Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, DK-5230, Odense M, Denmark.
Nordic Institute of Chiropractic and Clinical Biomechanics, Campusvej 55, DK-5230, Odense M, Denmark.
Syst Rev. 2019 Aug 27;8(1):220. doi: 10.1186/s13643-019-1125-2.
Neck pain is a major public health problem. Our objective was to describe differences in measures of movement and posture between people with and without neck pain.
PubMed and Embase were searched before 15 February 2019 for studies comparing people with neck pain with controls using electronic measurements of neck movement and/or posture. Data were extracted on participants, device, test methods, active range of motion (RoM) and quality of motion, joint positioning sense, and posture. Study quality was assessed using the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews (QUADAS) and Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) guidelines.
Thirty-six studies were included: 24 studies included measurement of active RoM, 15 quality of motion, 12 joint positioning sense, and 5 cervical spine posture. Measurements and test methods were heterogeneous. The reporting of study populations and methods were poor, whereas devices and statistics were well described. All studies on RoM showed reduced active RoM in people with neck pain when compared with controls, 5 of 10 studies reported reduced movement speed for people with neck pain, and 5 of 9 studies reported significantly greater joint positioning error for people with neck pain compared with controls. Due to heterogeneous test parameters and methods, no conclusion regarding differences in conjunct motion, tracking a motion pattern, and measures of posture could be drawn.
People with neck pain appear to have reduced active RoM, movement speed, and head repositioning accuracy when compared with controls. However, quality of reviewed studies was low and better descriptions of participants and methods are required before firm conclusions can be drawn.
颈部疼痛是一个主要的公共健康问题。我们的目的是描述有颈部疼痛和无颈部疼痛人群之间的运动和姿势测量值的差异。
在 2019 年 2 月 15 日之前,我们通过检索 PubMed 和 Embase,查找了比较有颈部疼痛和无颈部疼痛人群使用电子测量颈运动和/或姿势的研究。我们提取了参与者、设备、测试方法、主动活动范围(ROM)和运动质量、关节位置觉和姿势的数据。使用系统评价中包含的诊断准确性研究质量评估(QUADAS)和可靠性与一致性研究报告指南(GRRAS)指南评估了研究质量。
共纳入 36 项研究:24 项研究包括主动 ROM 测量值,15 项研究包括运动质量,12 项研究包括关节位置觉,5 项研究包括颈椎姿势。测量值和测试方法存在异质性。研究人群和方法的报告较差,而设备和统计方法的描述较好。与对照组相比,所有关于 ROM 的研究均显示颈部疼痛人群的主动 ROM 减少,10 项研究中有 5 项研究报告颈部疼痛人群的运动速度降低,9 项研究中有 5 项研究报告颈部疼痛人群的关节位置误差显著大于对照组。由于测试参数和方法存在异质性,无法得出关于协同运动、跟踪运动模式和姿势测量值的差异的结论。
与对照组相比,颈部疼痛人群的主动 ROM、运动速度和头部重新定位准确性似乎较低。然而,回顾研究的质量较低,需要更好地描述参与者和方法,才能得出明确的结论。