Effect of Physical Rehabilitation on the Quality of life of People with Postviral Fatigue Syndrome
Keywords:
physical exercises, massage, restoration, functioning, activity, participation, physical loadsAbstract
Objective: to investigate the dynamics of quality of life in people with postviral fatigue syndrome under the influence of the use of physical rehabilitation. Material and methods: analysis of foreign and domestic special scientific and methodical literature; questionnaire SF-36, methods of mathematical statistics. The contingent of the examined is 64 patients (the average age is 39,5 ± 5,61 years). The control group (СG) performed aerobic exercises with a specialist in a wellness and rehabilitation center and independently. In the main group (MG), the practicing in the health and rehabilitation center included functional gymnastics, exercises with rubber shock absorbers, unstable platforms, techniques of structural balance (myofascial release); Thai Nuad Bo-Rarn recovery system techniques. Results: Positive statistical changes were detected in all subscales of the SF-36 questionnaire in the main and control groups, which proved the effectiveness of the aerobic loads and the proposed program. However, the main group experienced more significant changes in the five scales of the questionnaire. In particular, the result of the «Physical functioning» subscale at the time of the final survey for the MG was 51,1±8,45 points, for the CG – 45,5±8,88 points, and the growth in the groups respectively was 9,55 and 5,48 points. The final indicator of the «The role of physical problems in the limitation of vital activity» subscale also statistically differed in groups (p<0,05). The value of the indicator in the MG increased by 25 points and made up 32,6±13,23 points, for the CG the growth was 16,13 points with the final average in the group of 24,2±17,66 points. At the same time, in the general scale «Physical status», the main group also had better final results: in the main group it increased by 5 points to 34,4 ± 2,65 points, and in the control groups by 2.6 points to 31,7 ± 4,14 points. At the same time, in the general scale «Physical status» the main group also had better final results. In the main group the indicator increased by 5 points up to 34,4 ± 2,65 points, in the control group by 2,6 points up to 31,7 ± 4,14 points. Conclusions. The identified advantages are seen in the use of a variant block of the program, which was aimed at helping to reduce the intensity of discomfort during the training and restoration of somatic proprioception.
References
2. Byrne, E. (1987). Chronic fatigue and myalgia syndrome: mitochondria and glycolytic studies in skeletal muscle / E. Byrne, I. Trouce // J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry. – № 50. – Р. 743–746.
3. Hardt J. (2001). Health-related quality of life in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome: an international study / J. Hardt, D. Buchwald, D. Wilks // Journal of Psychosomatic Research. – 51(2). – Р. 431–434.
4. Haywood K. L. (2012). Quality and acceptability of patient-reported outcome measures used in chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME): a systematic review / K. L. Haywood, S. Staniszewska, S. Chapman // Quality of life research. – 2012. – № 21(1). – Р. 35–52.
5. Hvidberg M. F. (2015). The health-related quality of life for patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) / M. F. Hvidberg // PloS one.– 2015. – № 10(7). e0132421.
6. Inbar O. (2001). Physiological responses to incremental exercise in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome / O. Inbar, R. Dlin, A. Rotstein // Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. – 33(9). – Р. 1463–1470.
7. Kent-Braun J. A. (1993). Central basis of muscle fatigue in chronic fatigue syndrome / J. A. Kent-Braun, K. R. Sharma, M. W. Weiner // Neurology. – № 43(1 Part 1). – Р. 125–125.
8. Komaroff A. L.(1996). Health status in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and in general population and disease comparison groups / A. L. Komaroff, L. R. Fagioli, Т. Н. Doolittle // The American journal of medicine. – № 101(3). – Р. 281–290.
9. Larun L. (2015). Exercise therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome / L. Larun, K. G. Brurberg, J. Odgaard-Jensen // Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Is. 2, Art. No.: CD003200. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003200.pub3.
10. Myers C. (1999). Comparison of Euroqol EQ-5D and SF-36 in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome / C. Myers, D. Wilks // Quality of Life Research. – № 8(1–2). – Р. 9-16.
11. Nijs J. (2011). Tired of being inactive: a systematic literature review of physical activity, physiological exercise capacity and muscle strength in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome / J. Nijs // Disabil Rehabil. – 33 (17–18). – Р. 1493–1500.
12. Royes B. (2010). Chronic fatigue syndrome: more than fatigue / B. Royes // Rev Enferm. – 33 (12). – Р. 16–19.
13. Sargent C. (2002). Maximal oxygen uptake and lactate metabolism are normal in chronic fatigue syndrome / C. Sargent, G. C. Scroop, P. M. Nemeth // Medicine and science in sports and exercise. – 34(1). – Р. 51–56.
14. Sisto, S. A. (1996). Metabolic and cardiovascular effects of a progressive exercise test in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome / S. A. Sisto, J. LaManca, D. L. Cordero // The American journal of medicine. – 100(6). – 634–640.
15. Van Cauwenbergh D. (2012). How to exercise people with chronic fatigue syndrome: evidence-based practice guidelines / D. Van Cauwenbergh, M. De Kooning, K. Ickmans, J. Nijs // European journal of clinical investigation. – 42(10). – 1136–1144.
