목적 : 뇌졸중 후 연하장애 중재에 포함된 임상가의 조기 접근을 위해 신경근전기자극(Neuromuscular Electronic Stimulation; NMES)와 비 침습성 뇌자극(Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation; NIBS)를 적용한 무작위 대조실험(Randomized Controlled Trials; RCTs) 연구의 메타분석을 통해 구체적인 효과와 방안을 제시하고자 한다. 연구방법 : Pubmed, CINAHL(EBSCOhost), Psycinfo, 한국학술정보원(Korean Studies Information Service System; KISS), 학술연구정보서비스(Research Information Sharing Service; RISS)를 통하 여 2008년부터 2019년까지의 논문을 검색하였다. 주요 용어는 “stroke OR CVA OR cerebrocascular accident OR vascular accident” AND “dysphagia OR swallowing disorder OR deglutition disorder” AND “tDCS OR transcranial direct current stimulation OR rTMS OR repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation OR NMES OR neuromuscular electronic stimulation” AND “RCT OR randomized control trial”, “뇌졸중” 그리고 “연하장애 또는 삼킴곤란” 그리고 “경두개 자기자극 또는 경두개 직류자극 또는 신경근 전기자극” 그리고 “무작위대조실험”을 사용하였다. 포함기준과 배제기준을 적용하여 총 11개의 연구가 분석 대상으로 사용되었다. 결과 : 경두개 직류자극(Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation; tDCS)의 전기자극 강도는 1mA, 경 두개 자기자극(Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation; rTMS)의 전기자극 강도는 3~5Hz, 신 경근 전기자극(Neuromuscular Electronic Stimulation; NMES)의 전기자극 강도는 8~15mA로 다양했으며, tDCS와 rTMS는 큰 효과크기, NMES는 중간 효과크기로 나타났다. 결론 : 본 연구는 메타분석을 통해 3가지 치료에 대한 효과를 확인하고 환자 특성과 중재 방향에 따라 다양한 결과를 확인할 수 있었다. 3가지 치료는 국내 뇌졸중 후 연하장애 회복에 효과가 있으며 안전하다고 판단한다. 향후 연하장애 회복을 이끄는 다양한 요인에 대한 명확한 연구가 활발히 이루어져야 할 것이다.

Purpose: Functional recovery of the paretic upper extremity post stroke continues to be one the greatest challenges faced by rehabilitation professionals. Although many tasks require the coordinated participation of both hands, rehabilitation strategies for the most part have focused on the paretic limb. This study investigated whether coupled bilateral coordinated movements and repetitive high frequency TMS enhanced upper limb corticomotor excitability and motor function poststroke. Methods: For this study, we compared the neurophysiological and behavioral changes associated with two such rehabilitation protocols: coupled bilateral training and coupled unilateral training. Twenty chronic stroke patients were randomly assigned to the two training group over 8-week period. For this experiment, transcranial magnetic stumulation, EMG, Ag/AgCI suface electrode, rehabilitation training equipment, jebsen-talyer hand function kit, box & block, and pinch & power grip test kit were used. Results: First, in the box & block and JTT task, coupled bimanual group showed a reduction in movement time in comparision to receiving coupled unilateral group. Second, in the cortical excitability within affected hemisphere, using TMS, an increased in map volume, and map number following coupled bilateral group. Overall, these finding suggest that a coupled bilateral movement and high frequency repetitive TMS protocol effective in recovering upper limb motor function and cortical excitability in chronic stroke patients.

Purpose: The contextual interference effect is a theory crucial for explaining the importance of efficient practice and its application in the field, and representative hypotheses on the theory are elaboration hypothesis and reconstruction hypothesis. as the recent studies on contextual interference by Lin et al. (2008, 2009, 2010) and Cross et al. (2007) support different hypotheses, this study purposed to examine the time point and tasks of interest in order to compare the result of the two hypotheses Methods: The subjects were 36 right‐handed male and female adults aged between 19 and 32, and they were divided into two groups (n=18 each) at random according to practice condition (blocked practice/random practice). In each group, 9 subjects were given transcranial magnetic stimulation(TMS) before task performance and the other 9 were given TMS after task performance. In the test, key pressing response time was used, and each group had the acquisition phase (1st day), and retention test and transfer test (2nd day), and then response time measurements were analyzed statistically Results: When TMS was given after task performance in the acquisition phase, the performance level was lower in the blocked practice group, but in the retention test when TMS was given before task performance the stimulation hindered the random practice group’s learning and lowered its performance level and consequently the contextual interference effect did not occur. Conclusion: After task performance in the acquisition phase, the information process occurs between tasks in the resting phase, and at the same time, the information process occurs in the preparation phase before task performance and affects learning. Accordingly, both the retention phase before task performance suggested by the reconstructive hypothesis and the resting phase after task performance suggested by the elaboration hypothesis can be the time points when contextual interference occurs between tasks, and therefore it is concluded that the reconstructive hypothesis and elaboration hypothesis may coexist with each other.