Matthijs F Wouda, Espen I Bengtson, Ellen Høyer, Alhed P Wesche, Vivien Jørgensen
{"title":"Acute orthostatic responses during early mobilisation of patients with acquired brain injury - Innowalk pro versus standing frame.","authors":"Matthijs F Wouda, Espen I Bengtson, Ellen Høyer, Alhed P Wesche, Vivien Jørgensen","doi":"10.1177/20556683241240488","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Early mobilisation is paramount in the rehabilitation of patients with acquired brain injuries. However, the effectiveness of mobilisation to standing combined with passive leg movement in mitigating orthostatic intolerance remains uncertain. Hence, we investigated whether participants exhibited better tolerance standing in a motorized standing device with passive leg movements, Innowalk Pro, compared to a traditional standing frame.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>17 patients with acquired brain injury (<1 year post-injury) performed two sessions in each standing device on four separate days. Maximum standing time was 30 min, less when symptoms of syncope or volitional exhaustion occurred. Besides total standing time, electromyography of thigh muscles, and changes in mean arterial pressure and heart rate were monitored at rest and during standing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences were found in standing time, changes in mean arterial pressure or heart rate between standing in Innowalk Pro and the standing frame. However, participants had significantly more thigh muscle activation (<i>p</i> = 0.006) when standing in Innowalk Pro.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mobilising participants with a subacute acquired brain injury in a standing frame with motorised passive movements of the lower limbs did, despite higher thigh muscle activation, not lead to better orthostatic tolerance or prolonged standing time compared to a traditional standing frame.</p>","PeriodicalId":43319,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11088804/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20556683241240488","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Early mobilisation is paramount in the rehabilitation of patients with acquired brain injuries. However, the effectiveness of mobilisation to standing combined with passive leg movement in mitigating orthostatic intolerance remains uncertain. Hence, we investigated whether participants exhibited better tolerance standing in a motorized standing device with passive leg movements, Innowalk Pro, compared to a traditional standing frame.
Methods: 17 patients with acquired brain injury (<1 year post-injury) performed two sessions in each standing device on four separate days. Maximum standing time was 30 min, less when symptoms of syncope or volitional exhaustion occurred. Besides total standing time, electromyography of thigh muscles, and changes in mean arterial pressure and heart rate were monitored at rest and during standing.
Results: No significant differences were found in standing time, changes in mean arterial pressure or heart rate between standing in Innowalk Pro and the standing frame. However, participants had significantly more thigh muscle activation (p = 0.006) when standing in Innowalk Pro.
Conclusions: Mobilising participants with a subacute acquired brain injury in a standing frame with motorised passive movements of the lower limbs did, despite higher thigh muscle activation, not lead to better orthostatic tolerance or prolonged standing time compared to a traditional standing frame.
导言:早期活动对于后天性脑损伤患者的康复至关重要。然而,移动至站立状态并结合腿部被动运动在减轻正静态不耐受方面的效果仍不确定。因此,我们研究了与传统站立架相比,参与者在带有腿部被动运动功能的电动站立装置 Innowalk Pro 中站立时是否表现出更好的耐受性:使用 Innowalk Pro 和站立架站立时,在站立时间、平均动脉压变化或心率方面没有发现明显差异。然而,在 Innowalk Pro 中站立时,参与者的大腿肌肉活动明显增加(p = 0.006):结论:与传统的站立架相比,让亚急性后天性脑损伤患者在站立架上进行下肢电动被动运动,尽管大腿肌肉活化程度更高,但并不能提高患者的正压耐受性或延长站立时间。