Koes B W, Bouter L M, Beckerman H, van der Heijden G J, Knipschild P G
Department of Epidemiology and Health Care Research, University of Limburg, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
BMJ. 1991 Jun 29;302(6792):1572-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.302.6792.1572.
To determine the quality of randomised controlled trials of exercise therapy for back pain.
Computer aided search of published papers and blinded assessment of the methods of studies.
23 randomised controlled trials, of which 16 studied exercise therapy given by physiotherapists to individual patients with back pain. Other conservative treatments could be included.
Score for quality of methods (based on four main categories: study population, interventions, measurement of effect, and data presentation and analysis) and main conclusion of author(s) with regard to exercise therapy.
Only four studies scored more than 50 points (maximum 100), indicating that most were of poor quality. Six studies found that exercise was better than reference treatments and 10 reported it to be no better or worse than the reference treatment. Those reporting positive results tended to have higher methods scores (4/6 positive v 4/10 negative scored greater than or equal to 42).
No conclusion can be drawn about whether exercise therapy is better than other conservative treatments for back pain or whether a specific type of exercise is more effective. Further trials are needed in which greater attention is paid to methods of study.
确定腰痛运动疗法随机对照试验的质量。
计算机辅助检索已发表论文并对研究方法进行盲法评估。
23项随机对照试验,其中16项研究了物理治疗师对个体腰痛患者进行的运动疗法。其他保守治疗也可纳入。
方法质量评分(基于四个主要类别:研究人群、干预措施、疗效测量以及数据呈现与分析)以及作者关于运动疗法的主要结论。
只有四项研究得分超过50分(满分100分),这表明大多数研究质量较差。六项研究发现运动疗法优于对照治疗,十项研究报告运动疗法与对照治疗效果相当。报告阳性结果的研究方法得分往往更高(4/6项阳性研究对4/10项阴性研究,得分大于或等于42)。
对于运动疗法是否比其他保守治疗更能有效治疗腰痛,或者特定类型的运动是否更有效,目前无法得出结论。需要进一步开展试验,更加关注研究方法。