恐惧-回避信念对腰椎退行性椎间盘病术后疼痛和功能障碍的预后价值:一项meta分析

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 REHABILITATION
Zhenni Zhao, Jiawei Li, Rui Zhang, Yun Feng, Yanyan He, Zhiling Sun
{"title":"恐惧-回避信念对腰椎退行性椎间盘病术后疼痛和功能障碍的预后价值:一项meta分析","authors":"Zhenni Zhao,&nbsp;Jiawei Li,&nbsp;Rui Zhang,&nbsp;Yun Feng,&nbsp;Yanyan He,&nbsp;Zhiling Sun","doi":"10.1097/MRR.0000000000000567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The study aimed to explore the prognostic value of fear-avoidance beliefs (FABs) on postoperative pain and back-specific function for patients with lumbar degenerative disk disease (LDDD). FABs have been proven to be a predictorof pain and disability for patients with low back pain. However, whether FABs are a predictor of surgical outcomes for LDDD is a matter of debate. PubMed, Cochrane library, EMBASE, and EBSCO were searched for eligible cohort studies or secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials. Fixed-effect meta-analysis models were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) because of absent or low heterogeneity ( I ² < 50%). Subgroup analyses were conducted according to different follow-up durations. Forest plots were used for graphical representation. Six studies with a total of 829 participants were included in the meta-analyses. Risk of bias was high for three studies and moderate for the other three studies. For patients with LDDD, meta-analyses showed that FABs were a predictor of postoperative pain intensity [OR 2.88; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.76-3.00] and back-specific function (OR 3.13; 95% CI, 3.02-3.24). Patients with FABs are less likely to report improvement in pain (OR 2.56; 95% CI, 1.73-3.86) and function (OR 2.81; 95% CI, 2.57-3.07). In conclusion, FABs were a predictor of postoperative pain and back-specific function for patients with LDDD. This prognostic value is sustained for a long period after surgery (>12 months). Clinicians are advised to initiate targeted interventions for patients with FABs at different stages after surgery. Due to the limited number and low quality of included studies, the results of this meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution.</p>","PeriodicalId":14301,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Rehabilitation Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The prognostic value of fear-avoidance beliefs on postoperative pain and dysfunction for lumbar degenerative disk disease: a meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Zhenni Zhao,&nbsp;Jiawei Li,&nbsp;Rui Zhang,&nbsp;Yun Feng,&nbsp;Yanyan He,&nbsp;Zhiling Sun\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MRR.0000000000000567\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The study aimed to explore the prognostic value of fear-avoidance beliefs (FABs) on postoperative pain and back-specific function for patients with lumbar degenerative disk disease (LDDD). FABs have been proven to be a predictorof pain and disability for patients with low back pain. However, whether FABs are a predictor of surgical outcomes for LDDD is a matter of debate. PubMed, Cochrane library, EMBASE, and EBSCO were searched for eligible cohort studies or secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials. Fixed-effect meta-analysis models were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) because of absent or low heterogeneity ( I ² < 50%). Subgroup analyses were conducted according to different follow-up durations. Forest plots were used for graphical representation. Six studies with a total of 829 participants were included in the meta-analyses. Risk of bias was high for three studies and moderate for the other three studies. For patients with LDDD, meta-analyses showed that FABs were a predictor of postoperative pain intensity [OR 2.88; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.76-3.00] and back-specific function (OR 3.13; 95% CI, 3.02-3.24). Patients with FABs are less likely to report improvement in pain (OR 2.56; 95% CI, 1.73-3.86) and function (OR 2.81; 95% CI, 2.57-3.07). In conclusion, FABs were a predictor of postoperative pain and back-specific function for patients with LDDD. This prognostic value is sustained for a long period after surgery (>12 months). Clinicians are advised to initiate targeted interventions for patients with FABs at different stages after surgery. Due to the limited number and low quality of included studies, the results of this meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14301,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Rehabilitation Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Rehabilitation Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000567\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Rehabilitation Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000567","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在探讨恐惧回避信念(FABs)对腰椎退行性椎间盘病(LDDD)患者术后疼痛和背部特异性功能的预后价值。fab已被证明是腰痛患者疼痛和残疾的预测指标。然而,fab是否是LDDD手术结果的预测指标仍存在争议。检索PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、EMBASE和EBSCO,寻找符合条件的队列研究或随机对照试验的二次分析。固定效应荟萃分析模型用于估计优势比(OR),因为不存在或低异质性(I²12个月)。建议临床医生对术后不同阶段的FABs患者进行有针对性的干预。由于纳入的研究数量有限且质量较低,本荟萃分析的结果应谨慎解读。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The prognostic value of fear-avoidance beliefs on postoperative pain and dysfunction for lumbar degenerative disk disease: a meta-analysis.

The study aimed to explore the prognostic value of fear-avoidance beliefs (FABs) on postoperative pain and back-specific function for patients with lumbar degenerative disk disease (LDDD). FABs have been proven to be a predictorof pain and disability for patients with low back pain. However, whether FABs are a predictor of surgical outcomes for LDDD is a matter of debate. PubMed, Cochrane library, EMBASE, and EBSCO were searched for eligible cohort studies or secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials. Fixed-effect meta-analysis models were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) because of absent or low heterogeneity ( I ² < 50%). Subgroup analyses were conducted according to different follow-up durations. Forest plots were used for graphical representation. Six studies with a total of 829 participants were included in the meta-analyses. Risk of bias was high for three studies and moderate for the other three studies. For patients with LDDD, meta-analyses showed that FABs were a predictor of postoperative pain intensity [OR 2.88; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.76-3.00] and back-specific function (OR 3.13; 95% CI, 3.02-3.24). Patients with FABs are less likely to report improvement in pain (OR 2.56; 95% CI, 1.73-3.86) and function (OR 2.81; 95% CI, 2.57-3.07). In conclusion, FABs were a predictor of postoperative pain and back-specific function for patients with LDDD. This prognostic value is sustained for a long period after surgery (>12 months). Clinicians are advised to initiate targeted interventions for patients with FABs at different stages after surgery. Due to the limited number and low quality of included studies, the results of this meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
88
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Rehabilitation Research is a quarterly, peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary forum for the publication of research into functioning, disability and contextual factors experienced by persons of all ages in both developed and developing societies. The wealth of information offered makes the journal a valuable resource for researchers, practitioners, and administrators in such fields as rehabilitation medicine, outcome measurement nursing, social and vocational rehabilitation/case management, return to work, special education, social policy, social work and social welfare, sociology, psychology, psychiatry assistive technology and environmental factors/disability. Areas of interest include functioning and disablement throughout the life cycle; rehabilitation programmes for persons with physical, sensory, mental and developmental disabilities; measurement of functioning and disability; special education and vocational rehabilitation; equipment access and transportation; information technology; independent living; consumer, legal, economic and sociopolitical aspects of functioning, disability and contextual factors.
×
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