Suppr超能文献

系统评价:评价手法治疗和运动疗法治疗非特异性慢性下腰痛的随机对照临床试验中分类策略的整合。

Integration of subclassification strategies in randomised controlled clinical trials evaluating manual therapy treatment and exercise therapy for non-specific chronic low back pain: a systematic review.

机构信息

Section for Physiotherapy Science, Department of Public Health and Primary Health Care, University of Bergen, Kalfarveien 31, 5018 Bergen, Norway.

出版信息

Br J Sports Med. 2010 Nov;44(14):1054-62. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2009.063289. Epub 2009 Dec 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is lack of evidence for specific treatment interventions for patients with non-specific chronic low back pain (NSCLBP) despite the substantial amount of randomised controlled clinical trials evaluating treatment outcome for this disorder.

HYPOTHESIS

It has been hypothesised that this vacuum of evidence is caused by the lack of subclassification of the heterogeneous population of patients with chronic low back pain for outcome research.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic review with a meta-analysis was undertaken to determine the integration of subclassification strategies with matched interventions in randomised controlled clinical trials evaluating manual therapy treatment and exercise therapy for NSCLBP. A structured search for relevant studies in Embase, Cinahl, Medline, PEDro and the Cochrane Trials Register database, followed by hand searching all relevant studies in English up to December 2008.

RESULTS

Only 5 of 68 studies (7.4%) subclassified patients beyond applying general inclusion and exclusion criteria. In the few studies where classification and matched interventions have been used, our meta-analysis showed a statistical difference in favour of the classification-based intervention for reductions in pain (p=0.004) and disability (p=0.0005), both for short-term and long-term reduction in pain (p=0.001). Effect sizes ranged from moderate (0.43) for short term to minimal (0.14) for long term.

CONCLUSION

A better integration of subclassification strategies in NSCLBP outcome research is needed. We propose the development of explicit recommendations for the use of subclassification strategies and evaluation of targeted interventions in future research evaluating NSCLBP.

摘要

背景

尽管有大量随机对照临床试验评估了这种疾病的治疗效果,但对于非特异性慢性下腰痛(NSCLBP)患者,仍缺乏针对特定治疗干预的证据。

假说

这种证据空白是由于缺乏对慢性下腰痛患者进行亚分类的研究,从而无法对其结果进行研究。

研究设计

系统评价。

方法

进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,以确定在评估手动治疗和运动治疗 NSCLBP 的随机对照临床试验中,亚分类策略与匹配干预措施的整合情况。对 Embase、Cinahl、Medline、PEDro 和 Cochrane 试验登记数据库中的相关研究进行了系统搜索,并对截至 2008 年 12 月的所有相关英文研究进行了手工检索。

结果

68 项研究中仅有 5 项(7.4%)对患者进行了分类,超出了一般纳入和排除标准。在少数使用分类和匹配干预措施的研究中,我们的荟萃分析显示,分类干预在减轻疼痛(p=0.004)和残疾(p=0.0005)方面具有统计学意义,短期和长期疼痛减轻均如此(p=0.001)。效应大小从短期的中度(0.43)到长期的轻度(0.14)。

结论

需要更好地将亚分类策略整合到 NSCLBP 结果研究中。我们建议在未来评估 NSCLBP 的研究中,为使用亚分类策略和评估靶向干预制定明确的建议。

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