José Renato Costa da Silva, Douglas Augusto de Oliveira Grigoletto, Cesário da Silva Souza, Iara Senem, Rodrigo Melo Conde
{"title":"等拉伸对腰痛患者疼痛和残疾的影响：随机临床试验的系统综述。","authors":"José Renato Costa da Silva, Douglas Augusto de Oliveira Grigoletto, Cesário da Silva Souza, Iara Senem, Rodrigo Melo Conde","doi":"10.1002/msc.70100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically review the evidence on the effectiveness of Isostretching on pain, physical function and quality of life in individuals with Low Back Pain (LBP).</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>We searched the following databases until November 11, 2024: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, PEDro, Virtual Health Library Regional Portal, Scopus, Web of Science, SportDiscus and Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine. PRISMA-S was used to strengthen the reporting quality of our search strategy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review followed the PRISMA checklist. Randomized clinical trials that investigated the effects of Isostretching against any control intervention in individuals with non-specific LBP were eligible. Literature screening and data extraction were performed independently by the authors. The PEDro scale, the GRADE approach and the TIDier checklist were used to assess the risk of bias, quality of the evidence and reporting quality of the intervention, respectively. Results were analysed and synthesised narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five articles were included (pooled n = 155). Only adults (76% female) between 19 and 60 years were included. The PEDro score ranged from 2-8 points (mean of 5.6). Very-low quality evidence suggests that isostretching may reduce pain and improve functional capacity in the short term when compared with no intervention. Also, very-low quality evidence suggests that isostretching is not superior to any active intervention to reduce pain and improve functional capacity and quality of life. The mean number of reported TIDier items was 6.4.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review supports Isostretching to reduce pain and improve physical function and quality of life in patients with non-specific LBP.</p>","PeriodicalId":46945,"journal":{"name":"Musculoskeletal Care","volume":"23 2","pages":"e70100"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of Isostretching on Pain and Disability in Individuals Diagnosed With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials.\",\"authors\":\"José Renato Costa da Silva, Douglas Augusto de Oliveira Grigoletto, Cesário da Silva Souza, Iara Senem, Rodrigo Melo Conde\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/msc.70100\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically review the evidence on the effectiveness of Isostretching on pain, physical function and quality of life in individuals with Low Back Pain (LBP).</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>We searched the following databases until November 11, 2024: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, PEDro, Virtual Health Library Regional Portal, Scopus, Web of Science, SportDiscus and Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine. PRISMA-S was used to strengthen the reporting quality of our search strategy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review followed the PRISMA checklist. Randomized clinical trials that investigated the effects of Isostretching against any control intervention in individuals with non-specific LBP were eligible. Literature screening and data extraction were performed independently by the authors. The PEDro scale, the GRADE approach and the TIDier checklist were used to assess the risk of bias, quality of the evidence and reporting quality of the intervention, respectively. Results were analysed and synthesised narratively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five articles were included (pooled n = 155). Only adults (76% female) between 19 and 60 years were included. The PEDro score ranged from 2-8 points (mean of 5.6). Very-low quality evidence suggests that isostretching may reduce pain and improve functional capacity in the short term when compared with no intervention. Also, very-low quality evidence suggests that isostretching is not superior to any active intervention to reduce pain and improve functional capacity and quality of life. The mean number of reported TIDier items was 6.4.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review supports Isostretching to reduce pain and improve physical function and quality of life in patients with non-specific LBP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Musculoskeletal Care\",\"volume\":\"23 2\",\"pages\":\"e70100\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Musculoskeletal Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.70100\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Musculoskeletal Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/msc.70100","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的：系统回顾等拉伸对腰痛（LBP）患者疼痛、身体功能和生活质量的影响。数据来源：截止到2024年11月11日，我们检索了以下数据库：PubMed， Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL， CINAHL, PEDro, Virtual Health Library Regional Portal, Scopus, Web of Science， SportDiscus和Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine。prism - s用于加强我们搜索策略的报告质量。方法：本综述遵循PRISMA检查表。在非特异性腰痛患者中，随机临床试验研究了等拉伸对任何对照干预的影响。文献筛选和资料提取由作者独立完成。使用PEDro量表、GRADE方法和TIDier检查表分别评估干预措施的偏倚风险、证据质量和报告质量。对结果进行了分析和叙述性综合。结果：共纳入5篇文献（共n = 155）。仅包括19至60岁的成年人（76%为女性）。PEDro评分范围为2-8分（平均5.6分）。极低质量的证据表明，与不干预相比，等拉伸可以在短期内减轻疼痛并改善功能。此外，非常低质量的证据表明，等拉伸并不优于任何主动干预，以减轻疼痛，改善功能能力和生活质量。报告TIDier项目的平均数量为6.4个。结论：本综述支持等拉伸术可以减轻非特异性腰痛患者的疼痛，改善身体功能和生活质量。
Effectiveness of Isostretching on Pain and Disability in Individuals Diagnosed With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials.
Objective: To systematically review the evidence on the effectiveness of Isostretching on pain, physical function and quality of life in individuals with Low Back Pain (LBP).
Data sources: We searched the following databases until November 11, 2024: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, PEDro, Virtual Health Library Regional Portal, Scopus, Web of Science, SportDiscus and Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine. PRISMA-S was used to strengthen the reporting quality of our search strategy.
Methods: This review followed the PRISMA checklist. Randomized clinical trials that investigated the effects of Isostretching against any control intervention in individuals with non-specific LBP were eligible. Literature screening and data extraction were performed independently by the authors. The PEDro scale, the GRADE approach and the TIDier checklist were used to assess the risk of bias, quality of the evidence and reporting quality of the intervention, respectively. Results were analysed and synthesised narratively.
Results: Five articles were included (pooled n = 155). Only adults (76% female) between 19 and 60 years were included. The PEDro score ranged from 2-8 points (mean of 5.6). Very-low quality evidence suggests that isostretching may reduce pain and improve functional capacity in the short term when compared with no intervention. Also, very-low quality evidence suggests that isostretching is not superior to any active intervention to reduce pain and improve functional capacity and quality of life. The mean number of reported TIDier items was 6.4.
Conclusion: This review supports Isostretching to reduce pain and improve physical function and quality of life in patients with non-specific LBP.
期刊介绍：
Musculoskeletal Care is a peer-reviewed journal for all health professionals committed to the clinical delivery of high quality care for people with musculoskeletal conditions and providing knowledge to support decision making by professionals, patients and policy makers. This journal publishes papers on original research, applied research, review articles and clinical guidelines. Regular topics include patient education, psychological and social impact, patient experiences of health care, clinical up dates and the effectiveness of therapy.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
