脊柱矫形器对颈椎固定的影响:研究方法的系统回顾

IF 0.4 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
N. Eddison, S. Benyahia, N. Chockalingam
{"title":"脊柱矫形器对颈椎固定的影响:研究方法的系统回顾","authors":"N. Eddison, S. Benyahia, N. Chockalingam","doi":"10.1097/JPO.0000000000000382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Introduction The purpose of this article is to review the literature on the effect of immobilization of the cervical spine using orthotic devices. The review focused on the methodologies of the studies to see if this might be a contributing factor to the lack of available clinical guidelines on spinal immobilization using orthoses. Methods This review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines (PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097). The search was conducted in August 2019 within all major databases using relevant phrases. No date restrictions were applied, but the search was restricted to full manuscripts published in English. These searches were then supplemented by tracking all key references from the appropriate articles identified. Articles were selected according to a priori–defined criteria. Initially, data were extracted regarding publication details, orthosis name and group, spinal level studied, and whether cervical range of motion was measured. Results A total of 52 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. This article discusses the methodology of the included studies. Conclusions There is a clear paucity of well-designed research on immobilization of the cervical spine using orthotic devices. Comparing the results of studies using different types of orthoses is difficult due to the type and age of the participants involved (healthy, pathological, cadaver) and the different techniques of measurement used. This lack of standardization prevents meta-analyses from being performed and may be a contributing factor to the lack of available clinical guidelines. An agreed structured methodology is required to enable meta-analyses and determine clinical guidelines for the prescription of spinal orthoses for cervical spine pathology.","PeriodicalId":53702,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics","volume":"34 1","pages":"e93 - e98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effect of Spinal Orthoses on Immobilizing the Cervical Spine: A Systematic Review of Research Methodologies\",\"authors\":\"N. Eddison, S. Benyahia, N. Chockalingam\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JPO.0000000000000382\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Introduction The purpose of this article is to review the literature on the effect of immobilization of the cervical spine using orthotic devices. The review focused on the methodologies of the studies to see if this might be a contributing factor to the lack of available clinical guidelines on spinal immobilization using orthoses. Methods This review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines (PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097). The search was conducted in August 2019 within all major databases using relevant phrases. No date restrictions were applied, but the search was restricted to full manuscripts published in English. These searches were then supplemented by tracking all key references from the appropriate articles identified. Articles were selected according to a priori–defined criteria. Initially, data were extracted regarding publication details, orthosis name and group, spinal level studied, and whether cervical range of motion was measured. Results A total of 52 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. This article discusses the methodology of the included studies. Conclusions There is a clear paucity of well-designed research on immobilization of the cervical spine using orthotic devices. Comparing the results of studies using different types of orthoses is difficult due to the type and age of the participants involved (healthy, pathological, cadaver) and the different techniques of measurement used. This lack of standardization prevents meta-analyses from being performed and may be a contributing factor to the lack of available clinical guidelines. An agreed structured methodology is required to enable meta-analyses and determine clinical guidelines for the prescription of spinal orthoses for cervical spine pathology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53702,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"e93 - e98\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0000000000000382\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0000000000000382","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:本文的目的是回顾关于使用矫形装置固定颈椎的效果的文献。这篇综述的重点是研究的方法,看看这是否可能是缺乏使用矫形器进行脊柱固定的可用临床指南的一个因素。方法本综述采用PRISMA指南(PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097)。该搜索于2019年8月在所有主要数据库中使用相关短语进行。没有日期限制,但搜索仅限于英文出版的全文。然后通过跟踪所确定的适当文章中的所有关键参考文献来补充这些搜索。根据优先级定义的标准选择文章。最初,提取的数据包括发表细节、矫形器名称和组、所研究的脊柱水平以及是否测量了颈椎活动范围。结果52篇文章符合纳入标准。本文讨论了纳入研究的方法。结论使用矫形器固定颈椎明显缺乏精心设计的研究。由于所涉及的参与者的类型和年龄(健康的、病理的、尸体的)以及所使用的不同测量技术,比较使用不同类型矫形器的研究结果很困难。这种标准化的缺乏阻碍了meta分析的进行,可能是缺乏可用临床指南的一个因素。需要一个商定的结构化方法来进行荟萃分析,并确定颈椎病理脊柱矫形器处方的临床指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Effect of Spinal Orthoses on Immobilizing the Cervical Spine: A Systematic Review of Research Methodologies
ABSTRACT Introduction The purpose of this article is to review the literature on the effect of immobilization of the cervical spine using orthotic devices. The review focused on the methodologies of the studies to see if this might be a contributing factor to the lack of available clinical guidelines on spinal immobilization using orthoses. Methods This review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines (PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097). The search was conducted in August 2019 within all major databases using relevant phrases. No date restrictions were applied, but the search was restricted to full manuscripts published in English. These searches were then supplemented by tracking all key references from the appropriate articles identified. Articles were selected according to a priori–defined criteria. Initially, data were extracted regarding publication details, orthosis name and group, spinal level studied, and whether cervical range of motion was measured. Results A total of 52 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. This article discusses the methodology of the included studies. Conclusions There is a clear paucity of well-designed research on immobilization of the cervical spine using orthotic devices. Comparing the results of studies using different types of orthoses is difficult due to the type and age of the participants involved (healthy, pathological, cadaver) and the different techniques of measurement used. This lack of standardization prevents meta-analyses from being performed and may be a contributing factor to the lack of available clinical guidelines. An agreed structured methodology is required to enable meta-analyses and determine clinical guidelines for the prescription of spinal orthoses for cervical spine pathology.
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
Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics
Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics Medicine-Rehabilitation
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Published quarterly by the AAOP, JPO: Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics provides information on new devices, fitting and fabrication techniques, and patient management experiences. The focus is on prosthetics and orthotics, with timely reports from related fields such as orthopaedic research, occupational therapy, physical therapy, orthopaedic surgery, amputation surgery, physical medicine, biomedical engineering, psychology, ethics, and gait analysis. Each issue contains research-based articles reviewed and approved by a highly qualified editorial board and an Academy self-study quiz offering two PCE''s.
×
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