Objective To systematically review the effect of percutaneous acupoint electrical stimulation (TEAS) on heart rate variability (HRV). Methods The PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, and CBM databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effects of percutaneous acupoint electrical stimulation on heart rate variability from inception to February 28, 2023. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed using RevMan 5.4 software. Results A total of 14 RCTs involving 719 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that SDNN (MD=12.95, 95%CI 9.18 to 16.72, P<0.01), RMSSD (MD=1.81, 95%CI 0.10 to 3.53, P=0.04), pNN50 (MD=1.75, 95%CI 1.02 to 2.48, P<0.01), HF (SMD=0.27, 95%CI 0.01 to 0.52, P=0.04), LF/HF (MD=−0.07, 95%CI −0.12 to −0.03, P<0.01), ln-LF (MD=0.63, 95%CI 0.25 to 1.01, P<0.01), ln-HF (MD=1.05, 95%CI 0.60 to 1.49, P<0.01), mean RR (MD=−11.86, 95%CI −21.77 to −1.96, P=0.02), and HR (SMD=−0.43, 95%CI −0.66 to −0.20, P<0.01) all showed improvement compared with the control group. However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in LF (SMD=0.15, 95%CI −0.10 to 0.40, P=0.23), LF norm (SMD=0.24, 95%CI −0.10 to 0.58, P=0.16) or HF norm (SMD=0.25, 95%CI −0.47 to 0.97, P=0.5). TEAS on PC6: SDNN, pNN50, HF, LF/HF, LF norm, HF norm, ln-LF, ln-HF, and HR all showed improvement compared with the control group. However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in RMSSD, LF, or RR interval. Conclusion This study supports the improvement of heart rate variability by transcutaneous acupoint electrical stimulation and PC6 acupoint selection. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.
With the continuous development of critical care medicine, the survival rate of critical ill patients continues to increase. However, the residual dysfunction will have a far-reaching impact on the burden on patients, families, and health-care systems, and will significantly increase the demand of the follow-up rehabilitation treatment. Critical illness rehabilitation intervenes patients who are still in the intensive care unit (ICU). It can prevent complications, functional deterioration and dysfunction, improve functional activity and quality of life, shorten the time of mechanical ventilation, the length of ICU stay and hospital stay, and also reduce medical expenses. Experts at home and abroad believe that early rehabilitation of critical ill patients is safe and effective. So rehabilitation should be involved in critical ill patients as early as possible. However, the promotion of this model is still limited by the setting of safety parameters, the ICU culture, the lack of critical rehabilitation professionals, and the physiological and mental cognitive status of patients. Rehabilitation treatment in ICU is constantly being practiced at home and abroad.
Since its discovery in early 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly around the world and is now a global challenge. As early respiratory rehabilitation can improve the patient’s respiratory function and quality of life, it deserves proper attention. Aimed to provide reference for the clinical rehabilitation, this paper summarizes the rehabilitation goals, rehabilitation treatments, nutrition therapy and psychotherapy for different types of COVID-19, on the basis of brief describing the etiological, pathological mechanism, clinical features and medical treatment.