Musculoskeletal Research Centre, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Level 2, HS3, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria 3086, Australia.
Phys Ther. 2012 May;92(5):652-65. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20100251. Epub 2012 Jan 12.
Providing specific treatment based on symptom response for people with low back pain (LBP) and a directional preference (DP) is a widely used treatment approach. The efficacy of treatment using the principles of directional preference management (DPM) for LBP is unclear.
The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of treatment using the principles of DPM for people with LBP and a DP.
Computer databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English up to January 2010. Only RCTs investigating DPM for people with LBP and a DP were included. Outcomes for pain, back specific function, and work participation were extracted.
Six RCTs were included in this review. Five were considered high quality. Clinical heterogeneity of the included trials prevented meta-analysis. GRADE quality assessment revealed mixed results; however, moderate evidence was identified that DPM was significantly more effective than a number of comparison treatments for pain, function, and work participation at short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term follow-ups. No trials found that DPM was significantly less effective than comparison treatments.
Although this systematic review showed mixed results, some evidence was found supporting the effectiveness of DPM when applied to participants with a DP, particularly at short-term and intermediate-term follow-ups. Further high-quality RCTs are warranted to evaluate the effect of DPM applied to people with LBP and a DP.
根据症状反应为腰痛(LBP)和方向性偏倚(DP)患者提供针对性治疗是一种广泛应用的治疗方法。基于方向性偏倚管理(DPM)原则治疗 LBP 的疗效尚不清楚。
本研究旨在确定基于 DPM 原则治疗 LBP 和 DP 患者的疗效。
计算机数据库检索了截至 2010 年 1 月发表的英文随机对照试验(RCT)。仅纳入针对 LBP 和 DP 患者的 DPM 研究。提取疼痛、背部特定功能和工作参与的结局。
本综述纳入了 6 项 RCT。其中 5 项被认为是高质量的。纳入试验的临床异质性使得无法进行荟萃分析。GRADE 质量评估显示结果不一致;然而,有中等质量证据表明,在短期、中期和长期随访中,DPM 比许多对照治疗在疼痛、功能和工作参与方面更有效。没有试验发现 DPM 明显不如对照治疗有效。
尽管本系统评价结果不一致,但有一些证据支持 DPM 对 DP 患者的有效性,尤其是在短期和中期随访中。需要进一步进行高质量 RCT 来评估 DPM 应用于 LBP 和 DP 患者的效果。