Centre for Physiotherapy Research, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Department of Allied Health and Medicine, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, UK.
J Physiother. 2014 Mar;60(1):13-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jphys.2013.12.003. Epub 2014 Apr 24.
In women with primary dysmenorrhoea, what is the effect of physiotherapeutic interventions compared to control (either no treatment or placebo/sham) on pain and quality of life?
Systematic review of randomised trials with meta-analysis.
Women with primary dysmenorrhea.
Any form of physiotherapy treatment.
The primary outcome was menstrual pain intensity and the secondary outcome was quality of life.
The search yielded 222 citations. Of these, 11 were eligible randomised trials and were included in the review. Meta-analysis revealed statistically significant reductions in pain severity on a 0-10 scale from acupuncture (weighted mean difference 2.3, 95% CI 1.6 to 2.9) and acupressure (weighted mean difference 1.4, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.9), when compared to a control group receiving no treatment. However, these are likely to be placebo effects because when the control groups in acupuncture/acupressure trials received a sham instead of no treatment, pain severity did not significantly differ between the groups. Significant reductions in pain intensity on a 0-10 scale were noted in individual trials of heat (by 1.8, 95% CI 0.9 to 2.7), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (2.3, 95% CI 0.03 to 4.2), and yoga (3.2, 95% CI 2.2 to 4.2). Meta-analysis of two trials of spinal manipulation showed no significant reduction in pain. None of the included studies measured quality of life.
Physiotherapists could consider using heat, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and yoga in the management of primary dysmenorrhea. While benefits were also identified for acupuncture and acupressure in no-treatment controlled trials, the absence of significant effects in sham-controlled trials suggests these effects are mainly attributable to placebo effects.
在原发性痛经的女性中,与对照组(不治疗或安慰剂/假治疗)相比,物理治疗干预对疼痛和生活质量有什么影响?
随机试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
原发性痛经的女性。
任何形式的物理治疗。
主要结局是月经疼痛强度,次要结局是生活质量。
检索到 222 篇引文。其中,11 项是符合条件的随机试验,被纳入综述。荟萃分析显示,与不接受治疗的对照组相比,针灸(加权均数差 2.3,95%可信区间 1.6 至 2.9)和指压(加权均数差 1.4,95%可信区间 0.8 至 1.9)在 0-10 疼痛严重程度评分上有统计学意义的降低。然而,这可能是安慰剂效应,因为当针灸/指压试验中的对照组接受假治疗而不是不治疗时,两组之间的疼痛严重程度没有显著差异。在个别热疗(降低 1.8,95%可信区间 0.9 至 2.7)、经皮神经电刺激(2.3,95%可信区间 0.03 至 4.2)和瑜伽(3.2,95%可信区间 2.2 至 4.2)试验中,疼痛强度显著降低。对两项脊柱推拿试验的荟萃分析显示,疼痛无显著减轻。纳入的研究均未测量生活质量。
物理治疗师可以考虑在原发性痛经的治疗中使用热疗、经皮神经电刺激和瑜伽。虽然在不治疗的对照试验中也发现了针灸和指压的益处,但在假治疗对照试验中没有显著效果表明这些效果主要归因于安慰剂效应。