10-Day Theta Burst Stimulation Intervention Facilitates the Clinical Rehabilitation of Patients After an Isolated Limb Fracture: A Longitudinal SHAM-Controlled Pilot Study.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Marianne Jodoin, Alberto Herrero Babiloni, Catherine Provost, Hélène Blais, Audrey Bellemare, Martine Desjardins, Dominique M Rouleau, Louis De Beaumont
{"title":"10-Day Theta Burst Stimulation Intervention Facilitates the Clinical Rehabilitation of Patients After an Isolated Limb Fracture: A Longitudinal SHAM-Controlled Pilot Study.","authors":"Marianne Jodoin, Alberto Herrero Babiloni, Catherine Provost, Hélène Blais, Audrey Bellemare, Martine Desjardins, Dominique M Rouleau, Louis De Beaumont","doi":"10.1097/PHM.0000000000002543","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We investigated if theta burst stimulation could enhance recovery by reducing key symptoms when implemented acutely postfracture in participants with an isolated upper limb fracture.</p><p><strong>Methods/design: </strong>This was a pilot study with a randomized matched pair, sham-controlled, participant-blind design of a 10-day prolonged continuous theta burst stimulation protocol. Two main groups were included: I) participants with isolated upper limb fracture receiving active theta burst stimulation and II) patients with isolated upper limb fracture receiving SHAM/placebo. Another group (III) of healthy individuals was the reference group. Disability and pain intensity were collected through questionnaires (disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand as well as numerical rating scale (NRA)) at three time points (baseline; 72 hrs after intervention, 3 mos after injury). Group III completed the baseline assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-nine participants were enrolled. Individuals in the ACTIVE and SHAM groups had similar baseline measures. For disability, the interaction between intervention and time approached significance (F = 2.33; P = 0.11), whereas it was significant for pain (F = 3.42; P = 0.04). At 3 mos after injury, the ACTIVE group reported reduced disability (F = 4.71; P = 0.04) and pain (F = 5.84; P = 0.02) at 3 mos after injury compared to the SHAM group, with clinical measures from ACTIVE group being like controls.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In isolated upper limb fracture patients, a 10-day theta burst stimulation intervention implemented acutely posttrauma had beneficial effects on symptoms of functional recovery and pain at 3 mos after trauma.</p>","PeriodicalId":7850,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"e152-e161"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0000000000002543","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: We investigated if theta burst stimulation could enhance recovery by reducing key symptoms when implemented acutely postfracture in participants with an isolated upper limb fracture.

Methods/design: This was a pilot study with a randomized matched pair, sham-controlled, participant-blind design of a 10-day prolonged continuous theta burst stimulation protocol. Two main groups were included: I) participants with isolated upper limb fracture receiving active theta burst stimulation and II) patients with isolated upper limb fracture receiving SHAM/placebo. Another group (III) of healthy individuals was the reference group. Disability and pain intensity were collected through questionnaires (disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand as well as numerical rating scale (NRA)) at three time points (baseline; 72 hrs after intervention, 3 mos after injury). Group III completed the baseline assessment.

Results: Seventy-nine participants were enrolled. Individuals in the ACTIVE and SHAM groups had similar baseline measures. For disability, the interaction between intervention and time approached significance (F = 2.33; P = 0.11), whereas it was significant for pain (F = 3.42; P = 0.04). At 3 mos after injury, the ACTIVE group reported reduced disability (F = 4.71; P = 0.04) and pain (F = 5.84; P = 0.02) at 3 mos after injury compared to the SHAM group, with clinical measures from ACTIVE group being like controls.

Conclusions: In isolated upper limb fracture patients, a 10-day theta burst stimulation intervention implemented acutely posttrauma had beneficial effects on symptoms of functional recovery and pain at 3 mos after trauma.

为期10天的θ脉冲刺激干预有助于孤立肢体骨折患者的临床康复:一项纵向SHAM对照试验研究。
目的:我们研究了θ 脉冲串刺激(TBS)在孤立性上肢骨折(IULF)患者骨折后急性期使用时,能否通过减轻主要症状来促进康复:我们研究了在孤立性上肢骨折(IULF)患者骨折后急性期实施θ脉冲刺激(TBS)是否可以通过减少主要症状来促进康复:这是一项试验性研究,采用随机配对、假对照、参试者盲法设计,实施为期 10 天的长时间连续 TBS 方案。主要包括两组:I)接受主动 TBS 治疗的 IULF 患者;II)接受 SHAM/安慰剂治疗的 IULF 患者。另一组(III)健康人为参照组。在三个时间点(基线、干预后 72 小时和受伤后 3 个月)通过问卷(DASH 和 NRA)收集残疾和疼痛强度。第三组完成了基线评估:结果:共有 79 人参加。干预组和自毁组的基线测量结果相似。在残疾方面,干预与时间之间的交互作用接近显著性(F = 2.33; p = 0.11),而在疼痛方面则显著(F = 3.42; p = 0.04)。在受伤后3个月,ACTIVE组与SHAM组相比减少了残疾(F = 4.71; p = 0.04)和疼痛(F = 5.84; p = 0.02),ACTIVE组的临床指标与对照组相同:结论:在IULF患者中,创伤后急性期实施为期10天的TBS干预对创伤后3个月的功能恢复症状和疼痛有好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
423
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation focuses on the practice, research and educational aspects of physical medicine and rehabilitation. Monthly issues keep physiatrists up-to-date on the optimal functional restoration of patients with disabilities, physical treatment of neuromuscular impairments, the development of new rehabilitative technologies, and the use of electrodiagnostic studies. The Journal publishes cutting-edge basic and clinical research, clinical case reports and in-depth topical reviews of interest to rehabilitation professionals. Topics include prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation of musculoskeletal conditions, brain injury, spinal cord injury, cardiopulmonary disease, trauma, acute and chronic pain, amputation, prosthetics and orthotics, mobility, gait, and pediatrics as well as areas related to education and administration. Other important areas of interest include cancer rehabilitation, aging, and exercise. The Journal has recently published a series of articles on the topic of outcomes research. This well-established journal is the official scholarly publication of the Association of Academic Physiatrists (AAP).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信