文章摘要
贾玉凤,李阳,张双,高淑芝,高静云,李爽.目标-活动-丰富运动疗法对全面性发育迟缓患儿智能及家长心理健康的疗效研究[J].中国康复,2022,37(6):331-335
目标-活动-丰富运动疗法对全面性发育迟缓患儿智能及家长心理健康的疗效研究
Effect of goals-activity-motor enrichment intervention on intelligence and care-givers’ mental health of children with global developmental delay
  
DOI:
中文关键词: 全面性发育迟缓  目标-活动-丰富运动  康复
英文关键词: global developmental delay  goals-activity-motor enrichment  rehabilitation
基金项目:
作者单位
贾玉凤 唐山市妇幼保健院儿童康复科河北 唐山 063000 
李阳 唐山市妇幼保健院儿童康复科河北 唐山 063000 
张双 唐山市妇幼保健院儿童康复科河北 唐山 063000 
高淑芝 唐山市妇幼保健院儿童康复科河北 唐山 063000 
高静云 唐山市妇幼保健院儿童康复科河北 唐山 063000 
李爽 唐山市妇幼保健院儿童康复科河北 唐山 063000 
摘要点击次数: 2080
全文下载次数: 5313
中文摘要:
  目的:探讨目标-活动-丰富运动(GAME)疗法对全面性发育迟缓(GDD)患儿智能的疗效及对患儿家长焦虑和抑郁情况的影响。方法:选取全面性发育迟缓的1~3岁儿童66例,随机分为2组各33例。对照组患儿接受常规康复治疗,GAME组患儿在对照组的基础上接受GAME疗法干预,干预时间为16周。在干预前后分别采用Gesell发育量表(GDS)、焦虑自评量表(SAS)、抑郁自评量表(SDS)对2组患儿的智能及其家长的焦虑和抑郁情况进行评估。结果:干预16周后,2组GDS评分各能区的发育商均高于干预前(均P<0.05),且GAME组在适应性、大运动、精细运动、语言和个人-社交各能区发育商均显著高于对照组(均P<0.05)。2组干预后SAS及SDS评分均低于干预前(均P<0.05),且GAME组得分均低于对照组(均P<0.05)。结论:GAME疗法对全面性发育迟缓患儿的智能有促进作用,并且有利于患儿家长焦虑和抑郁情况的改善,值得在临床推广应用。
英文摘要:
  Objective: To investigate the effect of goals-activity-motor enrichment (GAME) intervention on intelligence of children with global developmental delay (GDD) and on anxiety and depression of their care-givers. Methods: A total of 66 children aged 1 to 3 years who received rehabilitation treatment in Child Rehabilitation Department of Tangshan Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital from June 2020 to May 2021 were randomly divided into two groups. Children in the control group received routine rehabilitation intervention, and those in the GAME group received GAME intervention on the basis of the control group, for a duration of 16 weeks. Before and after intervention, Gesell Development Scale, Self-rating Anxiety Scale and Self-rating depression scale were used to evaluate the children’ intelligence and their care-givers’ anxiety and depression. Results: After intervention, compared with the control group, the GDS scores in GAME group were all significantly improved on the 5 DQ domains, and the differences were significant (all, P<0.05). After intervention, the scores of SAS assessment in both groups were lower than those before intervention (all, P<0.05), and the scores in GAME group were significantly lower than those in control group (all, P<0.05). After intervention, the scores of SDS in both groups were higher than those before intervention (all, P<0.05), and those in GAME group were significantly lower than those in the control group (all, P<0.05). Conclusion: The GAME intervention can improve the intelligence of children with GDS, and is beneficial to the improvement of care-givers’ anxiety and depression, so it is worth for application in clinical experience.
查看全文   下载PDF阅读器  HTML全文
关闭
本刊微信二维码