Suppr超能文献

功能性运动障碍专科物理治疗的效果:Physio4FMD随机对照试验

Outcomes of specialist physiotherapy for functional motor disorder: the Physio4FMD RCT.

作者信息

Nielsen Glenn, Marston Louise, Hunter Rachael Maree, Carson Alan, Goldstein Laura H, Holt Kate, Lee Teresa C, Le Novere Marie, Marsden Jonathan, Nazareth Irwin, Noble Hayley, Reuber Markus, Stone Jon, Strudwick Ann-Marie, Suarez Beatriz Santana, Edwards Mark J

机构信息

Neuroscience and Cell Biology Institute, St George's, University of London, London, UK.

Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.

出版信息

Health Technol Assess. 2025 Jul;29(34):1-28. doi: 10.3310/MKAC9495.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Functional motor disorder often causes persistent disabling symptoms that are associated with high healthcare costs. In recent years, specialist physiotherapy, informed by an understanding of functional motor disorder, has emerged as a promising treatment, but there is an absence of evidence of its effectiveness from large randomised controlled trials.

METHODS

We conducted a pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial, comparing specialist physiotherapy for functional motor disorder to treatment as usual, which was defined as community neurological physiotherapy. The primary outcome was the Short Form questionnaire-36 items Physical Functioning domain at 12 months (scale range 0-100, with 100 indicating optimum health). The trial was powered to detect a 9-point difference in the primary outcome with 90% power at the 5% level of significance. Secondary domains of measurement included a patient perception of improvement, health-related quality of life, mobility, anxiety, depression and illness perception. We also completed a health economic analysis with the primary aim of calculating the mean incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year over 12 months. In prespecified analysis plans, we excluded participants from the primary analysis if they were unable to receive their trial-allocated treatment due to COVID-19 lockdown restrictions. Sensitivity analysis explored the impact of this decision.

RESULTS

Between 19 October 2018 and 31 January 2022, 355 adults with functional motor disorder were randomised (1 : 1) to specialist physiotherapy ( = 179) and treatment as usual ( = 176). Eighty-nine participants were excluded due to COVID-19 disruptions. Retention for the primary analysis was 90% for both groups, leaving 241 participants in the primary analysis. At 12 months, there was no between-group difference in the primary outcome (adjusted mean difference 3.5, 95% confidence interval -2.3 to 9.3). However, several secondary outcomes favoured specialist physiotherapy, including the participant perception of improvement, Short Form questionnaire-36 items Mental Health domain, confidence in the diagnosis and two subscales (Personal Control and Illness Coherence) of the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire. There were no differences in the remaining outcomes. At 6 months, the following outcome measures were significantly different, in favour of specialist physiotherapy: participant perception of improvement, the Short Form questionnaire-36 items Physical Role Limitations, Short Form questionnaire-36 items Social Functioning, Short Form questionnaire-36 items Mental Health, EuroQol-5 Dimensions five-level version utility score, confidence in the diagnosis and three subscales (Timeline Cyclical, Personal Control and Treatment Control) of the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire. No outcomes significantly favoured treatment as usual. In the health economic analysis, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained from a health and social care cost perspective was £4133 with an 86% probability that specialist physiotherapy is cost-effective compared to treatment as usual at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. There were no adverse events related to physiotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Specialist physiotherapy was not superior to treatment as usual for the primary outcome, the Short Form questionnaire-36 items Physical Functioning domain at 12 months. However, a number of secondary outcome measures favoured specialist physiotherapy at 6 and 12 months. There is a high probability that specialist physiotherapy is cost-effective.

LIMITATIONS

Participants in treatment as usual waited longer to start physiotherapy, which resulted in a shorter time between concluding treatment and completing the primary outcome. Most outcome measures, including the primary outcome, were participant reported, which may have been biased by perceptions of the randomised treatment allocation.

FUTURE WORK

Future work should identify or develop more suitable outcome measures for functional motor disorder research, explore who is most likely to benefit from specialist physiotherapy and identify alternative interventions for those unlikely to benefit from this treatment. Additional work is needed to adapt treatment to meet the needs of minority groups and young people.

FUNDING

This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 16/31/63.

摘要

背景

功能性运动障碍常导致持续的致残症状,并带来高昂的医疗成本。近年来,基于对功能性运动障碍的理解开展的专科物理治疗已成为一种有前景的治疗方法,但大型随机对照试验缺乏其有效性的证据。

方法

我们进行了一项实用的多中心随机对照试验,将功能性运动障碍的专科物理治疗与常规治疗(定义为社区神经物理治疗)进行比较。主要结局是12个月时的36项简短问卷身体功能领域(量表范围0 - 100,100表示最佳健康状态)。该试验旨在以90%的检验效能在5%的显著性水平上检测主要结局中9分的差异。次要测量领域包括患者对改善的感知、健康相关生活质量、活动能力、焦虑、抑郁和疾病认知。我们还完成了一项卫生经济分析,主要目的是计算12个月期间每质量调整生命年的平均增量成本。在预先设定的分析计划中,如果参与者因新冠疫情封锁限制而无法接受试验分配的治疗,我们将其排除在主要分析之外。敏感性分析探讨了这一决定的影响。

结果

在2018年10月19日至2022年1月31日期间,355名患有功能性运动障碍的成年人被随机(1∶1)分配至专科物理治疗组(n = 179)和常规治疗组(n = 176)。由于新冠疫情干扰,89名参与者被排除。两组的主要分析保留率均为90%,主要分析中剩余241名参与者。在12个月时,主要结局在组间无差异(调整后平均差异3.5,95%置信区间 - 2.3至9.3)。然而,几个次要结局有利于专科物理治疗,包括参与者对改善的感知、36项简短问卷心理健康领域、对诊断的信心以及修订后的疾病认知问卷的两个子量表(个人控制和疾病连贯性)。其余结局无差异。在6个月时,以下结局指标有显著差异,有利于专科物理治疗:参与者对改善的感知、36项简短问卷身体角色限制、36项简短问卷社会功能、36项简短问卷心理健康、欧洲五维度健康量表五级版本效用评分、对诊断的信心以及修订后的疾病认知问卷的三个子量表(时间线周期性、个人控制和治疗控制)。没有结局显著有利于常规治疗。在卫生经济分析中,从卫生和社会护理成本角度来看,每获得一个质量调整生命年的增量成本为4133英镑,在每获得一个质量调整生命年20000英镑的成本效益阈值下,专科物理治疗与常规治疗相比具有成本效益的概率为86%。没有与物理治疗相关的不良事件。

结论

对于主要结局,即12个月时的36项简短问卷身体功能领域,专科物理治疗并不优于常规治疗。然而,一些次要结局指标在6个月和12个月时有利于专科物理治疗。专科物理治疗很可能具有成本效益。

局限性

常规治疗组的参与者开始物理治疗的等待时间更长,这导致完成治疗至完成主要结局之间的时间更短。包括主要结局在内的大多数结局指标是参与者报告的,这可能因对随机治疗分配的感知而存在偏差。

未来工作

未来的工作应确定或开发更适合功能性运动障碍研究的结局指标,探索最有可能从专科物理治疗中受益的人群,并为那些不太可能从这种治疗中受益的人确定替代干预措施。还需要开展额外工作以调整治疗方法来满足少数群体和年轻人的需求。

资金来源

本摘要介绍了由英国国家健康与照护研究中心(NIHR)卫生技术评估项目资助的独立研究,资助编号为16/31/63。

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