Suppr超能文献

神经根病性颈痛的分类系统:系统评价。

Neck pain with radiculopathy: A systematic review of classification systems.

机构信息

Centre of Precision Rehabilitation for Spinal Pain (CPR Spine), School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, United Kingdom.

Centre of Precision Rehabilitation for Spinal Pain (CPR Spine), School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, United Kingdom; School of Physical Therapy, Western University, Elborn College, London, Ontario, N6G 1H1, Canada.

出版信息

Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2021 Aug;54:102389. doi: 10.1016/j.msksp.2021.102389. Epub 2021 May 6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Disparities in eligibility criteria for cervical radiculopathy (CR) in clinical trials have been acknowledged previously. The increasing use of CR related neck pain classification systems to inform eligibility criteria in clinical trials warrants evaluation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate existing neck pain classification systems for CR.

DESIGN

Systematic review and critical appraisal, reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.

METHODS

Database searches were performed from inception until 31/7/2020. Neck pain classification systems containing CR as a component were included. Methodological quality of each classification system was assessed using seven measurement property domains and scored using a framework developed by Buchbinder and colleagues. Classification criteria for CR from classification systems assessed as moderate or good quality were narratively synthesised using inductive content analysis which consisted of selecting unit of analysis, open coding, grouping and categorisation.

RESULTS

Out of 19,975 references, 14,893 remained after elimination of duplicates with 17 articles reporting 11 classification systems included. Five moderate and one good quality classification systems were identified. Nine classification criteria for CR were derived, including dermatomal sensory deficit, positive Spurling's test, positive upper limb tension test.

CONCLUSION

All classification systems had methodological limitations with Childs et al. (2008) classification system identified as good quality and most clinically useful. Future studies should investigate the reliability of Childs et al. (2008) classification system as it has the potential to further strengthen its methodological quality and clinical utility. The nine derived classification criteria can inform eligibility criteria in future trials.

摘要

背景

先前已经承认,颈椎神经根病(CR)临床试验的纳入标准存在差异。越来越多地使用与 CR 相关的颈部疼痛分类系统来为临床试验的纳入标准提供信息,这需要进行评估。

目的

评估现有的 CR 相关颈部疼痛分类系统。

设计

系统评价和批判性评估,按照系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南进行报告。

方法

从创建数据库到 2020 年 7 月 31 日进行数据库检索。纳入包含 CR 作为组成部分的颈部疼痛分类系统。使用 Buchbinder 及其同事制定的框架评估每个分类系统的七个测量属性领域的方法学质量,并进行评分。对评估为中等或高质量的分类系统的 CR 分类标准进行叙述性综合,使用归纳内容分析,包括选择分析单位、开放编码、分组和分类。

结果

在 19975 条参考文献中,消除重复项后,剩余 14893 条,其中有 17 篇文章报道了 11 个分类系统。确定了 5 个中等质量和 1 个高质量的分类系统。得出了 9 个 CR 的分类标准,包括感觉神经缺陷、Spurling 试验阳性、上肢张力试验阳性。

结论

所有分类系统都存在方法学局限性,Childs 等人(2008)分类系统被认为是高质量和最具临床意义的分类系统。未来的研究应调查 Childs 等人(2008)分类系统的可靠性,因为它有可能进一步加强其方法学质量和临床实用性。这 9 个衍生的分类标准可以为未来的试验提供纳入标准。

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