Trevelyan Esmé G, Turner Warren A, Robinson Nicola
Faculty of Health and Social Care, London South Bank University, London, UK.
Acupunct Med. 2015 Feb;33(1):42-50. doi: 10.1136/acupmed-2014-010668. Epub 2014 Dec 8.
Little is known about how a Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) approach could be used to treat phantom limb pain (PLP). There is currently no standard acupuncture protocol in the literature to treat this syndrome.
To achieve consensus among a group of acupuncture practitioners on the pathology and recommended treatment of PLP and devise an acupuncture protocol for the treatment of this condition.
A classical Delphi approach was used using two parallel online Delphi studies. One study focused on participants with past experience of treating PLP (TPLP, n=7) and the other on practitioners with no past experience (NTPLP, n=16). Two hypothetical case studies were provided and participants were asked for responses on how they would treat these patients. Three rounds were included. Participants were also invited to rate and comment on the finalised protocol. Round 1 data were analysed using content analysis. In subsequent rounds an a priori criterion for defining consensus was set at ≤1.75 IQR. A group median of 5-6 was considered to mean 'agree'.
19 participants completed all Delphi rounds (12 NTPLP, 7 TPLP). 108 NTPLP and 76 TPLP statements were generated and circulated in round 2; 53% of the NTPLP statements and 62% of the TPLP statements met consensus in round 2 and 45% of the NTPLP statements and 44% of the TPLP statements met consensus in round 3. Participants all agreed with the final protocol developed.
The protocol developed does not claim to be best practice but provides a preliminary consensus from practitioners practising acupuncture for the treatment of PLP.
关于如何运用中医方法治疗幻肢痛(PLP),人们所知甚少。目前文献中尚无治疗该综合征的标准针灸方案。
在一组针灸从业者中就幻肢痛的病理及推荐治疗方法达成共识,并设计出治疗该病症的针灸方案。
采用经典德尔菲法,进行两项平行的在线德尔菲研究。一项研究聚焦于有治疗幻肢痛经验的参与者(TPLP,n = 7),另一项研究针对无过往经验的从业者(NTPLP,n = 16)。提供了两个假设病例研究,并要求参与者就如何治疗这些患者做出回应。共进行三轮。还邀请参与者对最终确定的方案进行评分和评论。第一轮数据采用内容分析法进行分析。在后续轮次中,将定义共识的先验标准设定为≤1.75四分位距。5 - 6的组中位数被视为“同意”。
19名参与者完成了所有德尔菲轮次(12名NTPLP,7名TPLP)。第二轮共产生并分发了108条NTPLP陈述和76条TPLP陈述;第二轮中53%的NTPLP陈述和62%的TPLP陈述达成了共识,第三轮中45%的NTPLP陈述和44%的TPLP陈述达成了共识。参与者均同意所制定的最终方案。
所制定的方案并非宣称是最佳实践,但提供了来自从事针灸治疗幻肢痛的从业者的初步共识。