Suppr超能文献

剂量还是内容?慢性下腰痛患者疼痛康复计划的有效性:一项系统评价。

Dose or content? Effectiveness of pain rehabilitation programs for patients with chronic low back pain: a systematic review.

作者信息

Waterschoot Franka P C, Dijkstra Pieter U, Hollak Niek, de Vries Haitze J, Geertzen Jan H B, Reneman Michiel F

机构信息

Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Center for Rehabilitation, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, The Netherlands Center for Human Movement Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Pain. 2014 Jan;155(1):179-189. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2013.10.006. Epub 2013 Oct 14.

Abstract

We sought to systematically analyze the influence of dose of pain rehabilitation programs (PRPs) for patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) on disability, work participation, and quality of life (QoL). Literature searches were performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, and Embase up to October 2012, using MeSH terms, other relevant terms and free-text words. Randomized controlled trials in English, Dutch, and German, analyzing the effect of PRPs, were included. One of the analyzed interventions had to be a PRP. Outcomes should be reported regarding disability, work participation, or QoL. To analyze dose, the number of contact hours should be reported. Two reviewers independently selected titles, abstracts, and full-text articles on the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated for each intervention, and influence of dose variables was analyzed by a mixed model analysis. Eighteen studies were identified, reporting a wide variety of dose variables and contents of PRPs. Analyses showed that evaluation moment, number of disciplines, type of intervention, duration of intervention in weeks, percentage of women, and age influenced the outcomes of PRPs. The independent effect of dose variables could not be distinguished from content because these variables were strongly associated. Because dose variables were never studied separately or reported independently, we were not able to disentangle the relationship between dose, content, and effects of PRPs on disability, work participation, and QoL.

摘要

我们试图系统分析慢性下腰痛(CLBP)患者疼痛康复计划(PRP)的剂量对残疾、工作参与度和生活质量(QoL)的影响。截至2012年10月,我们在PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、Cinahl和Embase中进行文献检索,使用医学主题词、其他相关术语和自由文本词。纳入了以英文、荷兰文和德文发表的分析PRP效果的随机对照试验。其中一项分析的干预措施必须是PRP。应报告有关残疾、工作参与度或生活质量的结果。为了分析剂量,应报告接触时间的数量。两名评审员根据纳入和排除标准独立选择标题、摘要和全文文章。提取数据并评估偏倚风险。计算每种干预措施的效应大小(ES),并通过混合模型分析剂量变量的影响。共识别出18项研究,报告了各种剂量变量和PRP的内容。分析表明,评估时间、学科数量、干预类型、以周为单位的干预持续时间、女性百分比和年龄会影响PRP的结果。由于这些变量密切相关,无法区分剂量变量与内容的独立效应。由于从未单独研究或独立报告剂量变量,我们无法理清PRP的剂量、内容与残疾、工作参与度和生活质量之间的关系。

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