Lukacs Michael J, Peters Nicole, Minetama Masakazu, Kowalski Katie L, Stanley Meagan, Jayaprakash Keerthana, Walton David M, Rushton Alison B
School of Physical Therapy, Western University, London, ON, N6G 1H1, Canada.
London Health Sciences Centre, Health Disciplines, London, Canada.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024 Oct 1;25(1):763. doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07892-2.
Despite the burden of low back pain (LBP) there is no currently accepted definition for its recovery, nor is there a gold standard for measurement. In addition, it is currently unclear how the perspective of patients are used in making recovery determinations. The purpose of this mixed study systematic review across both quantitative and qualitative literature was to (1) explore how recovery has been defined and measured for patients experiencing LBP, and (2) examine how the perspectives of patients and providers for recovery of LBP align or differ.
This was a mixed study systematic review. Key databases were searched from inception until February 20, 2023: Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, PEDro looking for sources examining definitions and measures of recovery in patients with LBP. Grey literature was identified through the ProQuest Thesis & Dissertation database. Two reviewers used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool for quality assessment of both qualitative and quantitative studies to explore definitions, measurements and perspective of recovery.
466 original studies were included: 12 qualitative studies, 88 quantitative randomized control trials, 348 quantitative non-randomized studies, 16 quantitative descriptive studies, and two mixed methods studies. Most of the time recovery was not defined, with six other themes identified: comparison of scores, in relation to a singular cut-off score, improvement of absence of clinical symptoms, a return to a pre-injury state, change/improvement score from baseline and as a process/trajectory. For recovery measurements, six themes described the data: multiple measures, single measure excluding recovery, a recovery measure, recovery and an additional measure, pain and an additional measure, or indirect/ not specified. Lastly recovery perspectives were made from either the patient, provider, or a combination of patient and provider.
For patients living with LBP, the concept of recovery continues to lack consensus for its definition and measurement in patients with LBP. The perspectives of patients were mostly not preserved in making recovery determinations. Urgent action is needed to generate consensus across clinicians, researchers, and patients regarding how recovery should be defined and measured. A multitude of study-specific definitions limit knowledge syntheses and definition of best practice.
尽管腰痛(LBP)负担沉重,但目前尚无被广泛接受的康复定义,也没有测量的金标准。此外,目前尚不清楚患者的观点在康复判定中是如何被运用的。这项跨越定量和定性文献的混合研究系统评价的目的是:(1)探讨如何对腰痛患者的康复进行定义和测量;(2)研究患者和医疗服务提供者对腰痛康复的观点是如何一致或不同的。
这是一项混合研究系统评价。从数据库建立到2023年2月20日,检索了关键数据库:医学索引数据库(Medline)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(EMBASE)、护理学与健康领域数据库(CINAHL)、考科蓝图书馆(Cochrane)、循证医学数据库(PEDro),以寻找有关腰痛患者康复定义和测量的研究资料。通过ProQuest论文与学位论文数据库识别灰色文献。两名评审员使用混合方法评估工具对定性和定量研究进行质量评估,以探讨康复的定义、测量和观点。
纳入466项原始研究:12项定性研究、88项定量随机对照试验、348项定量非随机研究、16项定量描述性研究和2项混合方法研究。大多数情况下,康复未被定义,还确定了其他六个主题:分数比较、相对于单一临界值分数、临床症状消失或改善、恢复到受伤前状态、与基线相比的变化/改善分数以及作为一个过程/轨迹。对于康复测量,六个主题描述了相关数据:多种测量、排除康复的单一测量、康复测量、康复及附加测量、疼痛及附加测量或间接/未明确说明的测量。最后,康复观点来自患者、医疗服务提供者或患者与医疗服务提供者的组合。
对于腰痛患者,康复的概念在定义和测量方面仍缺乏共识。在做出康复判定时,大多没有考虑患者的观点。需要采取紧急行动,就如何定义和测量康复在临床医生、研究人员和患者之间达成共识。众多特定研究的定义限制了知识的综合和最佳实践的定义。