EMGO Institute for Health and Care research, VU University Medical Center,Van der Boechorststraat 7, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 May 1;35(10):1017-24. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c212ee.
STUDY DESIGN: A randomized clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of a behavioral graded activity program with manual therapy in patients with subacute (4-12 weeks) nonspecific neck pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Neck pain is a common complaint, for which many conservative therapies are available in primary care. There is strong evidence for manual therapy in combination with exercises. Psychosocial factors are also believed to play a role in chronic pain. The evidence of the effectiveness of a program focused on these factors is still unknown. METHODS: A randomized clinical trial was conducted, involving 146 patients with subacute nonspecific neck pain. The BGA program can be described as a time-contingent increase in activities from baseline toward predetermined goals. Manual therapy consists of specific spinal mobilization techniques and exercises. Primary outcomes were global perceived effect, the Numerical Rating Scale for pain and the Neck Disability Index. Secondary outcomes were the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, the 4 Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire, and the Pain Coping and Cognition List. Measurements were carried out at baseline and 6, 13, 26, and 52 weeks after randomization. Data are analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle, using multilevel analysis. RESULTS: The success rates at 52 weeks, based on the GPE were 89.4% for the BGA program and 86.5% for MT. This difference was not statistically significant. For pain and disability, a difference was found in favor of the BGA program; mean difference for pain = 0.99 (95% CI 0.15-1.83) and mean difference for NDI = 2.42 (95% CI 0.52-4.32). All other differences between the interventions in the primary and secondary outcomes were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Based on this trial it can be concluded that there are only marginal, but not clinically relevant, differences between a BGA program and MT.
研究设计:一项随机临床试验。 目的:比较行为分级活动方案与手法治疗对亚急性(4-12 周)非特异性颈痛患者的疗效。 背景资料总结:颈痛是一种常见的主诉,在初级保健中可提供许多保守治疗方法。手法治疗联合运动疗法有很强的证据支持。心理社会因素也被认为与慢性疼痛有关。针对这些因素的治疗方案有效性的证据尚不清楚。 方法:进行了一项随机临床试验,共纳入 146 例亚急性非特异性颈痛患者。BGA 方案可描述为基线时活动量逐渐增加,达到预定目标。手法治疗包括特定的脊柱松动技术和运动。主要结局指标为总体感觉疗效、疼痛数字评分量表和颈部残疾指数。次要结局指标为坦帕运动恐惧调查问卷、4 维度症状问卷和疼痛应对认知问卷。测量在随机分组后 6、13、26 和 52 周进行。数据分析采用多水平分析,根据意向治疗原则进行。 结果:基于 GPE 的 52 周时的成功率,BGA 方案为 89.4%,MT 为 86.5%。差异无统计学意义。在疼痛和残疾方面,BGA 方案有优势;疼痛的平均差值为 0.99(95%CI 0.15-1.83),NDI 的平均差值为 2.42(95%CI 0.52-4.32)。干预措施在主要和次要结局方面的其他差异均无统计学意义。 结论:根据这项试验,可以得出结论,行为分级活动方案与手法治疗之间只有微小的但无临床意义的差异。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008-10-15
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007-10-15