
Chinese General Practice ›› 2026, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (15): 2022-2028.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2025.0320
• Original Research • Previous Articles
Received:2025-10-10
Revised:2026-01-08
Published:2026-05-20
Online:2026-04-14
Contact:
KAN Chaojie, WANG Qinglei
通讯作者:
阚超杰, 王庆雷
作者简介:作者贡献:
季颖提出研究思路,设计研究方案,负责研究资料的收集与整理、论文撰写;郭川、王彤负责论文修订、文章的质量控制及审校;朱仕哲负责研究资料以及各项数据的收集整理及统计学分析;季盼盼负责数据的校对、表格及图片的编辑与整理;阚超杰、王庆雷负责文章的构思与设计,最终版本修订,对文章整体负责。
基金资助:CLC Number:
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.chinagp.net/EN/10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2025.0320
| 组别 | 例数 | 年龄( | 性别(男/女) | 卒中类型(缺血性/出血性) | 病程[M(P25,P75),月] | 偏瘫侧(左/右) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 对照组 | 20 | 54.5±9.8 | 15/5 | 7/13 | 3.00(1.00,3.75) | 10/10 |
| 试验组 | 20 | 59.0±11.2 | 14/6 | 8/12 | 3.00(2.00,4.75) | 11/9 |
| 检验统计量值 | 1.333a | 0.125b | 0.107b | -0.938c | 0.100b | |
| P值 | 0.19 | 0.723 | 0.744 | 0.369 | 0.752 |
Table 1 Comparison of baseline data between two groups
| 组别 | 例数 | 年龄( | 性别(男/女) | 卒中类型(缺血性/出血性) | 病程[M(P25,P75),月] | 偏瘫侧(左/右) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 对照组 | 20 | 54.5±9.8 | 15/5 | 7/13 | 3.00(1.00,3.75) | 10/10 |
| 试验组 | 20 | 59.0±11.2 | 14/6 | 8/12 | 3.00(2.00,4.75) | 11/9 |
| 检验统计量值 | 1.333a | 0.125b | 0.107b | -0.938c | 0.100b | |
| P值 | 0.19 | 0.723 | 0.744 | 0.369 | 0.752 |
| 组别 | 例数 | BBS( | TIS[M(P25,P75),分] | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 干预前 | 干预后 | t配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
| 对照组 | 19 | 17.84±1.38 | 18.79±1.18 | -4.256 | <0.001 | 6.00(5.00,6.00) | 6.00(5.00,6.00) | -1.000 | 0.317 |
| 试验组 | 19 | 17.21±1.40 | 19.00±1.37 | -6.129 | <0.001 | 6.00(5.00,6.00) | 6.00(5.00,6.00) | -1.342 | 0.180 |
| t(Z)值 | -1.399 | 0.506 | -0.433a | -0.398a | |||||
| P值 | 0.170 | 0.616 | 0.665 | 0.690 | |||||
Table 2 Comparison of BBS and TIS(static balance items)between the two groups of patients
| 组别 | 例数 | BBS( | TIS[M(P25,P75),分] | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 干预前 | 干预后 | t配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
| 对照组 | 19 | 17.84±1.38 | 18.79±1.18 | -4.256 | <0.001 | 6.00(5.00,6.00) | 6.00(5.00,6.00) | -1.000 | 0.317 |
| 试验组 | 19 | 17.21±1.40 | 19.00±1.37 | -6.129 | <0.001 | 6.00(5.00,6.00) | 6.00(5.00,6.00) | -1.342 | 0.180 |
| t(Z)值 | -1.399 | 0.506 | -0.433a | -0.398a | |||||
| P值 | 0.170 | 0.616 | 0.665 | 0.690 | |||||
| 组别 | 例数 | OSI | APSI | MLSI | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
| 对照组 | 19 | 1.00(0.80,1.30) | 0.80(0.60,1.40) | -3.093 | 0.002 | 0.60(0.40,1.00) | 0.50(0.40,0.60) | -2.518 | 0.012 | 0.60(0.40,0.90) | 0.50(0.40,0.60) | -2.167 | 0.030 |
| 试验组 | 19 | 1.10(0.90,1.20) | 0.70(0.60,0.90) | -3.526 | <0.001 | 0.60(0.40,0.90) | 0.30(0.30,0.50) | -3.187 | 0.001 | 0.70(0.50,0.80) | 0.50(0.40,0.60) | -2.971 | 0.003 |
| Z值 | -0.426 | -0.774 | -0.147 | -1.865 | -0.838 | -0.687 | |||||||
| P值 | 0.670 | 0.439 | 0.883 | 0.062 | 0.402 | 0.492 | |||||||
Table 3 Comparison of stability index under the stable platform between the two groups of patients
| 组别 | 例数 | OSI | APSI | MLSI | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
| 对照组 | 19 | 1.00(0.80,1.30) | 0.80(0.60,1.40) | -3.093 | 0.002 | 0.60(0.40,1.00) | 0.50(0.40,0.60) | -2.518 | 0.012 | 0.60(0.40,0.90) | 0.50(0.40,0.60) | -2.167 | 0.030 |
| 试验组 | 19 | 1.10(0.90,1.20) | 0.70(0.60,0.90) | -3.526 | <0.001 | 0.60(0.40,0.90) | 0.30(0.30,0.50) | -3.187 | 0.001 | 0.70(0.50,0.80) | 0.50(0.40,0.60) | -2.971 | 0.003 |
| Z值 | -0.426 | -0.774 | -0.147 | -1.865 | -0.838 | -0.687 | |||||||
| P值 | 0.670 | 0.439 | 0.883 | 0.062 | 0.402 | 0.492 | |||||||
| 组别 | 例数 | BBS( | TIS[M(P25,P75),分] | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 干预前 | 干预后 | t配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
| 对照组 | 19 | 24.42±3.79 | 26.00±3.42 | -4.825 | <0.001 | 6.00(4.00,7.00) | 7.00(5.00,8.00) | -5.035 | <0.001 |
| 试验组 | 19 | 23.89±3.40 | 27.11±2.28 | -6.759 | <0.001 | 7.00(5.00,7.00) | 9.00(7.00,9.00) | -3.370 | 0.001 |
| t(Z)值 | -0.451 | 1.173 | 1.079a | -2.069a | |||||
| P值 | 0.655 | 0.249 | 0.288 | 0.039 | |||||
Table 4 Comparison of BBS and TIS(dynamic balance items)between the two groups of patients
| 组别 | 例数 | BBS( | TIS[M(P25,P75),分] | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 干预前 | 干预后 | t配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
| 对照组 | 19 | 24.42±3.79 | 26.00±3.42 | -4.825 | <0.001 | 6.00(4.00,7.00) | 7.00(5.00,8.00) | -5.035 | <0.001 |
| 试验组 | 19 | 23.89±3.40 | 27.11±2.28 | -6.759 | <0.001 | 7.00(5.00,7.00) | 9.00(7.00,9.00) | -3.370 | 0.001 |
| t(Z)值 | -0.451 | 1.173 | 1.079a | -2.069a | |||||
| P值 | 0.655 | 0.249 | 0.288 | 0.039 | |||||
| 组别 | 例数 | OSI( | APSI( | MLSI[M(P25,P75)] | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 干预前 | 干预后 | t配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | t配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
| 对照组 | 19 | 1.75±0.58 | 1.63±0.55 | 1.448 | 0.165 | 1.25±0.49 | 1.21±0.49 | 0.470 | 0.644 | 1.00(0.50,1.20) | 0.70(0.50,1.20) | -0.500 | 0.617 |
| 试验组 | 19 | 1.72±0.38 | 1.27±0.27 | -4.835 | <0.001 | 1.21±0.47 | 0.81±0.25 | 3.567 | 0.002 | 0.90(0.70,1.20) | 0.70(0.50,1.00) | -1.582 | 0.114 |
| t(Z)值 | -0.166 | -2.506 | -0.236 | -3.105 | -0.381a | -0.603a | |||||||
| P值 | 0.869 | 0.017 | 0.814 | 0.004 | 0.703 | 0.546 | |||||||
Table 5 Comparison of stability index in the unstable planes between the two groups of patients
| 组别 | 例数 | OSI( | APSI( | MLSI[M(P25,P75)] | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 干预前 | 干预后 | t配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | t配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
| 对照组 | 19 | 1.75±0.58 | 1.63±0.55 | 1.448 | 0.165 | 1.25±0.49 | 1.21±0.49 | 0.470 | 0.644 | 1.00(0.50,1.20) | 0.70(0.50,1.20) | -0.500 | 0.617 |
| 试验组 | 19 | 1.72±0.38 | 1.27±0.27 | -4.835 | <0.001 | 1.21±0.47 | 0.81±0.25 | 3.567 | 0.002 | 0.90(0.70,1.20) | 0.70(0.50,1.00) | -1.582 | 0.114 |
| t(Z)值 | -0.166 | -2.506 | -0.236 | -3.105 | -0.381a | -0.603a | |||||||
| P值 | 0.869 | 0.017 | 0.814 | 0.004 | 0.703 | 0.546 | |||||||
| 组别 | 例数 | OSI | APSI | MLSI | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
| 对照组 | 19 | 1.30(0.90,2.00) | 1.30(0.90,1.60) | 2.322 | 0.032 | 0.60(0.40,0.90) | 0.70(0.50,1.10) | 0.048 | 0.962 | 1.00(0.60,1.50) | 0.90(0.60,1.00) | 2.068 | 0.039 |
| 试验组 | 19 | 1.40(1.10,1.80) | 1.00(0.70,1.30) | 3.730 | <0.001 | 0.70(0.50,1.00) | 0.50(0.40,0.90) | 1.193 | 0.233 | 1.00(0.60,1.30) | 0.60(0.40,0.80) | 4.795 | <0.001 |
| Z值 | -0.512 | -1.434 | -0.132 | -1.608 | -0.470 | -1.647 | |||||||
| P值 | 0.608 | 0.160 | 0.895 | 0.108 | 0.641 | 0.099 | |||||||
Table 6 Comparison of stability index during dual task between the two groups of patients
| 组别 | 例数 | OSI | APSI | MLSI | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | 干预前 | 干预后 | Z配对值 | P值 | ||
| 对照组 | 19 | 1.30(0.90,2.00) | 1.30(0.90,1.60) | 2.322 | 0.032 | 0.60(0.40,0.90) | 0.70(0.50,1.10) | 0.048 | 0.962 | 1.00(0.60,1.50) | 0.90(0.60,1.00) | 2.068 | 0.039 |
| 试验组 | 19 | 1.40(1.10,1.80) | 1.00(0.70,1.30) | 3.730 | <0.001 | 0.70(0.50,1.00) | 0.50(0.40,0.90) | 1.193 | 0.233 | 1.00(0.60,1.30) | 0.60(0.40,0.80) | 4.795 | <0.001 |
| Z值 | -0.512 | -1.434 | -0.132 | -1.608 | -0.470 | -1.647 | |||||||
| P值 | 0.608 | 0.160 | 0.895 | 0.108 | 0.641 | 0.099 | |||||||
| [1] |
|
| [2] |
|
| [3] |
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
王淑睿, 李丽. 小脑间歇性θ短阵快速脉冲刺激对脑卒中患者下肢运动功能的影响[J]. 中国康复理论与实践, 2022, 28(10): 1205-1210. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.10069771.2022.10.011.
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
中华医学会神经病学分会, 中华医学会神经病学分会脑血管病学组. 中国各类主要脑血管病诊断要点2019[J]. 中华神经科杂志, 2019, 52(9): 710-715.
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
王惠娟, 张盛全, 刘夏, 等. 动态平衡仪与Berg量表用于评定偏瘫患者平衡功能的相关性分析[J]. 中国康复医学杂志, 2013, 28(4): 339-343. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-1242.2013.04.013.
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
汪彤, 宋波, 王茜茜, 等. 小脑非侵入性刺激对认知功能调控的研究进展[J]. 中华神经科杂志, 2024, 57(2): 192-198. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn113694-20230920-00176.
|
| [32] |
|
| [1] | TIAN Anni, YANG Jing, SUN Jing, WANG Shichun. Effect of Robot-assisted Training on the Recovery of Hand Motor Function in Patients with Different Stages of Stroke: a Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(14): 1911-1920. |
| [2] | HAN Yue, BIAN Zhe, GU Haochen, WANG Dali, PENG Yanbo. Impact of Cumulative Defined Daily Dose of Statins on Recurrence Risk in Ischemic Stroke Patients [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(14): 1821-1826. |
| [3] | LIU Yang, LIANG Fang, WU Ling, LI Wenlei, LI Pengfei. Diagnostic Value of Non-conventional Lipids and the Triglyceride-glucose Index in First-onset Acute Ischemic Stroke [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(11): 1422-1429. |
| [4] | WANG Xiaonan, RUAN Xiaonan, LIU Yang, WU Kang, QIU Hua, LIU Qingping, SONG Jiahui, GAO Jiaojiao, ZHOU Yi, LIU Xiaolin. Correlation between Anthropometric Indices and the Risk of Stroke: a Nested Case-control Study [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(08): 1020-1028. |
| [5] | CAO Lei, LIU Xuechun, JIANG Wei, CHEN Yan, YAN Sunhong, DU Jing. Study on the Prediction of Muscle Attenuation in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke by the Cross-sectional Area and Thickness of the Temporalis Muscle [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(08): 997-1007. |
| [6] | HU Naixiao, ZHANG Hao, WANG Bo, QI Xin, DONG Jianhong, XUE Ruizhong, ZHANG Qingsu. Study of the Therapeutic Effect of Intraoral Balloon Dilation Combined with K-point Stimulation in Patients with Post-stroke Pseudobulbar Palsy Associated Dysphagia and Trismus [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(05): 591-596. |
| [7] | ZHAO Xuejiao, LI Juan, LI Yujie, LU Ting, Xian Lihong, YAN Huan. Prevalence Trends and Influencing Factors for Post-stroke Cognitive Impairment in China: a Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(03): 380-392. |
| [8] | FAN Zhuanzhuan, LI Wenting, MA Guoliang. Relationship between the Chinese Visceral Adipose Index and Cardiovascular Disease in Postmenopausal Women: a Prospective Cohort Study [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(02): 180-187. |
| [9] | YU Hao, LIAO Peng, LUO Li. Digital Therapy for Stroke: Progress and Challenges from Screening to Intervention [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(02): 240-246. |
| [10] | LONG Yutong, LU Shiyu, TAN Jie, YANG Bolu, DUAN Jingying, YANG Tongde, YAN Lijing, GONG Enying, SHAO Ruitai. Long-term Medication Adherence Attitudes and Behaviors of Stroke Patients in Rural Areas of China and Related Factors: Based on Follow-up Data from a Certain County in Hebei Province [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(02): 170-179. |
| [11] | YANG Yingtian, LYU Qianyu, WU Qian, HOU Xinzheng, SONG Jianjun, YE Xuejiao, YANG Chenyan, WANG Shihan. Efficacy of Five-body Balance Exercise on Obesity-related Hypertension Based on the Rehabilitation Model of "Hospital-Gym-Community" : a Randomized Controlled Trial [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(32): 4038-4046. |
| [12] | TU Kunkun, ZHAO Jie, SHI Xiuyuan, XIE Pei, HAN Xinxin. The Impact of Generalist-Specialist Collaborative Care Models on Health Outcomes in Hypertension and Diabetes: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis in China [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(31): 3912-3923. |
| [13] | HAN Xue, LIU Huan, LOU Xiaole, SONG Jianing, ZHANG Ziang, GENG Zongxiao, WANG Shan, ZHANG Yongqing, XU Lei. Intermittent θ Burst Stimulation Combined with Chin Tuck Against Resistance Training for Dysphagia in Stroke Patients: a Randomized Controlled Trial [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(29): 3625-3630. |
| [14] | SU Qing, XU Yao, LI Yihang, WANG Liyan, CAI Yefeng, NI Xiaojia. Quality Evaluation of Methodology on the Changes in Traditional Chinese Medicine Syndromes of Stroke and Risk Population [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(29): 3694-3702. |
| [15] | LI Yibing, JIA Hongbo, FAN Xiaonong, ZHAO Wenjun, LIU Wei, GE Wenyi, LI Songjiao, LEI Kangchen, ZHANG Menglong, ZHANG Weiwei, CHEN Yang, LI Li. Comprehensive Evaluation of Prognostic Factors Affecting Dysphagia after Stroke: an Umbrella Review [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(29): 3631-3637. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||