Suppr超能文献

特定颈部运动治疗非特异性颈部疼痛的疗效;患者选择策略和个体化运动的有效性-系统评价和荟萃分析。

Effectiveness of Specific Neck Exercise for Nonspecific Neck Pain; Usefulness of Strategies for Patient Selection and Tailored Exercise-A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Deusto, Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain.

Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Nursing, University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU, Leioa, Spain.

出版信息

Phys Ther. 2022 Feb 1;102(2). doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzab259.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Specific neck exercises (SNE) targeting deep cervical flexors and extensors are commonly used for the treatment of nonspecific neck pain (NSNP). However, whether SNE are more effective than alternative exercise interventions (AEI) remains unclear. Furthermore, it has been postulated that SNE may be most effective when they are tailored and targeted to patients with evidence of motor control dysfunction, yet this notion also remains unproven. The objectives of this study were to compare the effectiveness of SNE with that of AEI for reducing pain and disability in people with NSNP and to assess whether the effectiveness of SNE is increased when the exercises are tailored and provided to patients with evidence of motor control dysfunction.

METHODS

For this systematic review with meta-analysis, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database were searched. Eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of SNE against that of AEI in people with NSNP. Meta-analysis included subgroup analyses to determine the effect of exercise tailoring and participant selection criteria on the effectiveness of SNE.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included. Meta-analysis revealed greater effectiveness of SNE in the short to medium term for reducing pain (pooled standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.41; 95% CI = -0.76 to -0.06; P = .02) and disability (pooled SMD = -0.41; 95% CI = -0.78 to -0.04; P = .03) but no differences in the long term for pain (pooled SMD = -1.30; 95% CI = -3.35 to 0.75; P = .21) and disability (pooled SMD = -1.81; 95% CI = -4.29 to 0.67; P = .15), although evidence was limited for the latter. The effectiveness of SNE was not superior in studies that included only participants with motor control dysfunction or when exercises were tailored to each participant. Overall, the studies were of low quality. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation revealed low certainty, serious risk of bias, and inconsistency of findings for short- to medium-term effects and very low certainty, serious risk of bias, and very serious inconsistency for long-term effects.

CONCLUSION

The preferential use of SNE may be recommended to achieve better short- to medium-term outcomes, although the low quality of evidence affects the certainty of these findings. Currently used strategies for selecting patients and tailoring SNE are not supported by the evidence and therefore cannot be recommended for clinical practice.

IMPACT

SNE are more effective than AEI for reducing pain and disability in patients with NSNP in the short to medium term, but overall evidence is of low quality, affecting the certainty of the findings. Tests of muscle dysfunction (mostly the craniocervical flexion test) currently used in studies to select patients and tailor SNE do not result in greater effectiveness of these exercises.

LAY SUMMARY

Evidence suggests SNE are more effective than other forms of exercise, although evidence is overall of low quality. Use of the craniocervical flexion test in isolation to select participants and/or tailor SNE cannot be recommended.

摘要

目的

针对深层颈屈肌和伸肌的特定颈部运动(SNE)常用于治疗非特异性颈部疼痛(NSNP)。然而,SNE 是否比其他运动干预(AEI)更有效仍不清楚。此外,有人假设当 SNE 针对有运动控制功能障碍证据的患者进行调整和靶向时,SNE 可能最有效,但这一概念仍未得到证实。本研究的目的是比较 SNE 与 AEI 在减轻 NSNP 患者疼痛和残疾方面的有效性,并评估当 SNE 进行调整并提供给有运动控制功能障碍证据的患者时,其有效性是否会增加。

方法

这是一项系统评价和荟萃分析,检索了 Medline、Web of Science、Scopus 和 Physiotherapy Evidence Database。纳入标准包括评估 SNE 与 AEI 在 NSNP 患者中的有效性的随机对照试验。荟萃分析包括亚组分析,以确定运动调整和参与者选择标准对 SNE 有效性的影响。

结果

纳入了 12 项研究。荟萃分析显示,SNE 在短期至中期内更能有效减轻疼痛(汇总标准化均数差[SMD]=-0.41;95%置信区间[CI]:-0.76 至 -0.06;P=.02)和残疾(汇总 SMD=-0.41;95%CI:-0.78 至 -0.04;P=.03),但在长期内疼痛(汇总 SMD=-1.30;95%CI:-3.35 至 0.75;P=.21)和残疾(汇总 SMD=-1.81;95%CI:-4.29 至 0.67;P=.15)方面无差异,尽管后者的证据有限。仅纳入运动控制功能障碍患者的研究或根据每个患者调整运动的研究中,SNE 的有效性并不优越。总体而言,这些研究的质量较低。推荐评估、制定与评估分级显示,短期至中期效果的证据确定性低,存在严重偏倚风险和结果不一致,长期效果的证据确定性非常低,存在严重偏倚风险和非常严重的结果不一致。

结论

尽管证据质量较低,影响了这些发现的确定性,但 SNE 可能更适合用于实现更好的短期至中期效果。目前用于选择患者和调整 SNE 的策略没有得到证据的支持,因此不能推荐用于临床实践。

影响

SNE 在短期至中期内比 AEI 更能有效减轻 NSNP 患者的疼痛和残疾,但总体证据质量较低,影响了发现的确定性。目前在研究中用于选择患者和调整 SNE 的肌肉功能障碍测试(主要是颅颈屈伸测试)并不能使这些运动更有效。

要点

有证据表明,SNE 比其他形式的运动更有效,尽管总体证据质量较低。不能仅使用颅颈屈伸测试来选择参与者和/或调整 SNE。

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