Department of Cystic Fibrosis, Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, Sydney Street, London SW36NP, UK.
Physiotherapy. 2011 Sep;97(3):209-17. doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2010.08.016. Epub 2010 Dec 13.
To assess the sensitivity of selected outcome measures to any change resulting from treatment of adults with cystic fibrosis with physiotherapy musculoskeletal techniques, use the data for sample size calculations for future studies and assess the acceptability of the methods to potential participants.
Preliminary, prospective, single-blind, randomised controlled trial.
Specialist cystic fibrosis centre.
Adults recruited from a cystic fibrosis outpatient clinic.
The control group received normal optimal physiotherapy care and the intervention group received weekly musculoskeletal treatment for 6 weeks in addition to normal optimal physiotherapy care.
Recorded at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 weeks. The outcome measures were posture (thoracic index), chest wall excursion, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), visual analogue scale for pain, modified shuttle test and Cystic Fibrosis Quality of Life Questionnaire--Section One (physical functioning).
Descriptive statistics [using medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs)] and linear regression mixed model.
From a total of 20 subjects, 10 were randomised to each group. Fifty percent of subjects were male, with a median age of 27 years (IQR 25 to 34), median FEV(1) of 1.75 l (IQR 1.4 to 2.4) and median body mass index of 20.8 (IQR 20.0 to 23.5). Baseline differences between groups in thoracic index and modified shuttle test made any differences difficult to interpret, but the results for thoracic index and chest wall excursion at the third rib in the treatment group showed a trend towards improvement. The usefulness of FEV₁, the visual analogue scale for pain and the Cystic Fibrosis Quality of Life Questionnaire as measures is unclear.
Further musculoskeletal studies in people with cystic fibrosis should consider using thoracic index and a measure of lung function in addition to FEV₁. The musculoskeletal techniques appear to be acceptable to people with cystic fibrosis, and do not seem to have associated adverse effects.
评估选择的结局测量指标对接受物理治疗肌肉骨骼技术治疗的成年囊性纤维化患者的治疗效果变化的敏感性，利用数据计算未来研究的样本量，并评估方法对潜在参与者的可接受性。
初步的、前瞻性的、单盲、随机对照试验。
囊性纤维化专科中心。
从囊性纤维化门诊招募的成年人。
对照组接受常规最佳物理治疗护理，干预组在接受常规最佳物理治疗护理的基础上每周接受肌肉骨骼治疗 6 周。
基线、3 周、6 周和 12 周记录。结局测量指标包括姿势（胸指数）、胸壁活动度、第 1 秒用力呼气量（FEV₁）、疼痛视觉模拟量表、改良 shuttle 测试和囊性纤维化生活质量问卷-第 1 部分（身体功能）。
描述性统计（使用中位数和四分位距（IQR））和线性回归混合模型。
在总共 20 名受试者中，有 10 名随机分配到每组。50%的受试者为男性，中位年龄为 27 岁（IQR 25 至 34），中位 FEV₁为 1.75 升（IQR 1.4 至 2.4），中位体重指数为 20.8（IQR 20.0 至 23.5）。治疗组第 3 肋的胸指数和改良 shuttle 测试结果显示出改善的趋势，但两组间胸指数和第 3 肋胸壁活动度的基线差异使得任何差异都难以解释。FEV₁、疼痛视觉模拟量表和囊性纤维化生活质量问卷作为测量工具的有用性尚不清楚。
进一步的肌肉骨骼研究在囊性纤维化患者中，除了 FEV₁，还应考虑使用胸指数和肺功能测量。肌肉骨骼技术似乎被囊性纤维化患者接受，并且似乎没有相关的不良影响。
