Department of Internal Medicine I, Klinikum Saarbrücken, Saarbrücken, Germany.
Eur J Pain. 2010 Jan;14(1):5-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2009.01.006. Epub 2009 Mar 4.
We compared the methodology and the recommendations of evidence-based guidelines for the management of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) to give an orientation within the continuously growing number of reviews on the therapy of FMS. Systematic searches up to April 2008 of the US-American National Guideline Clearing House, the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) and Medline were conducted. Three evidence-based guidelines for the management of FMS published by professional organizations were identified: The American Pain Society (APS) (2005), the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) (2007), and the AWMF (2008). The steering committees and panels of APS and AWMF were comprised of multiple disciplines engaged in the management of FMS and included patients, whereas the task force of EULAR only consisted of physicians, predominantly rheumatologists. APS and AWMF ascribed the highest level of evidence to systematic reviews and meta-analyses, whereas EULAR credited the highest level of evidence to randomised controlled studies. Both APS and AWMF assigned the highest level of recommendation to aerobic exercise, cognitive-behavioral therapy, amitriptyline, and multicomponent treatment. In contrast, EULAR assigned the highest level of recommendation to a set of to pharmacological treatment. Although there was some consistency in the recommendations regarding pharmacological treatments among the three guidelines, the APS and AWMF guidelines assigned higher ratings to CBT and multicomponent treatments. The inconsistencies across guidelines are likely attributable to the criteria used for study inclusion, weighting systems, and composition of the panels.
我们比较了纤维肌痛综合征(FMS)管理的循证指南的方法学和建议,以在不断增加的 FMS 治疗综述中提供指导。截至 2008 年 4 月,对美国国家指南清理中心、苏格兰校际指南网络、德国科学医学协会联合会(AWMF)和 Medline 进行了系统搜索。确定了三个由专业组织发布的 FMS 管理循证指南:美国疼痛学会(APS)(2005 年)、欧洲抗风湿病联盟(EULAR)(2007 年)和 AWMF(2008 年)。APS 和 AWMF 的指导委员会和小组由从事 FMS 管理的多个学科组成,包括患者,而 EULAR 的工作组仅由医生组成,主要是风湿病学家。APS 和 AWMF 将最高证据水平归因于系统评价和荟萃分析,而 EULAR 将最高证据水平归因于随机对照研究。APS 和 AWMF 将最高推荐级别分配给有氧运动、认知行为疗法、阿米替林和多组分治疗。相比之下,EULAR 将最高推荐级别分配给一组药物治疗。尽管这三个指南在药物治疗建议方面存在一些一致性,但 APS 和 AWMF 指南对 CBT 和多组分治疗的评级更高。指南之间的不一致可能归因于纳入研究的标准、加权系统和小组组成。