Suppr超能文献

肌筋膜疼痛患者、慢性纤维肌痛患者及对照组压痛检查的可靠性。

The reliability of examination for tenderness in patients with myofascial pain, chronic fibromyalgia and controls.

作者信息

Tunks E, McCain G A, Hart L E, Teasell R W, Goldsmith C H, Rollman G B, McDermid A J, DeShane P J

机构信息

Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

出版信息

J Rheumatol. 1995 May;22(5):944-52.

PMID:8587087
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To establish the reliability with which tenderness could be evaluated in patients with chronic myalgias, using dolorimetry and palpation.

METHODS

Three blinded examiners using pressure dolorimetry and digital palpation compared 19 paired tender points and 8 paired control points in 4 matched groups of 6 patients with fibromyalgia (FM), myofascial pain, pain controls, and healthy controls.

RESULTS

Good interrater and test-retest reliability were found for dolorimetry scores. There were significant differences in tenderness ratings by dolorimetry between the diagnostic groups, with the patients with FM and myofascial pain having the greatest tenderness, the normals having the least tenderness, and the pain controls having tenderness levels midway between the patients with FM or myofascial pain and the normals. In all patients, control points had higher pain thresholds than tender points. One-third of patients with localized pain complaints demonstrated a significant relationship between region of clinical pain complaint and measured tenderness thresholds by dolorimetry. In ratings of tenderness by digital palpation, there was very good intrarater reliability over 26 of 27 paired points, and good interrater reliability at 75% of the points. One-half of patients with localized pain complaints demonstrated a significant relationship between region of clinical pain complaint and number of tender points by palpation.

CONCLUSION

Both dolorimetry and palpation are sufficiently reliable to discriminate control patients from patients with myofascial pain and FM, but may not discriminate patients with myofascial pain from those with FM. Neither method appears to correlate well with the location of the clinical pain complaint, regardless of diagnosis.

摘要

目的

运用痛觉测量法和触诊法,确定慢性肌痛患者压痛评估的可靠性。

方法

三位不知情的检查者使用压力痛觉测量法和数字触诊法,对4组匹配的患者进行比较,每组6例,分别为纤维肌痛(FM)患者、肌筋膜疼痛患者、疼痛对照患者和健康对照患者,比较19对压痛点和8对对照点。

结果

痛觉测量评分具有良好的检查者间和重测信度。诊断组之间通过痛觉测量法得出的压痛评级存在显著差异,FM患者和肌筋膜疼痛患者压痛最明显,正常对照者压痛最不明显,疼痛对照患者的压痛水平介于FM患者或肌筋膜疼痛患者与正常对照者之间。在所有患者中,对照点的疼痛阈值高于压痛点。三分之一有局部疼痛主诉的患者,其临床疼痛主诉区域与通过痛觉测量法测得的压痛阈值之间存在显著相关性。在数字触诊的压痛评级中,27对中的26对具有非常好的检查者内信度,75%的点具有良好的检查者间信度。一半有局部疼痛主诉的患者,其临床疼痛主诉区域与触诊压痛点数量之间存在显著相关性。

结论

痛觉测量法和触诊法都具有足够的可靠性,可区分对照患者与肌筋膜疼痛和FM患者,但可能无法区分肌筋膜疼痛患者与FM患者。无论诊断如何,两种方法似乎都与临床疼痛主诉的部位相关性不佳。

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