Tetreault Lindsay A, Rhee John, Prather Heidi, Kwon Brian K, Wilson Jefferson R, Martin Allan R, Andersson Ian B, Dembek Anna H, Pagarigan Krystle T, Dettori Joseph R, Fehlings Michael G
Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Global Spine J. 2017 Sep;7(3 Suppl):42S-52S. doi: 10.1177/2192568217700397. Epub 2017 Sep 5.
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review to determine (1) change in function, pain, and quality of life following structured nonoperative treatment for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM); (2) variability of change in function, pain, and quality of life following different types of structured nonoperative treatment; (3) differences in outcomes observed between certain subgroups (eg, baseline severity score, duration of symptoms); and (4) negative outcomes and harms resulting from structured nonoperative treatment. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Collaboration for articles published between January 1, 1950, and February 9, 2015. Studies were included if they evaluated outcomes following structured nonoperative treatment, including therapeutic exercise, manual therapy, cervical bracing, and/or traction. The quality of each study was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and strength of the overall body of evidence was rated using guidelines outlined by the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group. RESULTS: Of the 570 retrieved citations, 8 met inclusion criteria and were summarized in this review. Based on our results, there is very low evidence to suggest that structured nonoperative treatment for DCM results in either a positive or negative change in function as evaluated by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of evidence to determine the role of nonoperative treatment in patients with DCM. However, in the majority of studies, patients did not achieve clinically significant gains in function following structured nonoperative treatment. Furthermore, 23% to 54% of patients managed nonoperatively subsequently underwent surgical treatment.
研究设计:系统评价。 目的:本研究的目的是进行系统评价,以确定:(1)退行性颈椎病(DCM)经结构化非手术治疗后功能、疼痛及生活质量的变化;(2)不同类型结构化非手术治疗后功能、疼痛及生活质量变化的差异;(3)某些亚组(如基线严重程度评分、症状持续时间)之间观察到的结果差异;(4)结构化非手术治疗产生的负面结果及危害。 方法:在Embase、PubMed和Cochrane协作网中对1950年1月1日至2015年2月9日发表的文章进行系统检索。纳入评估结构化非手术治疗(包括治疗性运动、手法治疗、颈部支具和/或牵引)后结果的研究。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估每项研究的质量,并根据推荐评估、制定与评价工作组概述的指南对总体证据强度进行评级。 结果:在检索到的570篇文献中,8篇符合纳入标准并在本综述中进行了总结。根据我们的结果,几乎没有证据表明DCM的结构化非手术治疗会导致日本骨科协会评分评估的功能出现正向或负向变化。 结论:缺乏证据来确定非手术治疗在DCM患者中的作用。然而,在大多数研究中,患者在接受结构化非手术治疗后功能并未取得临床上显著的改善。此外,23%至54%接受非手术治疗的患者随后接受了手术治疗。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013-10-15
J Spine Surg. 2024-6-21
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013-10-15
J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2025-3-14
J Spine Surg. 2024-6-21
J Can Chiropr Assoc. 2022-4
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2021-5-19
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015-6-15
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013-10-15