Zylbergold R S, Piper M C
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1985 Dec;10(10):867-71.
A randomized clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of three commonly employed forms of traction in the treatment of cervical spine disorders. One hundred consenting men and women with disorders of the cervical spine were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups, static traction, intermittent traction, manual traction, or no traction. All patients, regardless of group assignment, were seen twice weekly. The four groups were shown to be similar with regard to age, sex, diagnosis, chronicity, and prescores on the seven outcome measures. Although the entire cohort of neck patients, regardless of group assignment, improved significantly on all the outcome variables over the 6-week period, patients receiving intermittent traction performed significantly better than those assigned to the no traction group in terms of pain (P = 0.03), forward flexion (P = 0.01), right rotation (P = 0.004) and left rotation (P = 0.05).
开展了一项随机临床试验,以评估三种常用牵引方式治疗颈椎疾病的疗效。一百名同意参与的患有颈椎疾病的男性和女性被随机分配到四个治疗组之一:静态牵引组、间歇牵引组、手法牵引组或不牵引组。所有患者,无论分配到哪一组,均每周接受两次检查。结果显示,四组患者在年龄、性别、诊断、病程以及七项结局指标的预评分方面相似。尽管整个颈部疾病患者队列,无论分配到哪一组,在6周期间所有结局变量上均有显著改善,但接受间歇牵引的患者在疼痛(P = 0.03)、前屈(P = 0.01)、右旋(P = 0.004)和左旋(P = 0.05)方面的表现明显优于未牵引组患者。