Effects of cane use and position on performance of the sit-to-stand task in stroke patients

ABSTRACTObjectiveTo examine the effect of cane use and cane positions on the sit-to-stand (STS) performance of stroke patients.DesignIn a crossover study, 30 stroke patients performed STS test in seven situations in a random sequence: without a cane, three positions with a regular cane (parallel to the ankle, parallel to the 5th toe, and 10 cm in front of the 5th toe), and the same three positions with a quad cane. The peak vertical ground reaction force (GRF) and maximum vertical cane support force during STS were recorded.ResultsUsing a cane significantly reduced the peak GRF by 3%~9% of body weight compared to that without a cane (p=0.000~0.023). Different cane positions strongly influenced the maximum cane support force and peak GRF. When the cane was closer to the ankle, the maximal cane support force increased by 6.7%~8.6% of body weight, which resulted in a decrease in the peak GRF.ConclusionsBoth types of cane reduced lower extremities' load during STS. When the cane was closer to the trunk, the load on legs was lessened, while the load on the upper extremity increased. Upper extremity's load during STS was greater when using quad cane than using regular cane. Objective To examine the effect of cane use and cane positions on the sit-to-stand (STS) performance of stroke patients. Design In a crossover study, 30 stroke patients performed STS test in seven situations in a random sequence: without a cane, three positions with a regular cane (parallel to the ankle, parallel to the 5th toe, and 10 cm in front of the 5th toe), and the same three positions with a quad cane. The peak vertical ground reaction force (GRF) and maximum vertical cane support force during STS were recorded. Results Using a cane significantly reduced the peak GRF by 3%~9% of body weight compared to that without a cane (p=0.000~0.023). Different cane positions strongly influenced the maximum cane support force and peak GRF. When the cane was closer to the ankle, the maximal cane support force increased by 6.7%~8.6% of body weight, which resulted in a decrease in the peak GRF. Conclusions Both types of cane reduced lower extremities' load during STS. When the cane was closer to the trunk, the load on legs was lessened, while the load on the upper extremity increased. Upper extremity's load during STS was greater when using quad cane than using regular cane. Correspondence to: Dr. Mau-Roung Lin, Institute of Injury Prevention and Control, Taipei Medical University, 250 Wu-Hsing Street, Taipei 11031, Taiwan, R.O.C., Phone: 886-2-27398755; Fax: 886-2-27398755; E-mail: mrlin@tmu.edu.tw Financial support: This work was funded by the National Health Research Institute (NHRI-EX100-9805PI) and the Ministry of Technology and Science (MOST106-2314-B-038-046), Taiwan. No commercial party having a direct or indirect interest in the subject matter of this research has or will confer a benefit upon the authors or upon any organization with which the authors are associated. Conflicts of interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

from Rehabilitation via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2G3XrqR
via IFTTT