Suppr超能文献

机械诊断与治疗系统在脊柱疼痛患者中的可靠性:系统评价。

Reliability of the Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy System in Patients With Spinal Pain: A Systematic Review.

出版信息

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2018 Dec;48(12):923-933. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2018.7876. Epub 2018 Jun 22.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

An updated summary of the evidence for the reliability of the Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) system in patients with spinal pain is needed.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the evidence on the intrarater and interrater reliability of MDT in patients with spinal pain.

METHODS

Searches in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, PEDro, and Scopus were conducted for this systematic review. We included any study design as long as reliability of the MDT method was tested in patients with spinal pain. We collected data on the reliability of MDT to identify main and subsyndromes, directional preference, the centralization phenomenon, and lateral shift. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Quality Appraisal of Diagnostic Reliability and the Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies checklists.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included (8 studies on back pain, pooled n = 2160 patients; 3 studies on neck pain, pooled n = 45 patients; and 3 studies recruited mixed spinal conditions, pooled n = 389 patients). Studies investigating patients with back pain reported kappa estimates ranging from 0.26 to 1.00 (main and subsyndromes), 0.27 to 0.90 (directional preference), and 0.11 to 0.70 (centralization phenomenon). Kappa estimates for studies investigating neck pain ranged from 0.47 to 0.84 (main and subsyndromes) and 0.46 (directional preference). In mixed populations, kappa estimates ranged from 0.56 to 0.96 (main and subsyndromes).

CONCLUSION

The MDT system appears to have acceptable interrater reliability for classifying patients with back pain into main and subsyndromes when applied by therapists who have completed the credentialing examination, but unacceptable reliability in other therapists. We found conflicting evidence regarding the reliability of the MDT system in patients with neck pain or mixed pain locations. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(12):923-933. Epub 22 Jun 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7876.

摘要

背景

需要对机械诊断与治疗(MDT)系统在脊柱疼痛患者中的可靠性证据进行最新总结。

目的

调查 MDT 在脊柱疼痛患者中的内部和外部可靠性的证据。

方法

对 MEDLINE、CINAHL、Embase、PEDro 和 Scopus 进行了系统评价检索。只要对 MDT 方法的可靠性进行了测试,我们就纳入任何研究设计的患者患有脊柱疼痛。我们收集了 MDT 可靠性的数据,以确定主要和次要症状、方向性偏好、集中现象和侧移。使用诊断可靠性质量评估和可靠性和一致性研究报告指南检查表评估研究的方法学质量。

结果

纳入了 12 项研究(8 项腰痛研究,共纳入 2160 例患者;3 项颈痛研究,共纳入 45 例患者;3 项混合脊柱疾病研究,共纳入 389 例患者)。研究腰痛患者的研究报告kappa 估计值范围为 0.26 至 1.00(主要和次要症状)、0.27 至 0.90(方向性偏好)和 0.11 至 0.70(集中现象)。研究颈痛的 kappa 估计值范围为 0.47 至 0.84(主要和次要症状)和 0.46(方向性偏好)。在混合人群中,kappa 估计值范围为 0.56 至 0.96(主要和次要症状)。

结论

在经过认证考试的治疗师对背痛患者进行分类时,MDT 系统似乎具有可接受的内部可靠性,但在其他治疗师中可靠性不可接受。我们发现关于 MDT 系统在颈痛或混合疼痛部位患者中的可靠性存在相互矛盾的证据。

关键词

机械诊断与治疗系统;可靠性;脊柱疼痛;内部一致性;外部一致性

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验