Nonpharmacological Spine Pain Management in Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Systematic Review Using AGREE II and AGREE-REX Tools

IF 6 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Ting Ho Lim, Hui Yeung Mak, See Moriah Man Ngai, Yeuk Tsin Man, Ching Ho Tang, Arnold Y L Wong, André Bussières, Fadi M Al Zoubi
{"title":"Nonpharmacological Spine Pain Management in Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Systematic Review Using AGREE II and AGREE-REX Tools","authors":"Ting Ho Lim, Hui Yeung Mak, See Moriah Man Ngai, Yeuk Tsin Man, Ching Ho Tang, Arnold Y L Wong, André Bussières, Fadi M Al Zoubi","doi":"10.2519/jospt.2024.12729","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>OBJECTIVE:</b> To summarize the content and critically appraise the quality and applicability of recent clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for nonpharmacological, nonsurgical management of spine pain. <b>DESIGN:</b> Systematic review of CPGs. <b>LITERATURE SEARCH:</b> Six databases and seven guideline clearinghouses. <b>STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA:</b> Included de novo CPGs for nonpharmacological, nonsurgical management of spine pain designed for any primary health care providers, published in English, Arabic, French, or traditional Chinese within the past 12 years. <b>DATA SYNTHESIS:</b> Five reviewers independently appraised the guidelines using AGREE II and AGREE-REX. Interrater agreements were calculated for each domain and the total score of these tools using the intraclass correlation coefficient (2, 1) with absolute agreement. <b>RESULTS:</b> We included 30 CPGs, primarily (90%) developed in Western countries, which contained 404 recommendations. High-quality CPGs consistently recommended exercise therapy and multimodal care, encompassing a combination of exercises, mobilization/manipulation, education, alternative medicine, and cognitive-behavioral treatments. Generally, CPGs did not recommend assistive (eg, corsets and orthosis) devices or electro/thermotherapies (eg, therapeutic ultrasound and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation). Approximately half of the CPGs demonstrated good methodological quality according to AGREE II, whereas the rest were of poor quality. On the AGREE-REX assessment, one third of the recommendations were of excellent quality. <b>CONCLUSION:</b> Although recent guidelines frequently recommended exercise therapy and multimodal care for the management of spine pain, their recommendations often overlooked demographics and comorbidities. Despite methodological improvements, most CPGs lacked simple clinical applicability and considerations of knowledge users' values. <i>J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2025;55(1):1-14. Epub 4 November 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12729</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":50099,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy","volume":"55 1","pages":"12-25"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2024.12729","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the content and critically appraise the quality and applicability of recent clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for nonpharmacological, nonsurgical management of spine pain. DESIGN: Systematic review of CPGs. LITERATURE SEARCH: Six databases and seven guideline clearinghouses. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Included de novo CPGs for nonpharmacological, nonsurgical management of spine pain designed for any primary health care providers, published in English, Arabic, French, or traditional Chinese within the past 12 years. DATA SYNTHESIS: Five reviewers independently appraised the guidelines using AGREE II and AGREE-REX. Interrater agreements were calculated for each domain and the total score of these tools using the intraclass correlation coefficient (2, 1) with absolute agreement. RESULTS: We included 30 CPGs, primarily (90%) developed in Western countries, which contained 404 recommendations. High-quality CPGs consistently recommended exercise therapy and multimodal care, encompassing a combination of exercises, mobilization/manipulation, education, alternative medicine, and cognitive-behavioral treatments. Generally, CPGs did not recommend assistive (eg, corsets and orthosis) devices or electro/thermotherapies (eg, therapeutic ultrasound and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation). Approximately half of the CPGs demonstrated good methodological quality according to AGREE II, whereas the rest were of poor quality. On the AGREE-REX assessment, one third of the recommendations were of excellent quality. CONCLUSION: Although recent guidelines frequently recommended exercise therapy and multimodal care for the management of spine pain, their recommendations often overlooked demographics and comorbidities. Despite methodological improvements, most CPGs lacked simple clinical applicability and considerations of knowledge users' values. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2025;55(1):1-14. Epub 4 November 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12729.

临床实践指南中的非药物脊柱疼痛管理:使用AGREE II和AGREE- rex工具的系统综述。
目的:总结近期脊柱疼痛非药物、非手术治疗临床实践指南 (CPG) 的内容,并对其质量和适用性进行严格评估。设计:对 CPG 进行系统回顾。文献检索:六个数据库和七个指南交换中心。研究筛选标准:纳入过去 12 年内以英语、阿拉伯语、法语或繁体中文出版的、针对任何初级医疗保健提供者的非药物、非手术治疗脊柱疼痛的全新 CPG。数据合成:五位评审员使用 AGREE II 和 AGREE-REX 对指南进行独立评审。使用类内相关系数 (2, 1) 计算这些工具的每个领域和总分,并计算绝对一致度。结果:我们纳入了 30 项 CPG,主要(90%)由西方国家制定,其中包含 404 项建议。高质量的 CPG 一致推荐运动疗法和多模式护理,包括运动、活动/手法、教育、替代疗法和认知行为疗法的组合。一般来说,CPG 不推荐辅助性(如紧身衣和矫形器)设备或电疗/热疗(如治疗性超声波和经皮神经电刺激)。根据 AGREE II 评估,约有一半的 CPGs 方法质量良好,而其余的质量较差。在 AGREE-REX 评估中,三分之一的建议质量优异。结论:尽管近期的指南经常推荐运动疗法和多模式护理来治疗脊柱疼痛,但其建议往往忽略了人口统计学和合并症。尽管在方法上有所改进,但大多数 CPGs 缺乏简单的临床适用性和对知识使用者价值观的考虑。J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2025;55(1):1-14.doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12729。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.90%
发文量
101
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy® (JOSPT®) publishes scientifically rigorous, clinically relevant content for physical therapists and others in the health care community to advance musculoskeletal and sports-related practice globally. To this end, JOSPT features the latest evidence-based research and clinical cases in musculoskeletal health, injury, and rehabilitation, including physical therapy, orthopaedics, sports medicine, and biomechanics. With an impact factor of 3.090, JOSPT is among the highest ranked physical therapy journals in Clarivate Analytics''s Journal Citation Reports, Science Edition (2017). JOSPT stands eighth of 65 journals in the category of rehabilitation, twelfth of 77 journals in orthopedics, and fourteenth of 81 journals in sport sciences. JOSPT''s 5-year impact factor is 4.061.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信