영어번역[급]☆내공100☆내일저녁까지ㅠ도와주세요!
-
게시물 수정 , 삭제는 로그인 필요
이거 내일 저녁(목요일)까지 꼭 해야하는데요..ㅠ
하다하다 미치겠어서 마지막부분만 여기다 올려봅니다. 넘 어려워요.ㅠ
영어 고수님들~ 잠시만 시간내주셔셔 도와주세요..ㅠㅠ
내공은 정말 많이 드릴게요. 추가내공도 팍팍!! 완전 드립니다!!!
꼭 부탁드려요..ㅠ 괄호안에있는건 안해도 상관없구요..
꼭 정확하지 않아도 대충 말되게 의역해주셔도 되요. 부탁드립니다.!(--)(__)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motor Imagery for Gait Rehabilitation in Post-Stroke Hemiparesis
(뇌졸중후 편측부전마비의 보행 재활을 위한 운동 형상)
Outcomes(결론)
Temporospatial Parameters
The patient's gait speed was faster following imagery practice.The increase was highest at the postintervention evaluation (20.4% above the second baseline level), with substantial gains maintained at the follow-up evaluation.
Step lengths of both the paretic and nonparetic lower extremities were below the normal range during baseline sessions and increased with imagery practice, as evidenced by the 19.4% increase in stride length from the second baseline measurement to the postintervention evaluation. Gains in step length were partially maintained at follow-up. The cadence of MW was substantially lower than the cadence of aged-matched individuals without impairments. Despite variability in baseline cadence, the highest gains (9%) were noted at the midterm evaluation. These gains were only marginally maintained at follow-up.
Duration of absolute and relative double-support periods is depicted in Figure 5 . A decrease in double support can be seen at the midterm and postintervention evaluations, with some of these gains lost at follow-up. The absolute decrease in double-support duration was more enhanced than the relative (percentage of the gait cycle) decrease. This difference became pronounced in values obtained during the follow-up evaluation, where the relative values almost reverted to preintervention levels, while the absolute values remained lower than at preintervention.
Symmetry between single support on the nonparetic extremity versus the paretic extremity was 1.4 on the pretest and on all subsequent tests, including the follow-up evaluation. These results indicate a lack of improvement. Similarly, observational analysis of MW's unassisted gait yielded a score of 8/12 on the Tinetti ambulation scale 45 during all 5 testing sessions.
Kinematic Data
Kinematic data obtained at initial contact, mid-stance, toe-off, and mid-swing during each of the evaluation sessions are presented in Table 2. Percentage of improvement between the second baseline and the postintervention evaluation is presented in the far-right column of the table. The improvement at the knee joints was expressed by additional extension upon initial contact (eg, 176° and 174° at midterm, as compared with 171° and 167° at the second baseline, on the paretic and nonparetic sides, respectively), by additional extension at mid-stance, and by more enhanced flexion at toe-off and mid-swing.
Data describing the total range of motion of the knee (ie, the difference between the maximal extension angle and the maximal flexion angle) are provided in Figure 6. Following practice, the patient had a net increase in range of motion of the paretic knee as well as on the nonparetic knee, with gains partially maintained at follow-up. Nevertheless, the range of motion on the paretic side was substantially limited in comparison with the unaffected side. Furthermore, the range of motion on the unaffected side at follow-up also was somewhat reduced in comparison with normal values.
MW was highly motivated throughout the intervention period and was present at all sessions. From the third week on, he reported on increase in self-confidence during gait and resumed part of the outdoor ambulatory activities that he used to do prior to his stroke.
이거 내일 저녁(목요일)까지 꼭 해야하는데요..ㅠ
하다하다 미치겠어서 마지막부분만 여기다 올려봅니다. 넘 어려워요.ㅠ
영어 고수님들~ 잠시만 시간내주셔셔 도와주세요..ㅠㅠ
내공은 정말 많이 드릴게요. 추가내공도 팍팍!! 완전 드립니다!!!
꼭 부탁드려요..ㅠ 괄호안에있는건 안해도 상관없구요..
꼭 정확하지 않아도 대충 말되게 의역해주셔도 되요. 부탁드립니다.!(--)(__)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motor Imagery for Gait Rehabilitation in Post-Stroke Hemiparesis
(뇌졸중후 편측부전마비의 보행 재활을 위한 운동 형상)
Outcomes(결론)
Temporospatial Parameters
The patient's gait speed was faster following imagery practice.The increase was highest at the postintervention evaluation (20.4% above the second baseline level), with substantial gains maintained at the follow-up evaluation.
Step lengths of both the paretic and nonparetic lower extremities were below the normal range during baseline sessions and increased with imagery practice, as evidenced by the 19.4% increase in stride length from the second baseline measurement to the postintervention evaluation. Gains in step length were partially maintained at follow-up. The cadence of MW was substantially lower than the cadence of aged-matched individuals without impairments. Despite variability in baseline cadence, the highest gains (9%) were noted at the midterm evaluation. These gains were only marginally maintained at follow-up.
Duration of absolute and relative double-support periods is depicted in Figure 5 . A decrease in double support can be seen at the midterm and postintervention evaluations, with some of these gains lost at follow-up. The absolute decrease in double-support duration was more enhanced than the relative (percentage of the gait cycle) decrease. This difference became pronounced in values obtained during the follow-up evaluation, where the relative values almost reverted to preintervention levels, while the absolute values remained lower than at preintervention.
Symmetry between single support on the nonparetic extremity versus the paretic extremity was 1.4 on the pretest and on all subsequent tests, including the follow-up evaluation. These results indicate a lack of improvement. Similarly, observational analysis of MW's unassisted gait yielded a score of 8/12 on the Tinetti ambulation scale 45 during all 5 testing sessions.
Kinematic Data
Kinematic data obtained at initial contact, mid-stance, toe-off, and mid-swing during each of the evaluation sessions are presented in Table 2. Percentage of improvement between the second baseline and the postintervention evaluation is presented in the far-right column of the table. The improvement at the knee joints was expressed by additional extension upon initial contact (eg, 176° and 174° at midterm, as compared with 171° and 167° at the second baseline, on the paretic and nonparetic sides, respectively), by additional extension at mid-stance, and by more enhanced flexion at toe-off and mid-swing.
Data describing the total range of motion of the knee (ie, the difference between the maximal extension angle and the maximal flexion angle) are provided in Figure 6. Following practice, the patient had a net increase in range of motion of the paretic knee as well as on the nonparetic knee, with gains partially maintained at follow-up. Nevertheless, the range of motion on the paretic side was substantially limited in comparison with the unaffected side. Furthermore, the range of motion on the unaffected side at follow-up also was somewhat reduced in comparison with normal values.
MW was highly motivated throughout the intervention period and was present at all sessions. From the third week on, he reported on increase in self-confidence during gait and resumed part of the outdoor ambulatory activities that he used to do prior to his stroke.
