Sim Julius, Adams Nicola
Primary Care Sciences Research Center, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.
Clin J Pain. 2002 Sep-Oct;18(5):324-36. doi: 10.1097/00002508-200209000-00008.
Little is known of the effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions for fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). The authors therefore carried out a systematic review from 1980 to May 2000 of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of nonpharmacological interventions for FMS.
A search of computerized databases was supplemented by hand searching of bibliographies of key publications. The methodological quality of studies included in the review was evaluated independently by two researchers according to a set of formal criteria. Discrepancies in scoring were resolved through discussion.
The review yielded 25 RCTs, and the main categories of interventions tested in the studies were exercise therapy, educational intervention, relaxation therapy, cognitive-behavioral therapy, acupuncture, and forms of hydrotherapy. Methodological quality of studies was fairly low (mean score = 49.5/100). Most studies had small samples (median for individual treatment groups after randomization = 20), and the mean power of the studies to detect a medium effect ( > or = 0.5) was 0.36. Sixteen studies had blinded outcome assessment, but patients were blinded in only 6 studies. The median longest follow-up was 16 weeks. Statistically significant between-group differences on at least one outcome variable were reported in 17 of the 24 studies.
The varying combinations of interventions studied in the RCTs and the wide range of outcome measures used make it hard to form conclusions across studies. Strong evidence did not emerge in respect to any single intervention, though preliminary support of moderate strength existed for aerobic exercise. There is a need for larger, more methodologically rigorous RCTs in this area.
对于纤维肌痛综合征(FMS)的非药物干预效果,人们了解甚少。因此,作者对1980年至2000年5月间关于FMS非药物干预的随机对照试验(RCT)进行了系统评价。
在对计算机数据库进行检索的基础上,还通过手工检索关键出版物的参考文献进行补充。两名研究人员根据一套正式标准独立评估纳入评价的研究的方法学质量。评分差异通过讨论解决。
该评价纳入了25项RCT,研究中测试的主要干预类别为运动疗法、教育干预、放松疗法、认知行为疗法、针灸和各种形式的水疗法。研究的方法学质量相当低(平均得分=49.5/100)。大多数研究样本量较小(随机分组后各治疗组的中位数=20),研究检测中等效应(≥0.5)的平均检验效能为0.36。16项研究采用了盲法结局评估,但只有6项研究对患者实施了盲法。最长随访时间的中位数为16周。24项研究中有17项报告了至少一个结局变量存在组间统计学显著差异。
RCT中研究的干预措施组合各异,且使用的结局测量方法广泛,这使得难以在各项研究间形成结论。对于任何单一干预措施,均未出现有力证据,不过有氧运动有中等强度的初步支持。该领域需要开展更大规模、方法学更严谨的RCT。