Suppr超能文献

两种针对腰椎管狭窄症患者的物理治疗方案的比较:一项随机临床试验。

A comparison between two physical therapy treatment programs for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized clinical trial.

作者信息

Whitman Julie M, Flynn Timothy W, Childs John D, Wainner Robert S, Gill Howard E, Ryder Michael G, Garber Matthew B, Bennett Andrew C, Fritz Julie M

机构信息

Department of Physical Therapy, Regis University, 3333 Regis Blvd., G-4, Denver, CO 80221-1099, USA.

出版信息

Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006 Oct 15;31(22):2541-9. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000241136.98159.8c.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN

Multicenter randomized, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE

To compare two physical therapy programs for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Scant evidence exists regarding effectiveness of nonsurgical management programs for lumbar spinal stenosis.

METHODS

Fifty-eight patients with lumbar spinal stenosis were randomized to one of two 6-week physical therapy programs. One program included manual physical therapy, body weight supported treadmill walking, and exercise (Manual Physical Therapy, Exercise, and Walking Group), while the other included lumbar flexion exercises, a treadmill walking program, and subtherapeutic ultrasound (Flexion Exercise and Walking Group). Perceived recovery was assessed with a global rating of change scale. Secondary outcomes included: Oswestry, a numerical pain rating scale, a measure of satisfaction, and a treadmill test. Testing occurred at baseline, 6 weeks, and 1 year. Perceived recovery, pain, and other healthcare resources used were collected with a long-term follow-up questionnaire.

RESULTS

A greater proportion of patients in the manual physical therapy, exercise, and walking group reported recovery at 6 weeks compared with the flexion exercise and walking group (P = 0.0015), with a number needed to treat for perceived recovery of 2.6 (confidence interval, 1.8-7.8). At 1 year, 62% and 41% of the manual therapy, exercise, and walking group and the flexion exercise and walking group, respectively, still met the threshold for recovery. Improvements in disability, satisfaction, and treadmill walking tests favored the manual physical therapy, exercise, and walking group at all follow-up points.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis can benefit from physical therapy. Additional gains may be realized with the inclusion of manual physical therapy interventions, exercise, and a progressive body-weight supported treadmill walking program.

摘要

研究设计

多中心随机对照试验。

目的

比较两种针对腰椎管狭窄症患者的物理治疗方案。

背景数据总结

关于腰椎管狭窄症非手术治疗方案的有效性,现有证据不足。

方法

58例腰椎管狭窄症患者被随机分配至两种为期6周的物理治疗方案中的一种。一种方案包括手法物理治疗、体重支持下的跑步机行走和运动(手法物理治疗、运动和行走组),另一种方案包括腰椎前屈运动、跑步机行走方案和亚治疗剂量超声(前屈运动和行走组)。使用总体变化评定量表评估患者的自我感觉恢复情况。次要结局指标包括:Oswestry功能障碍指数、数字疼痛评分量表、满意度测量以及跑步机测试。测试分别在基线、6周和1年时进行。通过长期随访问卷收集患者的自我感觉恢复情况、疼痛情况以及其他医疗资源使用情况。

结果

与前屈运动和行走组相比,手法物理治疗、运动和行走组中有更大比例的患者在6周时报告恢复(P = 0.0015),自我感觉恢复所需治疗人数为2.6(置信区间,1.8 - 7.8)。在1年时,手法治疗、运动和行走组以及前屈运动和行走组分别有62%和41%的患者仍达到恢复阈值。在所有随访时间点,手法物理治疗、运动和行走组在功能障碍、满意度和跑步机行走测试方面的改善情况更佳。

结论

腰椎管狭窄症患者可从物理治疗中获益。纳入手法物理治疗干预、运动以及渐进性体重支持下的跑步机行走方案可能会带来更多益处。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验