Suppr超能文献

足底足跟痛治疗方案的比较效果:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

Comparative effectiveness of treatment options for plantar heel pain: a systematic review with network meta-analysis.

机构信息

Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.

Centre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK.

出版信息

Br J Sports Med. 2019 Feb;53(3):182-194. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098998. Epub 2018 Jun 28.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of current treatment options for plantar heel pain (PHP).

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA).

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, PEDro, Cochrane Database, Web of Science and WHO Clinical Trials Platform were searched from their inception until January 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with PHP investigating common treatments (ie, corticosteroid injection, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, therapeutic exercise, orthoses and/or extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT)) compared with each other or a no treatment, placebo/sham control.

DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted and checked for accuracy and completeness by pairs of reviewers. Primary outcomes were pain and function. Comparative treatment effects were analysed by random effects NMA in the short term, medium term and long term. Relative ranking of treatments was assessed by surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities (0-100 scale).

RESULTS

Thirty-one RCTs (total n=2450 patients) were included. There was no evidence of inconsistency detected between direct and indirect treatment comparisons in the networks, but sparse data led to frequently wide CIs. Available evidence does not suggest that any of the commonly used treatments for the management of PHP are better than any other, although corticosteroid injections, alone or in combination with exercise, and ESWT were ranked most likely to be effective for the management of short-term, medium-term and long-term pain or function; placebo/sham/control appeared least likely to be effective; and exercise appeared to only be beneficial for long-term pain or function.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence is equivocal regarding which treatment is the most effective for the management of PHP. Given limited understanding of long-term effects, there is need for large, methodologically robust multicentre RCTs investigating and directly comparing commonly used treatments for the management of PHP.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016046963.

摘要

目的

评估足底筋膜炎(PHP)当前治疗选择的对比疗效。

设计

系统评价和网络荟萃分析(NMA)。

数据来源

从建库起至 2018 年 1 月,检索了 Medline、EMBASE、CINAHL、AMED、PEDro、Cochrane 数据库、Web of Science 和 WHO 临床试验平台,以获取 PHP 成人常见治疗方法(即皮质类固醇注射、非甾体抗炎药、治疗性运动、矫形器和/或体外冲击波治疗(ESWT))比较研究的随机对照试验(RCT)。

研究选择

对足底筋膜炎成人患者进行研究的 RCT,调查常见治疗方法(即皮质类固醇注射、非甾体抗炎药、治疗性运动、矫形器和/或体外冲击波治疗(ESWT))之间的相互比较或与不治疗、安慰剂/假对照的比较。

数据提取和分析

数据由两名评审员进行提取和准确性及完整性核对。主要结局为疼痛和功能。通过短期、中期和长期的随机效应 NMA 分析比较治疗效果。通过累积排序概率曲面下面积(0-100 刻度)评估治疗方法的相对排名。

结果

纳入了 31 项 RCT(总计 2450 名患者)。网络中的直接和间接治疗比较之间没有发现不一致的证据,但数据稀疏导致置信区间较宽。现有证据表明,用于治疗足底筋膜炎的常用方法中,没有一种方法明显优于其他方法,尽管皮质类固醇注射,单独或与运动结合,以及 ESWT 在治疗短期、中期和长期疼痛或功能方面被认为最有效;安慰剂/假对照/控制似乎最无效;运动似乎仅对长期疼痛或功能有益。

结论

目前关于哪种治疗方法最有效地治疗足底筋膜炎的证据尚无定论。鉴于对长期效果的了解有限,需要进行大型、方法学上稳健的多中心 RCT,以调查和直接比较常用于治疗足底筋膜炎的方法。

PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42016046963。

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