目的：观察定期康复干预对社区脑卒中患者的疗效。

方法：2017年1月—2018年6月招募符合病例选择标准的60 例已回归家庭和社区的脑卒中患者，按随机数字表法分为定期康复干预组（30例）和非定期康复干预组（30例）。定期康复干预组患者每周接受1 次门诊康复干预，由康复治疗师指导患者选择相适应的运动项目进行家庭自我康复训练；非定期康复干预组患者在接受1次门诊康复干预后，即进行家庭自我随意康复训练。分别采用简化Fugl-Meyer 运动功能评分法、改良Barthel指数和生活满意度指数A 问卷，对2组患者干预前（0周）、康复干预12周（12周）以及后续自我康复训练12 周（24周）的运动功能、日常生活活动能力和生活质量进行评价。

结果：2组患者康复干预12周（12周）和后续自我康复训练12 周（24周）的运动功能、日常生活活动能力和生活质量均显著优于干预前（0周）（P ＜0.05）。康复干预12周（12周）时，定期康复干预组的简化Fugl-Meyer运动功能评分、改良Barthel指数和生活满意度指数A问卷评分分别为72.74±9.32、75.98±8.71和12.93±1.75，非定期康复干预组分别为61.89±8.56、61.38±9.11 和6.78±2.35；后续自我康复训练12周（24周）时，定期康复干预组的简化Fugl-Meyer 运动功能评分、改良Barthel指数和生活满意度指数A问卷评分分别为81.59±8.54、86.36±8.52和16.39±2.12，非定期康复干预组分别为62.78±12.34、63.13±13.37和8.54±4.51；定期康复干预组接受干预后的各项评分均显著高于非定期康复干预组（P ＜ 0.05）。

结论：定期康复干预可显著改善社区脑卒中患者的运动功能、日常生活活动能力和生活质量，并且显示出良好的延续效应，值得在脑卒中社区康复治疗中进行推广和应用。

Objective: To observe the effect of regular rehabilitation intervention on post-stroke patients in community.

Methods: From January 2017 to June 2018, 60 post-stroke patients who met the selection criteria were recruited and divided into regular rehabilitation intervention group (n = 30) and non-regular rehabilitation intervention group (n = 30) used by random number table. The regular rehabilitation intervention group received outpatient rehabilitation intervention once a week, and the patients were instructed by the rehabilitation therapist to choose appropriate sports items for family self-rehabilitation training; the non-regular rehabilitation intervention group received outpatient rehabilitation intervention once for family self-random rehabilitation training. Fugl-Meyer Assessment, modified Barthel Index and Life Satisfaction Index-A were used to evaluate the motor function, activities of daily
living and quality of life before intervention (0 week) and after 12 weeks of rehabilitation intervention (12 weeks) and 12 weeks of follow-up self-rehabilitation training (24 weeks). 

Results: The motor function, activities of daily living and quality of life of the two groups after 12 weeks of rehabilitation intervention (12 weeks) and 12 weeks of follow-up selfrehabilitation training (24 weeks) were significantly better than those before intervention (0 week) (P < 0.05). After 12 weeks of rehabilitation intervention (12 weeks), the scores of Fugl-Meyer Assessment, modified Barthel Index and Life Satisfaction Index-A in the regular rehabilitation intervention group were 72.74+9.32, 75.98+8.71 and 12.93+1.75, respectively, and those in the non-regular rehabilitation intervention group were 61.89+8.56, 61.38+9.11, and 6.78+2.35, respectively. After 12 weeks of follow-up self-rehabilitation training (24 weeks), the scores of Fugl-Meyer Assessment, modified Barthel Index and Life Satisfaction Index-A of the regular rehabilitation intervention group were 81.59+8.54, 86.36+8.52 and 16.39+2.12, respectively, while those of the non-regular rehabilitation intervention group were 62.78+12.34, 63.13+13.37 and 8.54+4.51, respectively; the scores of the regular rehabilitation intervention group were significantly higher than those of the non-regular rehabilitation intervention group (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: Regular rehabilitation intervention can significantly improve the motor function, activities of daily living and quality of life of post-stroke patients in community, and shows good continuity effect, which is worthy of promotion and application in rehabilitation treatment of stroke in community.