacy of the three groups was evaluated by comparing the scores of various indicators and the total scores of the dizziness handicap inventory(DHI)and Vestibular Rehabilitation Benefit Questionnaire(VRBQ)before treatment,and at 1 and 3 months after treatment.Independent sample t-tests were used for metric data with normal distribution,and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used for the metric data without normal distribution.Theχ^(2) test was used for intergroup binary variables,and one-way ANOVA was used for intragroup comparisons.Results There was no statistically significant difference in DHI,VRBQ total score,and various indicator scores among the three groups before treatment(P>0.05).However,the scores of the DHI,VRBQ total scores,and various indicator scores differed significantly among the three groups at 1 and 3 months after treatment(P<0.05).After 1 month of treatment,the DHI,VRBQ total score,and scores of functional and motion-induced dizziness in the acute and recovery phase groups were significantly different from those in the medication-only group(P<0.05),while the remaining indicators showed no significant difference(P>0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in the DHI and VRBQ scores between the acute and the recovery phase groups(P>0.05).After 3 months of treatment,th
作者
胡荣义
崔庆佳
HU Rongyi;CUI Qingjia(Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery,the Second People's Hospital of Baiyin City,Baiyin 730900,China;Department of Otolaryngology,Beijing Rehabilitation Hospital,Capital Medical University,Beijing 100144,China)
出处
《中国研究型医院》
2023年第3期41-46,共6页
Chinese Research Hospitals
基金
首都医科大学附属北京康复医院2021—2023年科技发展青年项目(2021-065)。
关键词
前庭神经炎
恢复期
急性期
功能恢复
前庭康复
Vestibular neuritis
Convalescence
Acute phase
Recovery of function
Vestibular rehabilitation
