Suppr超能文献

基于移动健康的运动与传统运动治疗慢性颈痛的比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

Comparison of Mobile Health-Based Exercise vs Traditional Exercise for Chronic Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

He XiaoYa, Zhou Hang, Jiang Yue Shuai, Liu Da-Chao, Qi Fei, Wang ZiPu

机构信息

Sports and Medicine Integrative Innovation Center, Capital University of Physical Education and Sports, Beijing, People's Republic of China.

Shenzhen University Experimental High School, Shenzhen, Guangdong, People's Republic of China.

出版信息

J Pain Res. 2025 Sep 7;18:4639-4649. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S526845. eCollection 2025.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness of mobile health (mHealth) exercise interventions in comparison to traditional exercise methods (exercises guided offline by a rehabilitation therapist or performed independently according to the instruction manual) for relieving pain intensity, decreasing functional disability, and improving the overall quality of life for individuals suffering from Chronic Neck Pain (CNP).

METHODS

A systematic search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from their inception until December 25, 2024, across multiple databases, such as Cochrane, Embase, Medline, and Web of Science. Data extraction was carried out independently by pairs of reviewers, who also evaluated bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.

RESULTS

In total, six studies were identified, encompassing 381 participants with an average age of 41.17±11.72 years. No statistically significant differences were observed in pain relief when comparing mHealth-based exercise to traditional exercise methods that did not incorporate mHealth (standard mean difference [SMD]=-0.31; 95% CI: -0.73 to 0.12, P=0.16). Additionally, there were no significant differences concerning functional disability (SMD=-0.33; 95% CI: -0.68 to 0.02; P=0.06) or quality of life (SMD=0.19; 95% CI: -0.19 to 0.56; P=0.34). Conversely, a significant difference was noted when comparing mHealth-supported exercise to unsupervised traditional exercise regarding pain alleviation (SMD=-0.76; 95% CI: -1.06 to -0.45; <0.001) and functional disability (SMD=-0.66; 95% CI: -1.01 to -0.32; <0.001).

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that exercise facilitated by mHealth is more effective than traditional unsupervised exercise in preventing pain and enhancing functional capabilities in young and middle-aged patients experiencing chronic non-specific neck pain. Traditional exercise can serve as a foundational intervention for the rehabilitation of non-specific neck pain, while mobile health-assisted exercise offers a feasible alternative in situations where offline interventions are limited. This approach enhances the accessibility and coverage of rehabilitation services.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估移动健康(mHealth)运动干预与传统运动方法(由康复治疗师在离线状态下指导锻炼或根据说明书独立进行锻炼)相比,对缓解慢性颈痛(CNP)患者的疼痛强度、降低功能障碍以及改善整体生活质量的有效性。

方法

进行了一项系统检索,以识别从研究开始至2024年12月25日期间在多个数据库(如Cochrane、Embase、Medline和Web of Science)上发表的随机对照试验(RCT)。数据提取由成对的评审员独立进行,他们还使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估偏倚。

结果

总共识别出六项研究,涉及381名参与者,平均年龄为41.17±11.72岁。将基于mHealth的运动与未纳入mHealth的传统运动方法进行比较时,在疼痛缓解方面未观察到统计学上的显著差异(标准化均数差[SMD]= -0.31;95%置信区间:-0.73至0.12,P = 0.16)。此外,在功能障碍(SMD = -0.33;95%置信区间:-0.68至0.02;P = 0.06)或生活质量(SMD = 0.19;95%置信区间:-0.19至0.56;P = 0.34)方面也没有显著差异。相反,在比较mHealth支持的运动与无监督的传统运动在缓解疼痛(SMD = -0.76;95%置信区间:-1.06至-0.45;<0.001)和功能障碍(SMD = -0.66;95%置信区间:-1.01至-0.32;<0.001)方面存在显著差异。

结论

结果表明,在预防慢性非特异性颈痛的年轻和中年患者的疼痛及增强功能能力方面,mHealth辅助的运动比传统的无监督运动更有效。传统运动可作为非特异性颈痛康复的基础干预措施,而在离线干预有限的情况下,移动健康辅助运动提供了一种可行的替代方案。这种方法提高了康复服务的可及性和覆盖范围。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ebea/12425653/1bf35a918d00/JPR-18-4639-g0001.jpg

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