Suppr超能文献

腰痛的临床重要结局

Clinically important outcomes in low back pain.

作者信息

Ostelo Raymond W J G, de Vet Henrica C W

机构信息

Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine (EMGO Institute), VU University Medical Center, van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2005 Aug;19(4):593-607. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2005.03.003.

Abstract

Four important domains directly related to low back pain are: pain intensity, low-back-pain-specific disability, patient satisfaction with treatment outcome, and work disability. Within each of the domains, different questionnaires have been proposed. This chapter focuses on validated and widely used questionnaires. Details of the background and the measurement properties, and of the minimally clinically important change (MCIC) using these questionnaires, are described. The MCIC can be estimated using various methods and there is no consensus in the literature on what the most appropriate technique is. This chapter focuses primarily on two adequate and frequently used methods for estimating the MCIC. We argue that the MCIC should not be considered as a fixed value and that the MCIC values presented in this chapter are used as indications. For patients with subacute or chronic low back pain, the MCIC for pain on a visual analogue scale (VAS) should at least be 20mm and for acute low back pain it seems reasonable to suggest that the MCIC should at least be at the level of approximately 35mm. If a numerical rating scale (NRS) is used it seems reasonable to suggest that the MCIC should at least be 3.5 and 2.5 for patients with acute and chronic low back pain, respectively. For functional disability as measured with the Roland Disability Questionnaire it seems reasonable that the MCIC should at least be 3.5 points, whereas an MCIC of at least 10 points when the Oswestry Disability Index is used. For global perceived effect, we argue that the MCIC is most appropriately defined in terms of at least 'much improved' or 'very satisfied', instead of including 'slightly improved'. Finally, we argue that, from the point of view of cost effectiveness, every day of earlier return to work is important. The exact value for the MCIC can be determined, taking into account the aim of the measurement, the initial scores, the target population and the method used to assess MCIC.

摘要

与腰痛直接相关的四个重要领域是

疼痛强度、腰痛特异性残疾、患者对治疗结果的满意度以及工作残疾。在每个领域内,都提出了不同的问卷。本章重点关注经过验证且广泛使用的问卷。描述了这些问卷的背景、测量属性以及最小临床重要变化(MCIC)的详细信息。可以使用各种方法估计MCIC,并且文献中对于最合适的技术尚无共识。本章主要关注两种适当且常用的估计MCIC的方法。我们认为MCIC不应被视为固定值,本章中呈现的MCIC值仅作为参考。对于亚急性或慢性腰痛患者,视觉模拟量表(VAS)上疼痛的MCIC至少应为20mm,对于急性腰痛,建议MCIC至少约为35mm似乎是合理的。如果使用数字评分量表(NRS),对于急性和慢性腰痛患者,建议MCIC分别至少为3.5和2.5似乎是合理的。对于用罗兰残疾问卷测量的功能残疾,MCIC至少应为3.5分似乎是合理的,而使用奥斯威斯利残疾指数时,MCIC至少应为10分。对于总体感知效果,我们认为MCIC最恰当的定义应为至少“明显改善”或“非常满意”,而不包括“略有改善”。最后,我们认为,从成本效益的角度来看,早日重返工作岗位的每一天都很重要。可以根据测量目的、初始分数、目标人群以及评估MCIC所使用的方法来确定MCIC的确切值。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验