今早為Asian Medical Students Association Hong Kong (AMSAHK)的新一屆執行委員會就職典禮作致詞分享嘉賓,題目為「疫情中的健康不公平」。
感謝他們的熱情款待以及為整段致詞拍了影片。以下我附上致詞的英文原稿:
It's been my honor to be invited to give the closing remarks for the Inauguration Ceremony for the incoming executive committee of the Asian Medical Students' Association Hong Kong (AMSAHK) this morning. A video has been taken for the remarks I made regarding health inequalities during the COVID-19 pandemic (big thanks to the student who withstood the soreness of her arm for holding the camera up for 15 minutes straight), and here's the transcript of the main body of the speech that goes with this video:
//The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, continues to be rampant around the world since early 2020, resulting in more than 55 million cases and 1.3 million deaths worldwide as of today. (So no! It’s not a hoax for those conspiracy theorists out there!) A higher rate of incidence and deaths, as well as worse health-related quality of life have been widely observed in the socially disadvantaged groups, including people of lower socioeconomic position, older persons, migrants, ethnic minority and communities of color, etc. While epidemiologists and scientists around the world are dedicated in gathering scientific evidence on the specific causes and determinants of the health inequalities observed in different countries and regions, we can apply the Social Determinants of Health Conceptual Framework developed by the World Health Organization team led by the eminent Prof Sir Michael Marmot, world’s leading social epidemiologist, to understand and delineate these social determinants of health inequalities related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
According to this framework, social determinants of health can be largely categorized into two types – 1) the lower stream, intermediary determinants, and 2) the upper stream, structural and macro-environmental determinants. For the COVID-19 pandemic, we realized that the lower stream factors may include material circumstances, such as people’s living and working conditions. For instance, the nature of the occupations of these people of lower socioeconomic position tends to require them to travel outside to work, i.e., they cannot work from home, which is a luxury for people who can afford to do it. This lack of choice in the location of occupation may expose them to greater risk of infection through more transportation and interactions with strangers. We have also seen infection clusters among crowded places like elderly homes, public housing estates, and boarding houses for foreign domestic helpers. Moreover, these socially disadvantaged people tend to have lower financial and social capital – it can be observed that they were more likely to be deprived of personal protective equipment like face masks and hand sanitizers, especially during the earlier days of the pandemic. On the other hand, the upper stream, structural determinants of health may include policies related to public health, education, macroeconomics, social protection and welfare, as well as our governance… and last, but not least, our culture and values. If the socioeconomic and political contexts are not favorable to the socially disadvantaged, their health and well-being will be disproportionately affected by the pandemic. Therefore, if we, as a society, espouse to address and reduce the problem of health inequalities, social determinants of health cannot be overlooked in devising and designing any public health-related strategies, measures and policies.
Although a higher rate of incidence and deaths have been widely observed in the socially disadvantaged groups, especially in countries with severe COVID-19 outbreaks, this phenomenon seems to be less discussed and less covered by media in Hong Kong, where the disease incidence is relatively low when compared with other countries around the world. Before the resurgence of local cases in early July, local spread of COVID-19 was sporadic and most cases were imported. In the earlier days of the pandemic, most cases were primarily imported by travelers and return-students studying overseas, leading to a minor surge between mid-March and mid-April of 874 new cases. Most of these cases during Spring were people who could afford to travel and study abroad, and thus tended to be more well-off. Therefore, some would say the expected social gradient in health impact did not seem to exist in Hong Kong, but may I remind you that, it is only the case when we focus on COVID-19-specific incidence and mortality alone. But can we really deduce from this that COVID-19-related health inequality does not exist in Hong Kong? According to the Social Determinants of Health Framework mentioned earlier, the obvious answer is “No, of course not.” And here’s why…
In addition to the direct disease burden, the COVID-19 outbreak and its associated containment measures (such as economic lockdown, mandatory social distancing, and change of work arrangements) could have unequal wider socioeconomic impacts on the general population, especially in regions with pervasive existing social inequalities. Given the limited resources and capacity of the socioeconomically disadvantaged to respond to emergency and adverse events, their general health and well-being are likely to be unduly and inordinately affected by the abrupt changes in their daily economic and social conditions, like job loss and insecurity, brought about by the COVID-19 outbreak and the corresponding containment and mitigation measures of which the main purpose was supposedly disease prevention and health protection at the first place. As such, focusing only on COVID-19 incidence or mortality as the outcomes of concern to address health inequalities may leave out important aspects of life that contributes significantly to people’s health. Recently, my research team and I collaborated with Sir Michael Marmot in a Hong Kong study, and found that the poor people in Hong Kong fared worse in every aspects of life than their richer counterparts in terms of economic activity, personal protective equipment, personal hygiene practice, as well as well-being and health after the COVID-19 outbreak. We also found that part of the observed health inequality can be attributed to the pandemic and its related containment measures via people’s concerns over their own and their families’ livelihood and economic activity. In other words, health inequalities were contributed by the pandemic even in a city where incidence is relatively low through other social determinants of health that directly concerned the livelihood and economic activity of the people. So in this study, we confirmed that focusing only on the incident and death cases as the outcomes of concern to address health inequalities is like a story half-told, and would severely truncate and distort the reality.
Truth be told, health inequality does not only appear after the pandemic outbreak of COVID-19, it is a pre-existing condition in countries and regions around the world, including Hong Kong. My research over the years have consistently shown that people in lower socioeconomic position tend to have worse physical and mental health status. Nevertheless, precisely because health inequality is nothing new, there are always voices in our society trying to dismiss the problem, arguing that it is only natural to have wealth inequality in any capitalistic society. However, in reckoning with health inequalities, we need to go beyond just figuring out the disparities or differences in health status between the poor and the rich, and we need to raise an ethically relevant question: are these inequalities, disparities and differences remediable? Can they be fixed? Can we do something about them? If they are remediable, and we can do something about them but we haven’t, then we’d say these inequalities are ultimately unjust and unfair. In other words, a society that prides itself in pursuing justice must, and I say must, strive to address and reduce these unfair health inequalities. Borrowing the words from famed sociologist Judith Butler, “the virus alone does not discriminate,” but “social and economic inequality will make sure that it does.” With COVID-19, we learn that it is not only the individuals who are sick, but our society. And it’s time we do something about it.
Thank you very much!//
Please join me in congratulating the incoming executive committee of AMSAHK and giving them the best wishes for their future endeavor!
Roger Chung, PhD
Assistant Professor, CUHK JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, @CUHK Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong 香港中文大學 - CUHK
Associate Director, CUHK Institute of Health Equity
同時也有5部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過39萬的網紅Chen Lily,也在其Youtube影片中提到,🌲 Lily英文聊天術(口說課程):https://bit.ly/36I05CF 📚 Lily新制托福課程:https://bit.ly/2GIs3mC 中英夾雜一直是一個很尷尬也很少被討論的話題, 卻正好是我現在研究的一個重要概念, 這次和大家分享三個人為什麼會語言混雜的原因。 希望大家可以踴...
「structural中文」的推薦目錄:
- 關於structural中文 在 Roger Chung 鍾一諾 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於structural中文 在 國家衛生研究院-論壇 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於structural中文 在 Charles Mok 莫乃光 Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於structural中文 在 Chen Lily Youtube 的最佳解答
- 關於structural中文 在 香港喵喵俠 Youtube 的最佳解答
- 關於structural中文 在 香港喵喵俠 Youtube 的最佳解答
- 關於structural中文 在 中文和英文的兩個結構分別(2/2) - YouTube 的評價
structural中文 在 國家衛生研究院-論壇 Facebook 的最讚貼文
➥冠狀病毒利用棘狀(S)蛋白與宿主細胞受體結合並催化細胞膜融合,因為這個重要的角色,S蛋白成為發展治療方法的標的。
Dr. Wrapp等人提出由接種prefusion-stabilized冠狀病毒的駱馬體內分離出兩株抗體(VHHs),這些VHHs可分別中和MERS-CoV及SARS-CoV-1。
VHHs與其各別之病毒標的結合的晶體結構顯示兩個完全不同的抗原表位,但兩個VHHs皆能干擾受體結合。
研究團隊還發現了SARS-CoV-1及SARS-CoV-2引起VHHs間的交叉反應,並證實交叉反應的VHHs可形成二價的IgG Fc-fusion(免疫球蛋白的一種)中和SARS-CoV-2。
這些資料提供VHHs中和致病性冠狀病毒的分子基礎,顯示這些分子可在冠狀病毒流行期間成為一個有效的治療方法。(「財團法人國家衛生研究院」莊淑鈞博士 摘要整理 ➥http://forum.nhri.org.tw/covid19/virus/j874/ )
📋 Structural Basis for Potent Neutralization of Betacoronaviruses by Single-Domain Camelid Antibodies (2020/05/05)+中文摘要轉譯
■ Author:
Daniel Wrapp, Dorien De Vlieger, Kizzmekia S. Corbett, et al.
■ Link:
( Cell Press / Cell) https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)30494-3
🔔豐富的學術文獻資料都在【Covid-19 新冠肺炎資源網】
■ http://forum.nhri.org.tw/covid19/
#2019COVID19Academic
衛生福利部
疾病管制署 - 1922防疫達人
疾病管制署
國家衛生研究院-論壇
structural中文 在 Charles Mok 莫乃光 Facebook 的最佳貼文
【法政匯思就社會進一步動盪的聲明】
【Statement on Further Escalation of Social Unrest】
// 當體制構建不能保障市民應有的追索權,暴力兼「私了」必如落山流水跟著來,這已清晰可見。僅說無諾,何能「止暴制亂」?
// Where the system fails to provide proper recourse, vigilantism and violence proclaiming self-defence arise as simple cause and effect. Without any real commitment by the Government to de-escalate and defuse the political crisis, verbal condemnation and physical crackdown will do nothing to ‘stop violence and curb disorder’.
https://www.facebook.com/…/a.455221741311…/1474268236073377/
【法政匯思就社會進一步動盪的聲明】
【Statement on Further Escalation of Social Unrest】(Scroll for English)
1. 近日,警隊的行為就如國際特赦組織所言越見低劣。[1] 這皆因政府漠視其專家提供的建議,並以歇斯底里、毫無章法可言的策略回應持續的動盪。
2. 五個月來,政府持續容許以下情況發生,對警政問題及根本的政治危機藥石亂投:
a. 阻礙救護人員前往現場拯救傷者;[2]
b. 偏頗地處理強姦或酷刑對待被拘留人士的指控;[3]
c. 肆無忌憚地濫用武力;[4]
d. 以諸多藉口為警察的失控或報復行為辯解。[5]
3. 法政匯思強烈譴責警隊濫用武力,及其本末倒置、往往為社區添煩添亂的驅散示威者行動。警方在十一月十一日於香港中文大學(「中大」)、香港理工大學及香港大學等驅散非法集結及/或堵路行為的行動,指稱的事實根據惹人非議。[6] 在撰寫此聲明之時,警方甚至以催淚彈及橡膠子彈回應中大校長的善意,與學生發生激烈衝突,造成最少60人受傷及多人被捕。[7]
4. 歸根究底,現有的制度未能公正地調查涉及警務人員的刑事指控,乃是警民衝突的源頭。樂觀地看,這可能只是個別調查人員的疏忽;悲觀地看,這反映一種互相包庇的文化,可能已由員佐級警員到警務處處長、保安局局長甚至特首,滲透警隊及政府上下。無論是哪一個情況,這種警察橫行無忌的觀感已經令公眾對負責調查大部分罪行的警察的信任蕩然無存。這個缺口一開,刑事司法制度剩下非常有限的能力,處理失職警員。
5. 法政匯思繼續呼籲香港政府成立獨立調查委員會,調查包括六月份以來政府的治安管理手段。除了將肇事者繩之於法外,更重要的是全面檢閱香港警隊以達至結構上的改革。至今,特區政府對於這個明顯又實際的選擇不屑一顧,堅持讓一個缺乏監察權力的獨立監察警方處理投訴委員會(「監警會」)[8] 去調查警察投訴及內部調查科。這正正就是問題根源所在。
6. 監警會委派的國際專家組就這個問題發表《進展報告》。國際專家組與政府持相反意見。他們批評監警會在結構上欠缺全面調查權力,對監警會這一個輕型、監管式的體制是否能夠做出決定性的貢獻表示懷疑,更指出下一步的可能性諸如「委派一個享有所需權力的獨立調查機構以作更深程度及更廣泛的調查」,意味著一個獨立調查委員會。[9]
7. 對於近數星期暴力頻頻,政府沒有採取任何行動,只是堅拒示威者的訴求(包括成立獨立調查委員會),更稱他們為「人民的敵人」。[10] 警員們多月來非人化地濫稱示威者為「曱甴」。[11]
8. 法政匯思絕對不認同法外制裁。此立場於七月二十五日之聲明已表明。然而,當體制構建不能保障市民應有的追索權,暴力兼「私了」必如落山流水跟著來,這已清晰可見。僅說無諾,何能「止暴制亂」?
法政匯思
2019年11月15日
(PDF: https://tinyurl.com/tt2nzmr)
1. Police conduct has seen, in the words of Amnesty International, ‘another shocking low’ [1] in recent days as the Government ignored constructive feedback by its own experts and hysterically responded to the ongoing unrest without any rational strategy.
2. In particular, these allegations point to a wanton failure on the part of the Government to properly approach policing and the underlying political crisis, now in its 5th month:
a. Obstructing rescuers and ambulances from accessing the injured; [2]
b. Unfair handling of allegations of rape and torture in custody; [3]
c. Unapologetic excesses in its use of force; [4] and
d. Evasive defence of police officers acting impulsively or in retaliation. [5]
3. The Progressive Lawyers Group (the ‘PLG’) vehemently condemns the Police regarding their excessive use of force and dispersal operations which often create the chaos sought to be quelled. On 11 November, the police conducted operations in, amongst others, the Chinese University of Hong Kong (‘CUHK’), the Polytechnic University of Hong Kong and the University of Hong Kong to disperse unlawful assemblies and/or obstruction of traffic, [6] the factual basis of which has been doubted by many. As at the drafting of this Statement, as riot police responded to an olive branch by the CUHK Vice-Chancellor with tear gas and rubber bullets, severe clashes between students and riot police at CUHK are ongoing with at least 60 injured and dozens arrested. [7]
4. Nonetheless, the crux of the problem remains in the institutional failure to investigate criminal allegations involving police officers impartially. At best, it could be an omission by individual police officers in their execution of duty. At worst, it could be a culture that acquiesces and conceals wrongdoings affecting grassroot constables, the Commissioner of Police, the Secretary for Security and the Chief Executive alike. Whichever the case may be, this perception of impunity breaches the trust and confidence the public reposes in the police who are tasked with investigating most offences. With this link broken, there remains very limited recourse in the criminal justice system against rogue officers.
5. The PLG continues to call on the Hong Kong Government to appoint a Commission of Inquiry regarding, amongst others, the current approach to policing social unrest since June. Bringing wrongdoers to justice aside, the more important task is a holistic review on the Police Force and a roadmap to structural reforms. So far, the Government brushed aside this obvious and pragmatic option, insisting upon an inquiry by the Independent Police Complaints Council (‘IPCC’) [8] whose (lack of) oversight over the Complaints Against Police Office (‘CAPO’) is the very issue at the heart of the current saga.
6. Curiously, the International Expert Panel of the IPCC appointed for advice on that very inquiry seems to hold a contrary view. In their Position Statement Report of Progress, the experts pointed out ‘structural limitations in the scope and powers of the IPCC Inquiry’ and noted that ‘it remains to be seen whether a light touch, oversight body like the IPCC, can make sufficient progress to produce any decisive contribution…’ It also identified a possible next step such as ‘a deeper more comprehensive inquiry in a number of respects by an independent body with requisite powers’, alluding to a Commission of Inquiry. [9]
7. In response to the extraordinary brutalities these few weeks, the Government did nothing but maintain that it will not yield to the protesters’ demands (including an independent Commission of Inquiry) and call them ‘enemies of the people’. [10] It has not helped that the police have for months been blatantly using such a dehumanising term as ‘cockroaches’ to refer to protesters [11].
8. The PLG stands by our Statement on 25 July 2019 and does not encourage citizens to take justice into their own hands. However, it is obvious by now that where the system fails to provide proper recourse, vigilantism and violence proclaiming self-defence arise as simple cause and effect. Without any real commitment by the Government to de-escalate and defuse the political crisis, verbal condemnation and physical crackdown will do nothing to ‘stop violence and curb disorder’.
The Progressive Lawyers Group
15 November 2019
(PDF version: https://tinyurl.com/tt2nzmr)
structural中文 在 Chen Lily Youtube 的最佳解答
🌲 Lily英文聊天術(口說課程):https://bit.ly/36I05CF
📚 Lily新制托福課程:https://bit.ly/2GIs3mC
中英夾雜一直是一個很尷尬也很少被討論的話題,
卻正好是我現在研究的一個重要概念,
這次和大家分享三個人為什麼會語言混雜的原因。
希望大家可以踴躍的留言,說說你的看法!
1. 有沒有什麼字或概念是中文有但英文沒有,反之亦然?
2. 你會不會中英夾雜,或甚至混雜其他語言,為什麼?和我說的原因相似嗎?
3. 如果你認為語言混雜是負面的,為什麼?
4. 關於這個話題,你想了解什麼也歡迎告訴我。I can do all the reading for you :P
我的目標是讓這個頻道成為大家能自由自在討論語言現象的地方
歡迎你加入這個對話 :)
【影片裡的單字與用法】
1. Heatwave (n) 熱浪
2. Tip of the tongue (phr) 舌尖現象,話在嘴邊
3. Hazelnut (n) 榛果 (字幕打錯了,應該是一個字才對)
4. Troublesome (a) 令人煩惱的,棘手的
5. Annoying (a) 討厭的,惱人的
Reference:
• Fedric, F. (2005). Long-term effects of CS: clues to structural borrowing. International Journal of Bilingualism, 9(3-4), 341-360
• Heredia, R., & Altarriba, J. (2001). Bilingual language mixing: why do bilinguals code-switch? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(5), 164-168.
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂
ღ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chennlilyy/
ღ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/chennlilyy/
ღ 合作邀約:chenlilyofficial@gmail.com
⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂⁂
我是Lily Chen. 加拿大McGill University 語言教育碩士
我的頻道分享語言學習方法、實境生活英文,以及留學、托福相關資訊
希望能藉由應用語言學的知識,讓更多人成為自信的bilingual(雙語者)
structural中文 在 香港喵喵俠 Youtube 的最佳解答
喵喵俠一路以來都有一個病,由細路到大,就是脊柱側彎,即是背部最重要條脊骨有側彎的現像,年青的我暫時都未有因為側彎問題影響,但將來一定會有麻煩,所以現在年青,為了健康,有機會的話真的要試試,現在就找到一名有信心治療好喵喵俠的師父去為喵喵俠治療,我們會一連幾集,由喵喵俠的從未治療過實錄到師父治療到好返,絕對是真實個案,這部實錄了希望幫到我之餘又幫到大家,如果大家想了解更多,不防可以來喵喵俠專頁贊好,以及PM訊息我,分享你的問題,互相交流。
#脊柱側彎 #Scoliosis #實錄 #治療 #健康 #人生 #脊骨側彎 #側灣 #脊椎側彎
脊椎側彎可能會造成的問題:明顯的脊椎彎曲、脊椎旋轉導到肋骨旋轉、脊椎兩側的肌肉對稱、姿勢體態的歪斜、可能全身柔軟度不佳、可能全身過度柔軟、大腦缺乏對正確姿勢的認知、可能出現疼痛、內臟受到壓,透過了解這些問題,在下個章節中去試著判斷,那些才是有效的脊椎側彎治療方式。
喵喵俠專頁
https://www.facebook.com/catcatcatman/
#脊骨側彎 #脊柱側彎 #脊椎側彎 #健康2.0 #運動 #側凸 #脊骨側凸 #脊椎側凸 #脊柱側彎問題 #脊骨側彎問題 #脊椎側彎問題 #選擇脊椎側彎治療 #選擇脊骨側彎治療 #選擇脊椎側彎治療 #實証 #案例 #側彎例子 #側彎案例 #治療案例 #護脊有方法
脊椎側彎 (scoliosis)是指患者的脊椎有不正常的側向曲線(#有時會伴隨脊椎旋轉 )的一種症狀。通常令患者進行由後向前的X光檢查時可以看到X光片中的脊椎呈現S型、C型等的形狀而非一條直線。常見的分類包括先天性脊椎側彎、好發於青少年時期的原發性脊椎側彎以及因為其他因素(如:#外傷 、#腦性麻痺 )所產生的次發性脊椎側彎。
#脊椎側彎的種類
#結構性脊椎側彎症
結構性脊椎側彎症(structural scoliosis)是指患者躺下來的時候側彎現象不會消失。此類脊椎側彎患者中有80%患者為原發性脊椎側彎,其次為次發性脊椎側彎。
非結構性脊椎側彎症[編輯]
#非結構性脊椎側彎症 (non-structural scoliosis)是指患者躺下來的時候側彎現象會消失。常見的因素則是因為神經肌肉病變、脊椎左右兩側肌肉張力不平衡、兩腳長度不等(長短腳)等因素產生。此類患者往往能在病因消失後改善其脊椎側彎的症狀。
結構性脊柱側彎症: 又分為特發性及非特發性兩種。原因在於脊椎本身,只有治療脊椎本身才能改善。不同於非結構性的脊柱側彎症,病人在躺下來時側彎不會消失。特發性脊柱側彎:佔百分之80%,通常開始於10到13歲兒童,好發於身體快速發育成長的青少年時期。非特發性脊柱側彎:則起因於某一特定原因,例如神經肌肉病變、退化、感染、腫瘤等。
#治療方法
#姿勢矯正及運動治療
側彎角度小於20度的患者需要在物理治療師的指導下接受姿勢矯正及運動治療,同時每半年追蹤檢查一次,觀察角度是否有惡化的情況。
#穿戴背架
側彎角度介於20度~40度或50度之間的患者,除了運動治療之外,必須穿背架矯正,避免惡化,同時每三至六個月追蹤檢查一次。通常大於30度建議開刀,除了容易治療,恢復力也較快
手術治療
側彎角度若大於40度或50度,就不建議按照上面方法矯正,持續惡化的速度會加快,#強烈建議手術治療 。
structural中文 在 香港喵喵俠 Youtube 的最佳解答
喵喵俠一路以來都有一個病,由細路到大,就是脊柱側彎,即是背部最重要條脊骨有側彎的現像,年青的我暫時都未有因為側彎問題影響,但將來一定會有麻煩,所以現在年青,為了健康,有機會的話真的要試試,現在就找到一名有信心治療好喵喵俠的師父去為喵喵俠治療,我們會一連幾集,由喵喵俠的從未治療過實錄到師父治療到好返,絕對是真實個案,這部實錄了希望幫到我之餘又幫到大家,如果大家想了解更多,不防可以來喵喵俠專頁贊好,以及PM訊息我,分享你的問題,互相交流。
#脊柱側彎 #Scoliosis #實錄 #治療 #健康 #人生 #脊骨側彎 #側灣 #脊椎側彎
脊椎側彎可能會造成的問題:明顯的脊椎彎曲、脊椎旋轉導到肋骨旋轉、脊椎兩側的肌肉對稱、姿勢體態的歪斜、可能全身柔軟度不佳、可能全身過度柔軟、大腦缺乏對正確姿勢的認知、可能出現疼痛、內臟受到壓,透過了解這些問題,在下個章節中去試著判斷,那些才是有效的脊椎側彎治療方式。
喵喵俠專頁
https://www.facebook.com/catcatcatman/
#脊骨側彎 #脊柱側彎 #脊椎側彎 #健康2.0 #運動 #側凸 #脊骨側凸 #脊椎側凸 #脊柱側彎問題 #脊骨側彎問題 #脊椎側彎問題 #選擇脊椎側彎治療 #選擇脊骨側彎治療 #選擇脊椎側彎治療 #實証 #案例 #側彎例子 #側彎案例 #治療案例 #護脊有方法
脊椎側彎 (scoliosis)是指患者的脊椎有不正常的側向曲線(#有時會伴隨脊椎旋轉 )的一種症狀。通常令患者進行由後向前的X光檢查時可以看到X光片中的脊椎呈現S型、C型等的形狀而非一條直線。常見的分類包括先天性脊椎側彎、好發於青少年時期的原發性脊椎側彎以及因為其他因素(如:#外傷 、#腦性麻痺 )所產生的次發性脊椎側彎。
#脊椎側彎的種類
#結構性脊椎側彎症
結構性脊椎側彎症(structural scoliosis)是指患者躺下來的時候側彎現象不會消失。此類脊椎側彎患者中有80%患者為原發性脊椎側彎,其次為次發性脊椎側彎。
非結構性脊椎側彎症[編輯]
#非結構性脊椎側彎症 (non-structural scoliosis)是指患者躺下來的時候側彎現象會消失。常見的因素則是因為神經肌肉病變、脊椎左右兩側肌肉張力不平衡、兩腳長度不等(長短腳)等因素產生。此類患者往往能在病因消失後改善其脊椎側彎的症狀。
結構性脊柱側彎症: 又分為特發性及非特發性兩種。原因在於脊椎本身,只有治療脊椎本身才能改善。不同於非結構性的脊柱側彎症,病人在躺下來時側彎不會消失。特發性脊柱側彎:佔百分之80%,通常開始於10到13歲兒童,好發於身體快速發育成長的青少年時期。非特發性脊柱側彎:則起因於某一特定原因,例如神經肌肉病變、退化、感染、腫瘤等。
#治療方法
#姿勢矯正及運動治療
側彎角度小於20度的患者需要在物理治療師的指導下接受姿勢矯正及運動治療,同時每半年追蹤檢查一次,觀察角度是否有惡化的情況。
#穿戴背架
側彎角度介於20度~40度或50度之間的患者,除了運動治療之外,必須穿背架矯正,避免惡化,同時每三至六個月追蹤檢查一次。通常大於30度建議開刀,除了容易治療,恢復力也較快
手術治療
側彎角度若大於40度或50度,就不建議按照上面方法矯正,持續惡化的速度會加快,#強烈建議手術治療 。
structural中文 在 中文和英文的兩個結構分別(2/2) - YouTube 的推薦與評價
Two structural differences between Chinese and English | 中文 和英文 ... are valid within Chinese structure but not within English structure. ... <看更多>