Suppr超能文献

二级医疗机构中成人原发性冻结肩的管理(英国 FROST):一项多中心、实用、三臂、优效随机临床试验。

Management of adults with primary frozen shoulder in secondary care (UK FROST): a multicentre, pragmatic, three-arm, superiority randomised clinical trial.

机构信息

York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK; Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Botnar Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; The James Cook University Hospital, South Tees Hospitals National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, Middlesbrough, UK.

York Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.

出版信息

Lancet. 2020 Oct 3;396(10256):977-989. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31965-6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Manipulation under anaesthesia and arthroscopic capsular release are costly and invasive treatments for frozen shoulder, but their effectiveness remains uncertain. We compared these two surgical interventions with early structured physiotherapy plus steroid injection.

METHODS

In this multicentre, pragmatic, three-arm, superiority randomised trial, patients referred to secondary care for treatment of primary frozen shoulder were recruited from 35 hospital sites in the UK. Participants were adults (≥18 years) with unilateral frozen shoulder, characterised by restriction of passive external rotation (≥50%) in the affected shoulder. Participants were randomly assigned (2:2:1) to receive manipulation under anaesthesia, arthroscopic capsular release, or early structured physiotherapy. In manipulation under anaesthesia, the surgeon manipulated the affected shoulder to stretch and tear the tight capsule while the participant was under general anaesthesia, supplemented by a steroid injection. Arthroscopic capsular release, also done under general anaesthesia, involved surgically dividing the contracted anterior capsule in the rotator interval, followed by manipulation, with optional steroid injection. Both forms of surgery were followed by postprocedural physiotherapy. Early structured physiotherapy involved mobilisation techniques and a graduated home exercise programme supplemented by a steroid injection. Both early structured physiotherapy and postprocedural physiotherapy involved 12 sessions during up to 12 weeks. The primary outcome was the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS; 0-48) at 12 months after randomisation, analysed by initial randomisation group. We sought a target difference of 5 OSS points between physiotherapy and either form of surgery, or 4 points between manipulation and capsular release. The trial registration is ISRCTN48804508.

FINDINGS

Between April 1, 2015, and Dec 31, 2017, we screened 914 patients, of whom 503 (55%) were randomly assigned. At 12 months, OSS data were available for 189 (94%) of 201 participants assigned to manipulation (mean estimate 38·3 points, 95% CI 36·9 to 39·7), 191 (94%) of 203 participants assigned to capsular release (40·3 points, 38·9 to 41·7), and 93 (94%) of 99 participants assigned to physiotherapy (37·2 points, 35·3 to 39·2). The mean group differences were 2·01 points (0·10 to 3·91) between the capsular release and manipulation groups, 3·06 points (0·71 to 5·41) between capsular release and physiotherapy, and 1·05 points (-1·28 to 3·39) between manipulation and physiotherapy. Eight serious adverse events were reported with capsular release and two with manipulation. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year, manipulation under anaesthesia had the highest probability of being cost-effective (0·8632, compared with 0·1366 for physiotherapy and 0·0002 for capsular release).

INTERPRETATION

All mean differences on the assessment of shoulder pain and function (OSS) at the primary endpoint of 12 months were less than the target differences. Therefore, none of the three interventions were clinically superior. Arthoscopic capsular release carried higher risks, and manipulation under anaesthesia was the most cost-effective.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

摘要

背景

在全麻下进行手法松解和关节镜下囊切开术是治疗冻结肩的昂贵且有创的治疗方法,但它们的疗效仍不确定。我们将这两种手术干预与早期结构化物理治疗加类固醇注射进行了比较。

方法

在这项多中心、实用、三臂、优效性随机试验中,从英国 35 家医院招募了因原发性冻结肩接受二级治疗的患者。参与者为成年(≥18 岁)单侧冻结肩患者,表现为患肩被动外旋受限(≥50%)。参与者被随机分配(2:2:1)接受全麻下手法松解、关节镜下囊切开术或早期结构化物理治疗。在全麻下手法松解中,在参与者接受全身麻醉时,外科医生操纵受影响的肩膀以伸展和撕裂紧绷的囊,同时辅以类固醇注射。关节镜下囊切开术也在全身麻醉下进行,涉及在旋转间隔处切开收缩的前囊,然后进行操纵,可选择注射类固醇。两种手术均在术后进行物理治疗。早期结构化物理治疗包括动员技术和分级家庭运动计划,辅以类固醇注射。早期结构化物理治疗和术后物理治疗在 12 周内最多进行 12 次。主要结局是随机分组后 12 个月的牛津肩部评分(OSS;0-48),按初始随机分组进行分析。我们寻求物理治疗与任何一种手术形式之间的 OSS 差值为 5 分,或手法松解与囊切开术之间的 OSS 差值为 4 分。该试验的注册是 ISRCTN48804508。

发现

2015 年 4 月 1 日至 2017 年 12 月 31 日,我们筛选了 914 名患者,其中 503 名(55%)被随机分配。在 12 个月时,201 名接受手法松解(平均估计值为 38.3 分,95%CI 36.9 至 39.7)、203 名接受囊切开术(40.3 分,38.9 至 41.7)和 99 名接受物理治疗(37.2 分,35.3 至 39.2)的参与者分别有 189 名(94%)、191 名(94%)和 93 名(94%)提供了 OSS 数据。两组间的平均差值分别为囊切开术与手法松解组间 2.01 分(0.10 至 3.91),囊切开术与物理治疗组间 3.06 分(0.71 至 5.41),以及手法松解与物理治疗组间 1.05 分(-1.28 至 3.39)。报道了 8 例与囊切开术相关的严重不良事件和 2 例与手法松解相关的严重不良事件。在支付意愿阈值为每质量调整生命年 20000 英镑时,全麻下手法松解的成本效益最高(0.8632,与物理治疗的 0.1366 和囊切开术的 0.0002 相比)。

解释

在 12 个月的主要终点时,所有对肩部疼痛和功能(OSS)的评估的平均差异均小于目标差异。因此,三种干预措施均无临床优势。关节镜下囊切开术风险较高,全麻下手法松解的成本效益最高。

资助

英国国家卫生研究院卫生技术评估计划。

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