McLean Sionnadh M, Klaber Moffett Jennifer A, Sharp Donald M, Gardiner Eric
School of Health and Well Being, Sheffield Hallam University, Broomhall Road, Sheffield S10 2BP, UK.
Man Ther. 2013 Jun;18(3):199-205. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2012.09.005. Epub 2012 Oct 22.
Evidence supports exercise-based interventions for the management of neck pain, however there is little evidence of its superiority over usual physiotherapy. This study investigated the effectiveness of a group neck and upper limb exercise programme (GET) compared with usual physiotherapy (UP) for patients with non-specific neck pain. A total of 151 adult patients were randomised to either GET or UP. The primary measure was the Northwick Park Neck pain Questionnaire (NPQ) score at six weeks, six months and 12 months. Mixed modelling identified no difference in neck pain and function between patients receiving GET and those receiving UP at any follow-up time point. Both interventions resulted in modest significant and clinically important improvements on the NPQ score with a change score of around 9% between baseline and 12 months. Both GET and UP are appropriate clinical interventions for patients with non-specific neck pain, however preferences for treatment and targeted strategies to address barriers to adherence may need to be considered in order to maximise the effectiveness of these approaches.
有证据支持基于运动的干预措施用于颈部疼痛的管理,然而,几乎没有证据表明其优于常规物理治疗。本研究调查了与常规物理治疗(UP)相比,针对非特异性颈部疼痛患者的团体颈部和上肢运动计划(GET)的有效性。总共151名成年患者被随机分配到GET组或UP组。主要测量指标是在6周、6个月和12个月时的诺斯威克公园颈部疼痛问卷(NPQ)评分。混合模型分析表明,在任何随访时间点,接受GET的患者与接受UP的患者在颈部疼痛和功能方面均无差异。两种干预措施均使NPQ评分有适度的显著且具有临床意义的改善,基线至12个月期间的变化评分约为9%。GET和UP都是治疗非特异性颈部疼痛患者的合适临床干预措施,然而,为了使这些方法的效果最大化,可能需要考虑患者对治疗的偏好以及解决依从性障碍的针对性策略。