农村和城市人口中肌肉骨骼疼痛的全球流行率。系统回顾与荟萃分析。农村和城市人口中的肌肉骨骼疼痛。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 NURSING
Carlos I. Mesa-Castrillon PhD, Paula R. Beckenkamp PhD, Manuela Ferreira PhD, Milena Simic PhD, Phillip R. Davis PT, Antonio Michell PT, Evangelos Pappas PhD, Georgina Luscombe PhD, Marcos De Noronha PhD, Paulo Ferreira PhD
{"title":"农村和城市人口中肌肉骨骼疼痛的全球流行率。系统回顾与荟萃分析。农村和城市人口中的肌肉骨骼疼痛。","authors":"Carlos I. Mesa-Castrillon PhD,&nbsp;Paula R. Beckenkamp PhD,&nbsp;Manuela Ferreira PhD,&nbsp;Milena Simic PhD,&nbsp;Phillip R. Davis PT,&nbsp;Antonio Michell PT,&nbsp;Evangelos Pappas PhD,&nbsp;Georgina Luscombe PhD,&nbsp;Marcos De Noronha PhD,&nbsp;Paulo Ferreira PhD","doi":"10.1111/ajr.13161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>To systematically compare the global prevalence of musculoskeletal pain and care-seeking in rural and urban populations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A systematic review with meta-analysis of observational studies reporting a direct comparison of rural and urban populations was conducted worldwide and included back, knee, hip, shoulder, neck pain and a broad diagnosis of ‘musculoskeletal pain’. A search strategy combining terms related to ‘prevalence’, ‘musculoskeletal pain’ and ‘rural’ was used on the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and rural and remote health from their inception to 1 June 2022. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the data. Results were presented as odds ratios (OR) along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 42 studies from 24 countries were included with a total population of 489 439 participants. The quality scores for the included studies, using the modified Newcastle Ottawa Scale tool, showed an average score of 0.78/1, which represents an overall good quality. The pooled analysis showed statistically greater odds of hip (OR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.23–2.15), shoulder (OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.06–1.90) and overall musculoskeletal pain (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.08–1.47) in rural populations compared to urban populations. Although the odds of seeking treatment were higher in rural populations this relationship was not statistically significant (OR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.55–1.03).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Very low-certainty evidence suggests that musculoskeletal, hip and shoulder pain are more prevalent in rural than urban areas, although neck, back and knee pain, along with care-seeking, showed no significant difference between these populations. Strategies aimed to reduce the burden of musculoskeletal pain should consider the specific needs and limited access to quality evidence-based care for musculoskeletal pain of rural populations.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55421,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Rural Health","volume":"32 5","pages":"864-876"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajr.13161","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Global prevalence of musculoskeletal pain in rural and urban populations. A systematic review with meta-analysis. Musculoskeletal pain in rural and urban populations\",\"authors\":\"Carlos I. Mesa-Castrillon PhD,&nbsp;Paula R. Beckenkamp PhD,&nbsp;Manuela Ferreira PhD,&nbsp;Milena Simic PhD,&nbsp;Phillip R. Davis PT,&nbsp;Antonio Michell PT,&nbsp;Evangelos Pappas PhD,&nbsp;Georgina Luscombe PhD,&nbsp;Marcos De Noronha PhD,&nbsp;Paulo Ferreira PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajr.13161\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>To systematically compare the global prevalence of musculoskeletal pain and care-seeking in rural and urban populations.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>A systematic review with meta-analysis of observational studies reporting a direct comparison of rural and urban populations was conducted worldwide and included back, knee, hip, shoulder, neck pain and a broad diagnosis of ‘musculoskeletal pain’. A search strategy combining terms related to ‘prevalence’, ‘musculoskeletal pain’ and ‘rural’ was used on the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and rural and remote health from their inception to 1 June 2022. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the data. Results were presented as odds ratios (OR) along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>A total of 42 studies from 24 countries were included with a total population of 489 439 participants. The quality scores for the included studies, using the modified Newcastle Ottawa Scale tool, showed an average score of 0.78/1, which represents an overall good quality. The pooled analysis showed statistically greater odds of hip (OR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.23–2.15), shoulder (OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.06–1.90) and overall musculoskeletal pain (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.08–1.47) in rural populations compared to urban populations. Although the odds of seeking treatment were higher in rural populations this relationship was not statistically significant (OR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.55–1.03).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Very low-certainty evidence suggests that musculoskeletal, hip and shoulder pain are more prevalent in rural than urban areas, although neck, back and knee pain, along with care-seeking, showed no significant difference between these populations. Strategies aimed to reduce the burden of musculoskeletal pain should consider the specific needs and limited access to quality evidence-based care for musculoskeletal pain of rural populations.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55421,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Rural Health\",\"volume\":\"32 5\",\"pages\":\"864-876\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajr.13161\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Rural Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajr.13161\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Rural Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajr.13161","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:目的:系统比较全球农村和城市人口的肌肉骨骼疼痛患病率和就医情况:系统比较全球农村和城市人口中肌肉骨骼疼痛的患病率和就医情况:在全球范围内对直接比较农村和城市人口的观察性研究进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,包括背部、膝部、髋部、肩部、颈部疼痛以及 "肌肉骨骼疼痛 "的广泛诊断。在以下数据库中使用了与 "患病率"、"肌肉骨骼疼痛 "和 "农村 "相关的搜索策略:MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、Scopus 以及农村和偏远地区健康等数据库,检索期从开始到 2022 年 6 月 1 日。采用随机效应荟萃分析法汇总数据。结果以几率比(OR)和 95% 置信区间(95% CI)表示:共纳入了来自 24 个国家的 42 项研究,总参与人数为 489 439 人。采用修改后的纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表工具对纳入研究进行质量评分,结果显示平均得分为 0.78/1,总体质量良好。汇总分析表明,与城市人口相比,农村人口发生髋关节疼痛(OR = 1.62,95% CI = 1.23-2.15)、肩关节疼痛(OR = 1.42,95% CI = 1.06-1.90)和整体肌肉骨骼疼痛(OR = 1.26,95% CI = 1.08-1.47)的几率更高。虽然农村人口寻求治疗的几率更高,但这一关系在统计学上并不显著(OR = 0.76,95% CI = 0.55-1.03):极低确定性的证据表明,肌肉骨骼、髋部和肩部疼痛在农村地区比城市地区更为普遍,尽管颈部、背部和膝部疼痛以及寻求治疗的情况在这些人群之间没有明显差异。旨在减轻肌肉骨骼疼痛负担的策略应考虑到农村人口的特殊需求,以及在肌肉骨骼疼痛方面获得优质循证护理的机会有限的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Global prevalence of musculoskeletal pain in rural and urban populations. A systematic review with meta-analysis. Musculoskeletal pain in rural and urban populations

Global prevalence of musculoskeletal pain in rural and urban populations. A systematic review with meta-analysis. Musculoskeletal pain in rural and urban populations

Introduction

To systematically compare the global prevalence of musculoskeletal pain and care-seeking in rural and urban populations.

Methods

A systematic review with meta-analysis of observational studies reporting a direct comparison of rural and urban populations was conducted worldwide and included back, knee, hip, shoulder, neck pain and a broad diagnosis of ‘musculoskeletal pain’. A search strategy combining terms related to ‘prevalence’, ‘musculoskeletal pain’ and ‘rural’ was used on the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and rural and remote health from their inception to 1 June 2022. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the data. Results were presented as odds ratios (OR) along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

Results

A total of 42 studies from 24 countries were included with a total population of 489 439 participants. The quality scores for the included studies, using the modified Newcastle Ottawa Scale tool, showed an average score of 0.78/1, which represents an overall good quality. The pooled analysis showed statistically greater odds of hip (OR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.23–2.15), shoulder (OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.06–1.90) and overall musculoskeletal pain (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.08–1.47) in rural populations compared to urban populations. Although the odds of seeking treatment were higher in rural populations this relationship was not statistically significant (OR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.55–1.03).

Conclusion

Very low-certainty evidence suggests that musculoskeletal, hip and shoulder pain are more prevalent in rural than urban areas, although neck, back and knee pain, along with care-seeking, showed no significant difference between these populations. Strategies aimed to reduce the burden of musculoskeletal pain should consider the specific needs and limited access to quality evidence-based care for musculoskeletal pain of rural populations.

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
Australian Journal of Rural Health
Australian Journal of Rural Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
122
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: The Australian Journal of Rural Health publishes articles in the field of rural health. It facilitates the formation of interdisciplinary networks, so that rural health professionals can form a cohesive group and work together for the advancement of rural practice, in all health disciplines. The Journal aims to establish a national and international reputation for the quality of its scholarly discourse and its value to rural health professionals. All articles, unless otherwise identified, are peer reviewed by at least two researchers expert in the field of the submitted paper.
×
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