Suppr超能文献

多学科临床疼痛状况方案的有效性:伞式综述。

Effectiveness of multidisciplinary programmes for clinical pain conditions: An umbrella review.

机构信息

Pain and Rehabilitation Centre, and Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, SE-581 85 Linköping, Sweden.

出版信息

J Rehabil Med. 2018 Sep 28;50(9):779-791. doi: 10.2340/16501977-2377.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the strength of the evidence for multimodal/multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes (MMRPs) for common pain outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, PsychInfo, PEDro and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to August 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials or controlled clinical trials and qualitative systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials and non-randomized controlled trials were considered eligible.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers abstracted data and evaluated the methodological quality of the reviews. The strength of the evidence was graded using several criteria.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twelve meta-analyses, including 134 associations, and 24 qualitative systematic reviews were selected. None of the associations in meta-analyses and qualitative systematic reviews were supported by either strong or highly suggestive evidence. In meta-analyses, only 8 (6%) associations that were significant at p-value ≤ 0.05 were supported by suggestive evidence, whereas 44 (33%) associations were supported by weak evidence. Moderate evidence was found only in 4 (17%) qualitative systematic reviews, while 14 (58%) qualitative systematic reviews had limited evidence.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence that MMRPs are effective for prevalent clinical pain conditions. The majority of the evidence remains ambiguous and susceptible to biases due to the small sample size of participants and the limited number of studies included.

摘要

目的

评估常见疼痛结局的多模式/多学科康复方案(MMRPs)的证据强度。

资料来源

从建库到 2017 年 8 月,检索了 PubMed、PsychInfo、PEDro 和 Cochrane Library。

研究选择

符合条件的研究包括随机对照试验的荟萃分析或对照临床试验,以及随机对照试验和非随机对照试验的定性系统评价。

资料提取

两名独立评审员提取数据并评估综述的方法学质量。使用多种标准对证据的强度进行分级。

资料综合

选择了 12 项荟萃分析,包括 134 项关联,以及 24 项定性系统评价。荟萃分析和定性系统评价中的关联均没有得到强有力或高度提示性证据的支持。在荟萃分析中,只有 8 项(6%)在 p 值≤0.05 时显著的关联得到提示性证据的支持,而 44 项(33%)关联得到弱证据的支持。仅在 4 项(17%)定性系统评价中发现了中度证据,而 14 项(58%)定性系统评价的证据有限。

结论

没有证据表明 MMRPs 对常见的临床疼痛状况有效。由于参与者样本量小,纳入的研究数量有限,大多数证据仍然模棱两可,容易受到偏倚的影响。

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