神经疗法诊断中颈部反射/"阿德勒-朗格 "点的评分者间可靠性和可重复性较低,但治疗后压力-疼痛阈值提高--随机对照观察者-盲法试验结果。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Complementary Medicine Research Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-14 DOI:10.1159/000539230
Kyung-Eun Choi, Jan Grünert, Marc Werner, Holger Cramer, Dennis Anheyer, Gustav Dobos, Felix J Saha
{"title":"神经疗法诊断中颈部反射/\"阿德勒-朗格 \"点的评分者间可靠性和可重复性较低,但治疗后压力-疼痛阈值提高--随机对照观察者-盲法试验结果。","authors":"Kyung-Eun Choi, Jan Grünert, Marc Werner, Holger Cramer, Dennis Anheyer, Gustav Dobos, Felix J Saha","doi":"10.1159/000539230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Neck reflex points or Adler-Langer points are commonly used in neural therapy to detect so-called interference fields. Chronic irritations or inflammations in the sinuses, teeth, tonsils, or ears are supposed to induce tension and tenderness of the soft tissues and short muscles in the upper cervical spine. The individual treatment strategy is based on the results of diagnostic Adler-Langer point palpation. This study investigated the inter- and intra-rater reliability and explored treatment effects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a randomized controlled trial with 104 inpatients (80.8% female, 51.8 ± 12.74 years) of a German department for internal and integrative medicine. Patients were randomized to individual neural therapy according to the pathological findings (n = 48) or no treatment (n = 56). In each patient, three experienced raters (20-45 years of experience in neural therapy) and two novice raters (medical students) rated Adler-Langer points rigidity on a standardized rating scale (\"strong,\" \"weak,\" \"none\"). The patients independently evaluated the tenderness on palpation of the eight points using the same scale. Pressure pain thresholds were assessed at the eight Adler-Langer points. All patients were retested after 30 min. The five raters were blinded to treatment allocation and assessments of the other raters. Video recordings were obtained to assess the consistency of the areas tested by the different raters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Agreement between patients and raters (Cohen's kappa = 0.161-0.400) and inter-rater reliability were low (Fleiss kappa = 0.132-0.150). Moreover, the individual agreement (pre-post comparisons in untreated patients) was similarly low even in experienced raters (Cohen's kappa = 0.099-0.173). Video documentation suggests that raters do not place their fingers in the correct segments (percentage of correct position: 42.0-60.6%). Pressure pain thresholds at five of the eight Adler-Langer points showed significant changes after treatment compared to none in the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Under this artificial experimental setting, this method of Adler-Langer point palpation has not proven to be a reliable diagnostic tool. But it could be shown that, as claimed by the method, the tenderness in five of eight Adler-Langer points decreased after neural therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":10541,"journal":{"name":"Complementary Medicine Research","volume":" ","pages":"359-366"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Low Inter-Rater Reliability and Reproducibility of Neck Reflex/\\\"Adler-Langer\\\" Points in Neural Therapy Diagnostics but Increased Pressure Pain Threshold after Therapy: Results of a Randomized Controlled Observer-Blind Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Kyung-Eun Choi, Jan Grünert, Marc Werner, Holger Cramer, Dennis Anheyer, Gustav Dobos, Felix J Saha\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000539230\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Neck reflex points or Adler-Langer points are commonly used in neural therapy to detect so-called interference fields. Chronic irritations or inflammations in the sinuses, teeth, tonsils, or ears are supposed to induce tension and tenderness of the soft tissues and short muscles in the upper cervical spine. The individual treatment strategy is based on the results of diagnostic Adler-Langer point palpation. This study investigated the inter- and intra-rater reliability and explored treatment effects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a randomized controlled trial with 104 inpatients (80.8% female, 51.8 ± 12.74 years) of a German department for internal and integrative medicine. Patients were randomized to individual neural therapy according to the pathological findings (n = 48) or no treatment (n = 56). In each patient, three experienced raters (20-45 years of experience in neural therapy) and two novice raters (medical students) rated Adler-Langer points rigidity on a standardized rating scale (\\\"strong,\\\" \\\"weak,\\\" \\\"none\\\"). The patients independently evaluated the tenderness on palpation of the eight points using the same scale. Pressure pain thresholds were assessed at the eight Adler-Langer points. All patients were retested after 30 min. The five raters were blinded to treatment allocation and assessments of the other raters. Video recordings were obtained to assess the consistency of the areas tested by the different raters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Agreement between patients and raters (Cohen's kappa = 0.161-0.400) and inter-rater reliability were low (Fleiss kappa = 0.132-0.150). Moreover, the individual agreement (pre-post comparisons in untreated patients) was similarly low even in experienced raters (Cohen's kappa = 0.099-0.173). Video documentation suggests that raters do not place their fingers in the correct segments (percentage of correct position: 42.0-60.6%). Pressure pain thresholds at five of the eight Adler-Langer points showed significant changes after treatment compared to none in the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Under this artificial experimental setting, this method of Adler-Langer point palpation has not proven to be a reliable diagnostic tool. But it could be shown that, as claimed by the method, the tenderness in five of eight Adler-Langer points decreased after neural therapy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Complementary Medicine Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"359-366\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Complementary Medicine Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000539230\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Complementary Medicine Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000539230","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景介绍颈部反射点或阿德勒-朗格点通常用于神经疗法,以检测所谓的干扰场。鼻窦、牙齿、扁桃体或耳朵的慢性刺激或炎症会引起上颈椎软组织和短肌肉的紧张和疼痛。个人治疗策略以诊断性阿德勒-朗格穴触诊结果为基础。本研究调查了评分者之间和评分者内部的可靠性,并探讨了治疗效果:我们对德国一家内科和综合科的 104 名住院患者(80.8% 为女性,51.812.74 岁)进行了随机对照试验。患者根据病理结果随机接受个体神经疗法(48 人)或不接受治疗(56 人)。每名患者均由三名经验丰富的评定者(神经疗法经验 20-45 年)和两名新手评定者(医科学生)根据标准化评分表("强"、"弱"、"无")对阿德勒-朗格穴僵硬度进行评分。患者使用相同的量表独立评估触诊八个穴位时的压痛感。对八个阿德勒-朗格穴的压痛阈值进行评估。30 分钟后对所有患者进行复测。五位评定者对治疗分配和其他评定者的评定结果都是盲测。为评估不同评分者测试区域的一致性,还进行了录像:患者与评分者之间的一致性(Cohen's Kappa=.161-.400)和评分者之间的可靠性均较低(Fleiss-Kappa=.132-.150)。此外,即使是经验丰富的评分员,其个人一致性(未经治疗患者的前后比较)也同样较低(科恩卡帕=.099-.173)。视频记录表明,评分者并没有将手指放在正确的区段(正确位置百分比为 42.0-60.6%)。八个阿德勒-朗格穴中有五个穴位的压痛阈值在治疗后出现了显著变化,而对照组则没有:在这种人工实验环境下,阿德勒-朗格穴触诊法并未被证明是一种可靠的诊断工具。但可以证明的是,正如该方法所声称的那样,经过神经疗法后,八个阿德勒-朗格穴中有五个穴位的压痛有所减轻。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Low Inter-Rater Reliability and Reproducibility of Neck Reflex/"Adler-Langer" Points in Neural Therapy Diagnostics but Increased Pressure Pain Threshold after Therapy: Results of a Randomized Controlled Observer-Blind Trial.

Background: Neck reflex points or Adler-Langer points are commonly used in neural therapy to detect so-called interference fields. Chronic irritations or inflammations in the sinuses, teeth, tonsils, or ears are supposed to induce tension and tenderness of the soft tissues and short muscles in the upper cervical spine. The individual treatment strategy is based on the results of diagnostic Adler-Langer point palpation. This study investigated the inter- and intra-rater reliability and explored treatment effects.

Methods: We performed a randomized controlled trial with 104 inpatients (80.8% female, 51.8 ± 12.74 years) of a German department for internal and integrative medicine. Patients were randomized to individual neural therapy according to the pathological findings (n = 48) or no treatment (n = 56). In each patient, three experienced raters (20-45 years of experience in neural therapy) and two novice raters (medical students) rated Adler-Langer points rigidity on a standardized rating scale ("strong," "weak," "none"). The patients independently evaluated the tenderness on palpation of the eight points using the same scale. Pressure pain thresholds were assessed at the eight Adler-Langer points. All patients were retested after 30 min. The five raters were blinded to treatment allocation and assessments of the other raters. Video recordings were obtained to assess the consistency of the areas tested by the different raters.

Results: Agreement between patients and raters (Cohen's kappa = 0.161-0.400) and inter-rater reliability were low (Fleiss kappa = 0.132-0.150). Moreover, the individual agreement (pre-post comparisons in untreated patients) was similarly low even in experienced raters (Cohen's kappa = 0.099-0.173). Video documentation suggests that raters do not place their fingers in the correct segments (percentage of correct position: 42.0-60.6%). Pressure pain thresholds at five of the eight Adler-Langer points showed significant changes after treatment compared to none in the control group.

Conclusion: Under this artificial experimental setting, this method of Adler-Langer point palpation has not proven to be a reliable diagnostic tool. But it could be shown that, as claimed by the method, the tenderness in five of eight Adler-Langer points decreased after neural therapy.

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
Complementary Medicine Research
Complementary Medicine Research Medicine-Complementary and Alternative Medicine
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: Aims and Scope ''Complementary Medicine Research'' is an international journal that aims to bridge the gap between conventional medicine and complementary/alternative medicine (CAM) on a sound scientific basis, promoting their mutual integration. Accordingly, experts of both conventional medicine and CAM medicine cooperate on the journal‘s editorial board, which accepts papers only after a rigorous peer-review process in order to maintain a high standard of scientific quality. Spectrum of ''Complementary Medicine Research'': - Review and Original Articles, Case Reports and Essays regarding complementary practice and methods - Journal Club: Analysis and discussion of internationally published articles in complementary medicine - Editorials of leading experts in complementary medicine - Questions of complementary patient-centered care - Education in complementary medicine - Reports on important meetings and conferences - Society Bulletins of Schweizerische Medizinische Gesellschaft für Phytotherapie (SMGP) and Deutsche Gesellschaft für Naturheilkunde Bibliographic Details Complementary Medicine Research Journal Abbreviation: Complement Med Res ISSN: 2504-2092 (Print) e-ISSN: 2504-2106 (Online) DOI: 10.1159/issn.2504-2092 www.karger.com/CMR
×
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