a Department of Physical Therapy , Federal University of Pernambuco , Recife , Brazil.
Disabil Rehabil. 2018 May;40(9):988-996. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2017.1282989. Epub 2017 Feb 10.
To determine the quality of evidence on the use of whole-body vibration (WBV) in controlling pain, fatigue and quality of life in women with fibromyalgia.
The search involved MEDLINE/PubMed, LILACS, CINAHL, CENTRAL and PEDro, without temporal or language restriction. The terms "fibromyalgia" and "whole-body vibration" were used. Trials (randomized or quasi-randomized) that compared a group of women with fibromyalgia who received WBV to a control group with no intervention were included. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE system. The quantitative evaluation by meta-analysis was also used, whenever possible.
Three studies were included. Regarding the outcome pain, it has not been possible to assess the magnitude of effect of treatment. The result of the outcome fatigue showed no difference between the groups after the proposed intervention (Mean Difference: 0.01; 95% CI: -0.11 to 0.09). The meta-analysis for the outcome quality of life showed a small difference between groups, favoring the WBV group (Standard Mean Difference: 0.4943; p = 0.05; 95% CI: 0.0045 to 0.9841).
The results, based on very low quality of evidence, were inconclusive regarding pain, and showed no clinically important effects on the control of fatigue and improvement of quality of life. Implications for rehabilitation There is no evidence to support the use of whole-body vibration for pain treatment of women with fibromyalgia. The use of whole-body vibration in women with fibromyalgia showed no clinically important effects in the control of fatigue and improvement of quality of life.
确定全身振动(WBV)在控制纤维肌痛女性疼痛、疲劳和生活质量方面的证据质量。
检索了 MEDLINE/PubMed、LILACS、CINAHL、CENTRAL 和 PEDro,没有时间和语言限制。使用了“纤维肌痛”和“全身振动”这两个术语。纳入了比较一组接受 WBV 的纤维肌痛女性与无干预对照组的随机或半随机试验。使用 GRADE 系统评估证据质量。只要可能,还使用了荟萃分析进行定量评估。
纳入了 3 项研究。关于疼痛结局,无法评估治疗效果的大小。疲劳结局的结果显示,干预后两组之间没有差异(平均差异:0.01;95%置信区间:-0.11 至 0.09)。生活质量结局的荟萃分析显示,两组之间存在微小差异,WBV 组更有利(标准均数差:0.4943;p=0.05;95%置信区间:0.0045 至 0.9841)。
基于极低质量证据,结果对疼痛的结论不确定,对疲劳控制和生活质量改善也没有显示出临床上重要的影响。康复意义:没有证据支持全身振动用于治疗纤维肌痛女性的疼痛。全身振动在纤维肌痛女性中使用对疲劳控制和生活质量改善没有显示出临床上重要的影响。