CAJ | 학술논문

目的：对比抗骨质疏松症药物治疗（ Anti osteoporosis drug therapy， AODT）与药物联合脉冲电磁场（ Drug and Pulse Electromagnetic Field， DPEF）治疗对老年骨质疏松症伴认知功能障碍患者影响的随访调查研究。方法应用回顾性研究对照方法，随机选取2011年3月－2013年12月来我院康复医学科就诊的60名老年骨质疏松症患者。随机选择并将纳入研究的患者分为AODT组（30人）和DPEF 组（30人）。所有患者都有一定程度的认知障碍，但是在入院治疗前都有步行能力。AODT组患者应用抗骨质疏松症药物治疗，DPEF组应用抗骨质疏松症药物联合脉冲电场治疗。在治疗前及治疗后第3个月，第6个月及第12个月分别对患者进行康复评定及腰椎骨密度检测。评估内容包括简易精神状况问卷调查表（ SPMSQ量表）评分，功能独立性评分（Function Independent Measure， FIM），腰椎骨密度T值（Bone mineral density T score）及生活质量评分（EQ－5D）。结果随访12个月后发现，AODT组患者与DPEF组患者生活质量（EQ－5D）评分及腰椎骨密度T值明显提高（P＞0．05）。 DPEF组患者功能独立性评分明显高于AODT组患者，差异有统计学意义。两组患者复发率对比无差异（ P＞0．05）。结论 DPEF治疗技术与AODT治疗技术相比，可以有效提高老年骨质疏松症伴认知功能障碍患者的生活质量及功能独立能力，有效提高腰椎骨密度。
목적：대비항골질소송증약물치료（ Anti osteoporosis drug therapy， AODT）여약물연합맥충전자장（ Drug and Pulse Electromagnetic Field， DPEF）치료대노년골질소송증반인지공능장애환자영향적수방조사연구。방법응용회고성연구대조방법，수궤선취2011년3월－2013년12월래아원강복의학과취진적60명노년골질소송증환자。수궤선택병장납입연구적환자분위AODT조（30인）화DPEF 조（30인）。소유환자도유일정정도적인지장애，단시재입원치료전도유보행능력。AODT조환자응용항골질소송증약물치료，DPEF조응용항골질소송증약물연합맥충전장치료。재치료전급치료후제3개월，제6개월급제12개월분별대환자진행강복평정급요추골밀도검측。평고내용포괄간역정신상황문권조사표（ SPMSQ량표）평분，공능독립성평분（Function Independent Measure， FIM），요추골밀도T치（Bone mineral density T score）급생활질량평분（EQ－5D）。결과수방12개월후발현，AODT조환자여DPEF조환자생활질량（EQ－5D）평분급요추골밀도T치명현제고（P＞0．05）。 DPEF조환자공능독립성평분명현고우AODT조환자，차이유통계학의의。량조환자복발솔대비무차이（ P＞0．05）。결론 DPEF치료기술여AODT치료기술상비，가이유효제고노년골질소송증반인지공능장애환자적생활질량급공능독립능력，유효제고요추골밀도。
Objective To compare the treatment between anti osteoporosis drug therapy ( AODT) and anti osteoporosis drug therapy associated with drug pulse electromagnetic fields ( DPEF) in senile osteoporosis.Methods Using retrospective study with control method, 60 senile osteoporosis patients in rehabilitation medicine clinic of our hospital were randomly selected from March 2011 to December 2013.The patients selected were divided into AODT group (30 cases) and DPEF group (30 cases).All patients were with a certain degree of cognitive impairment but with the ability to walk before the treatment.Anti-osteoporosis drug treatment was used in the AODT group and anti-osteoporosis drug combined pulse electric field was used in the DPEF group.The DPEF rehabilitation evaluation was carried out in the 3, 6, and 12 months for the patients, respectively.The evaluation included SPMSQ score, functional independence score ( FIM) , bone mineral density T score of the lumbar vertebra, and quality of life score ( EQ-5D) .Results EQ-5D and bone mineral density T score of the lumbar vertebra increased significantly in both AODT group and DPEF group ( P>0.05) in 12 months of followed up.FIM in the DPEF group was obviously higher than that in AODT group and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).The recurrence in the two groups was no different (P>0.05).Conclusion The quality of life, functional independence ability and bone mineral density of the lumbar vertebra effectively improve with the treatment of DPEF compared with the treatment of AODT.