Côté Pierre, Hogg-Johnson Sheilah, Cassidy J David, Carroll Linda, Frank John W, Bombardier Claire
Institute for Work & Health, University of Toronto, Toronto Western Research Institute and Rehabilitations Solutions, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Arthritis Rheum. 2007 Jun 15;57(5):861-8. doi: 10.1002/art.22775.
To test the reproducibility of the finding that early intensive care for whiplash injuries is associated with delayed recovery.
We analyzed data from a cohort study of 1,693 Saskatchewan adults who sustained whiplash injuries between July 1, 1994 and December 31, 1994. We investigated 8 initial patterns of care that integrated type of provider (general practitioners, chiropractors, and specialists) and number of visits (low versus high utilization). Cox models were used to estimate the association between patterns of care and time to recovery while controlling for injury severity and other confounders.
Patients in the low-utilization general practitioner group and those in the general medical group had the fastest recovery even after controlling for important prognostic factors. Compared with the low-utilization general practitioner group, the 1-year rate of recovery in the high-utilization chiropractic group was 25% slower (adjusted hazard rate ratio [HRR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.54-1.04), in the low-utilization general practitioner plus chiropractic group the rate was 26% slower (HRR 0.74, 95% CI 0.60-0.93), and in the high-utilization general practitioner plus chiropractic combined group the rate was 36% slower (HRR 0.64, 95% CI 0.50-0.83).
The observation that intensive health care utilization early after a whiplash injury is associated with slower recovery was reproduced in an independent cohort of patients. The results add to the body of evidence suggesting that early aggressive treatment of whiplash injuries does not promote faster recovery. In particular, the combination of chiropractic and general practitioner care significantly reduces the rate of recovery.
验证有关鞭打损伤早期强化护理与恢复延迟相关这一发现的可重复性。
我们分析了一项队列研究的数据,该研究涉及1994年7月1日至1994年12月31日期间在萨斯喀彻温省遭受鞭打损伤的1693名成年人。我们调查了8种初始护理模式,这些模式综合了提供者类型(全科医生、脊椎按摩治疗师和专科医生)和就诊次数(低利用率与高利用率)。使用Cox模型估计护理模式与恢复时间之间的关联,同时控制损伤严重程度和其他混杂因素。
即使在控制了重要的预后因素之后,低利用率全科医生组的患者和普通医疗组的患者恢复最快。与低利用率全科医生组相比,高利用率脊椎按摩治疗组的1年恢复率慢25%(调整后风险率比[HRR]为0.75,95%置信区间[95%CI]为0.54 - 1.04),低利用率全科医生加脊椎按摩治疗组的恢复率慢26%(HRR为0.74,95%CI为0.60 - 0.93),高利用率全科医生加脊椎按摩治疗联合组的恢复率慢36%(HRR为0.64,95%CI为0.50 - 0.83)。
在一个独立的患者队列中再现了以下观察结果:鞭打损伤后早期大量使用医疗保健与恢复较慢相关。这些结果进一步证明,早期积极治疗鞭打损伤并不能促进更快恢复。特别是,脊椎按摩治疗和全科医生护理的结合显著降低了恢复率。