Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial evaluating the treatment of plantar fasciitis with an extracoporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) device: a North American confirmatory study.

Despite numerous publications and clinical trials, the results of treatment of recalcitrant chronic plantar fasciitis with extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) still remain equivocal as to whether or not this treatment provides relief from the pain associated with this condition. The objective of this study was to determine whether extracorporeal shock wave therapy can safely and effectively relieve the pain associated with chronic plantar fasciitis compared to placebo treatment, as demonstrated by pain with walking in the morning. This was set in a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, confirmatory clinical study undertaken in four outpatient orthopedic clinics. The patients, 114 adult subjects with chronic plantar fasciitis, recalcitrant to conservative therapies for at least 6 months, were randomized to two groups. Treatment consisted of approximately 3,800 total shock waves (+/-10) reaching an approximated total energy delivery of 1,300 mJ/mm(2) (ED+) in a single session versus placebo treatment. This study demonstrated a statistically significant difference between treatment groups in the change from baseline to 3 months in the primary efficacy outcome of pain during the first few minutes of walking measured by a visual analog scale. There was also a statistically significant difference between treatments in the number of participants whose changes in Visual Analog Scale scores met the study definition of success at both 6 weeks and 3 months posttreatment; and between treatment groups in the change from baseline to 3 months posttreatment in the Roles and Maudsley Score. The results of this study confirm that ESWT administered with the Dornier Epos Ultra is a safe and effective treatment for recalcitrant plantar fasciitis.     

体表电位标测微机系统(Ⅰ型)

本系统的107个电极中,103个分布于胸、背部,1个为参考电极,1个为V_3,其余用于肢导。本系统除能绘出2、4、8ms任意间隔的103通道同步的体表等电位图,常规12导联和V_(7 9)心电图,胸、背部位的心电图外,还可记录R峰值等电位图,∑R,Q波等电位图,nQ30、40,极大、极小轨迹图等。     

Lithium increases slow wave sleep: possible mediation by brain 5-HT2 receptors?

The effect of lithium on slow wave sleep (SWS) was studied in ten normal male volunteers using home based cassette sleep recording and automatic sleep stage analysis. Lithium increased SWS, an effect consisten with a reduction in brain 5-HT₂ receptor function.     

健康人视动性眼球震颤的研究

用微处理机(单板计算机)实时分析了视动性眼震,提取了10项参数,其中9项参数得出正常值,可作为评定视动性眼震之参考。各项参数间均有相关,整体评定,可提高诊断水平。将平均慢相速度、快相波辐和累积快相波辐、慢相时间等4项参数分别用计算机处理和人工处理,把两种处理结果进行t检验,无显著差异(P值均>0.05)。将计算机与人工计算的眼震频率进行比较,两者符合率达96.7％以上。采用微处理机可显著提高工效。     

TOCP染毒母鸡的神经电生理研究

对TOCP染毒母鸡进行为期7周的神经电生理监测,结果表明,TOCP主要影响远端周围神经,导致坐骨神经远端MCV和SCV减慢及腓肠肌EMG失神经样改变,而胫后神经H反射及重复电刺激无明显异常。     

CVI-Q检测颈动脉血流量的临床应用价值

目的 :用彩色速度显像定量 (CVI Q)技术测定颈动脉血流量并给出青年组正常参考值。方法 :应用传统的多普勒法及CVI Q法对正常 5 0名在校四年级大学生进行左、右颈总动脉血流量的测定比较。结果 :单侧颈总动脉血流量传统法测定为 (789.49± 15 3 .40 )ml·min-1,CVI Q法为 (3 92 .85± 63 .95 )ml·min-1,两者有显著性差异 (P <0 .0 0 1) ,男女之间、左右之间无明显差异 ,S/D、RI和PI 3组数据两两之间亦无显著性差异。结论 :CVI Q是一种实用、无创、简便、可靠的测量方法 ,具有良好的临床应用价值     

R波相关振动法血压测量

为了提高振地血压测量的准确性，提出了一咱基于心电Ｒ波与血压振动波之间相关性，识别振动信号的一种抗干扰方法＝－Ｒ波相关法，结合振动波形特征识别，该方法可有效地提取信号，消除干扰影响，该算法已在１６位８０９８单片机上实现，本文同时给出了程序的详细流程图。     

左侧气胸的心电图特征及原因分析

目的探讨左侧气胸致心电图改变的特征及产生原因。方法回顾性分析50例左侧气胸患者的心电图和X线胸片资料。结果50例(100%)均呈R波逆递增,V1￣V6导联QRS波平均振幅呈V2>V3>V4>V5。左侧胸导联低电压39例(78%),而II、III、aVF导联QRS波振幅全部>0.5mV。顺钟向转位38例(76%),胸导联QRS波振幅随呼吸周期性改变31例(62%),胸导联QRS波振幅最大/最小的比值与气胸肺组织压缩程度呈正相关(p<0.05)。结论胸导联R波逆递增是左侧气胸最重要的特征性心电图改变,气胸的严重程度与胸导联QRS波振幅最大/最小的比值呈正比。     

脑血管反应性检测方法的临床评价

目的对二氧化碳吸入、屏气及过度换气等3种不同的脑血管反应性检测方法进行比较,拟为临床应用探索一种有效且简便的方法。方法70例健康体格检查者通过经颅多普勒(TCD)超声技术常规检测颅底及颈部各动脉,然后分别进行二氧化碳吸入试验、过度换气试验和屏气试验,记录试验前后双侧大脑中动脉血流速度变化数据和趋势,检测脑血管反应性。结果吸入二氧化碳后,大脑中动脉平均血流速度明显加快,增加率为(44.86±10.18)%;过度换气时,平均血流速度明显减慢,于过度换气20～30s后降至平台期,平均下降率为(33.63±8.62)%,直至过度通气结束血流速度无明显变化。70例受试者平均屏气时间为(41.66±9.51)s,其中男性屏气时间(42.05±9.23)s,女性(40.63±10.47)s,男女之间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);屏气后大脑中动脉平均血流速度明显加快,增加率为(46.53±11.83)%;平均屏气指数为1.16±0.37;屏气后血流速度增加率和屏气指数之间呈高度正相关(r=0.865,P<0.01);当屏气时间>30s时,无论采用屏气后血流速度增加率或屏气指数作为分析指标,均可准确地反映脑血管反应性变化。对二氧化碳吸入试验、过度换气试验及屏气试验3种不同方法进行比较显示,过度换气试验与二氧化碳吸入试验、屏气试验间差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);而二氧化碳吸入试验与屏气试验之间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论二氧化碳吸入试验、屏气试验和过度换气试验均可有效地评价脑血管反应性,其中以屏气试验评价脑血管反应性更为简便。