Suppr超能文献

物理治疗对治疗外侧上髁炎的疗效:一项荟萃分析。

Efficacy of physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis.

作者信息

Weber Christoph, Thai Veronika, Neuheuser Katrin, Groover Katharina, Christ Oliver

机构信息

Department of Psychology, TU Darmstadt, Alexanderstrasse 10, 64287, Darmstadt, Germany.

DMB Die MPU Berater GmbH, Bad Nauheimerstrasse 4, 64289, Darmstadt, Germany.

出版信息

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015 Aug 25;16:223. doi: 10.1186/s12891-015-0665-4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis (LE) often comprises movement therapies, extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ECSWT), low level laser therapy (LLLT), low frequency electrical stimulation or pulsed electromagnetic fields. Still, only ECSWT and LLLT have been meta-analytically researched.

METHODS

PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane database were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methodological quality of each study was rated with an adapted version of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklist. Pain reduction (the difference between treatment and control groups at the end of trials) and pain relief (the change in pain from baseline to the end of trials) were calculated with mean differences (MD) and 95%-Confidence intervals (95 % CI).

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred thirty eight studies were identified. One thousand seventy of those did not meet inclusion criteria. After full articles were retrieved 16 studies met inclusion criteria and 12 studies reported comparable outcome variables. Analyses were conducted for overall pain relief, pain relief during maximum handgrip strength tests, and maximum handgrip strength. There were not enough studies to conduct an analysis of physical function or other outcome variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences between treatment and control groups were larger than differences between treatments. Control group gains were 50 to 66% as high as treatment group gains. Still, only treatment groups with their combination of therapy specific and non-therapy specific factors reliably met criteria for clinical relevance. Results are discussed with respect to stability and their potential meaning for the use of non-therapy specific agents to optimize patients' gain.

摘要

背景

用于治疗外侧上髁炎(LE)的物理治疗通常包括运动疗法、体外冲击波疗法(ECSWT)、低强度激光疗法(LLLT)、低频电刺激或脉冲电磁场。然而,仅有ECSWT和LLLT经过了荟萃分析研究。

方法

系统检索了PUBMED、EMBASE和Cochrane数据库中的随机对照试验(RCT)。每项研究的方法学质量使用苏格兰跨学院指南网络(SIGN)清单的改编版进行评分。采用均数差(MD)和95%置信区间(95%CI)计算疼痛减轻情况(试验结束时治疗组与对照组之间的差异)和疼痛缓解情况(从基线到试验结束时疼痛的变化)。

结果

共识别出1138项研究。其中1070项不符合纳入标准。检索全文后,16项研究符合纳入标准,12项研究报告了可比的结局变量。对总体疼痛缓解、最大握力测试期间的疼痛缓解以及最大握力进行了分析。没有足够的研究对身体功能或其他结局变量进行分析。

结论

治疗组与对照组之间的差异大于不同治疗方法之间的差异。对照组的改善程度为治疗组改善程度的50%至66%。然而,只有将治疗特异性和非治疗特异性因素相结合的治疗组才能可靠地达到临床相关性标准。讨论了结果的稳定性及其对于使用非治疗特异性药物优化患者改善情况的潜在意义。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2a56/4549077/60c843d5742c/12891_2015_665_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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