脊柱手法治疗非特异性腰痛:针对特定椎体水平是否有区别?荟萃分析的系统综述。

IF 6 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Peter Westlund Sørensen, Casper Glissmann Nim, Erik Poulsen, Carsten Bogh Juhl
{"title":"脊柱手法治疗非特异性腰痛:针对特定椎体水平是否有区别?荟萃分析的系统综述。","authors":"Peter Westlund Sørensen, Casper Glissmann Nim, Erik Poulsen, Carsten Bogh Juhl","doi":"10.2519/jospt.2023.11962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>OBJECTIVE:</b> We aimed to examine whether targeting spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), by applying the intervention to a specific vertebral level, produces superior clinical outcomes than a nontargeted approach in patients with nonspecific low back pain. <b>DESIGN:</b> Systematic review with meta-analysis. <b>LITERATURE SEARCH:</b> MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Scopus, PEDro, and Index to Chiropractic Literature were searched up to May 31, 2023. <b>STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA:</b> Randomized controlled trials comparing targeted SMT (mobilization or manipulation) to a nontargeted approach in patients with nonspecific low back pain, and measuring the effects on pain intensity and patient-reported disability. <b>DATA SYNTHESIS:</b> Data extraction, risk of bias, and evaluation of the overall certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach were performed by 2 authors independently. Meta-analyses were performed using the restricted maximum likelihood method. <b>RESULTS:</b> Ten randomized controlled trials (n = 931 patients) were included. There was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference between targeted SMT and a nontargeted approach for pain intensity at postintervention (weighted mean difference = -0.20 [95% CI: -0.51, 0.10]) and at follow-up (weighted mean difference = 0.05 [95% CI: -0.26, 0.36]). For patient-reported disability, there was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference at postintervention (standardized mean difference = -0.04 [95% CI: -0.36, 0.29]) and at follow-up (standardized mean difference = -0.05 [95% CI: -0.24, 0.13]). Adverse events were reported in 4 trials, and were minor and evenly distributed between groups. <b>CONCLUSION:</b> Targeting a specific vertebral level when administering SMT for patients with nonspecific low back pain did not result in improved outcomes on pain intensity and patient-reported disability compared to a nontargeted approach. <i>J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(9):1-11. Epub: 28 July 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11962</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":50099,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Does Targeting a Specific Vertebral Level Make a Difference?: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Peter Westlund Sørensen, Casper Glissmann Nim, Erik Poulsen, Carsten Bogh Juhl\",\"doi\":\"10.2519/jospt.2023.11962\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>OBJECTIVE:</b> We aimed to examine whether targeting spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), by applying the intervention to a specific vertebral level, produces superior clinical outcomes than a nontargeted approach in patients with nonspecific low back pain. <b>DESIGN:</b> Systematic review with meta-analysis. <b>LITERATURE SEARCH:</b> MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Scopus, PEDro, and Index to Chiropractic Literature were searched up to May 31, 2023. <b>STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA:</b> Randomized controlled trials comparing targeted SMT (mobilization or manipulation) to a nontargeted approach in patients with nonspecific low back pain, and measuring the effects on pain intensity and patient-reported disability. <b>DATA SYNTHESIS:</b> Data extraction, risk of bias, and evaluation of the overall certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach were performed by 2 authors independently. Meta-analyses were performed using the restricted maximum likelihood method. <b>RESULTS:</b> Ten randomized controlled trials (n = 931 patients) were included. There was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference between targeted SMT and a nontargeted approach for pain intensity at postintervention (weighted mean difference = -0.20 [95% CI: -0.51, 0.10]) and at follow-up (weighted mean difference = 0.05 [95% CI: -0.26, 0.36]). For patient-reported disability, there was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference at postintervention (standardized mean difference = -0.04 [95% CI: -0.36, 0.29]) and at follow-up (standardized mean difference = -0.05 [95% CI: -0.24, 0.13]). Adverse events were reported in 4 trials, and were minor and evenly distributed between groups. <b>CONCLUSION:</b> Targeting a specific vertebral level when administering SMT for patients with nonspecific low back pain did not result in improved outcomes on pain intensity and patient-reported disability compared to a nontargeted approach. <i>J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(9):1-11. Epub: 28 July 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11962</i>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50099,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2023.11962\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2023.11962","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们旨在研究靶向脊柱推拿疗法(SMT),通过对特定椎体水平进行干预,是否比非靶向方法在非特异性腰痛患者中产生更好的临床结果。设计:采用荟萃分析的系统评价。文献检索:MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Scopus, PEDro和Index to Chiropractic LITERATURE被检索到2023年5月31日。研究选择标准:随机对照试验比较靶向SMT(动员或操作)和非靶向方法对非特异性腰痛患者的影响,并测量疼痛强度和患者报告的残疾。数据综合:数据提取、偏倚风险和使用GRADE方法评估证据的总体确定性由2位作者独立完成。采用限制最大似然法进行meta分析。结果:纳入10项随机对照试验(n = 931例)。有中等确定性证据表明,在干预后(加权平均差值= -0.20 [95% CI: -0.51, 0.10])和随访时(加权平均差值= 0.05 [95% CI: -0.26, 0.36]),靶向SMT和非靶向SMT在疼痛强度方面没有差异。对于患者报告的残疾,有中等确定性证据表明干预后(标准化平均差= -0.04 [95% CI: -0.36, 0.29])和随访(标准化平均差= -0.05 [95% CI: -0.24, 0.13])无差异。4项试验报告了不良事件,不良事件较小,组间分布均匀。结论:与非靶向方法相比,针对特定椎体水平对非特异性腰痛患者进行SMT治疗并没有改善疼痛强度和患者报告的残疾。[J] .中华体育杂志,2013;33(6):1161 - 1161。Epub: 2023年7月28日。doi: 10.2519 / jospt.2023.11962。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Nonspecific Low Back Pain: Does Targeting a Specific Vertebral Level Make a Difference?: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine whether targeting spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), by applying the intervention to a specific vertebral level, produces superior clinical outcomes than a nontargeted approach in patients with nonspecific low back pain. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH: MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Scopus, PEDro, and Index to Chiropractic Literature were searched up to May 31, 2023. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing targeted SMT (mobilization or manipulation) to a nontargeted approach in patients with nonspecific low back pain, and measuring the effects on pain intensity and patient-reported disability. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data extraction, risk of bias, and evaluation of the overall certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach were performed by 2 authors independently. Meta-analyses were performed using the restricted maximum likelihood method. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials (n = 931 patients) were included. There was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference between targeted SMT and a nontargeted approach for pain intensity at postintervention (weighted mean difference = -0.20 [95% CI: -0.51, 0.10]) and at follow-up (weighted mean difference = 0.05 [95% CI: -0.26, 0.36]). For patient-reported disability, there was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference at postintervention (standardized mean difference = -0.04 [95% CI: -0.36, 0.29]) and at follow-up (standardized mean difference = -0.05 [95% CI: -0.24, 0.13]). Adverse events were reported in 4 trials, and were minor and evenly distributed between groups. CONCLUSION: Targeting a specific vertebral level when administering SMT for patients with nonspecific low back pain did not result in improved outcomes on pain intensity and patient-reported disability compared to a nontargeted approach. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(9):1-11. Epub: 28 July 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11962.

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
8.00
自引率
4.90%
发文量
101
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy® (JOSPT®) publishes scientifically rigorous, clinically relevant content for physical therapists and others in the health care community to advance musculoskeletal and sports-related practice globally. To this end, JOSPT features the latest evidence-based research and clinical cases in musculoskeletal health, injury, and rehabilitation, including physical therapy, orthopaedics, sports medicine, and biomechanics. With an impact factor of 3.090, JOSPT is among the highest ranked physical therapy journals in Clarivate Analytics''s Journal Citation Reports, Science Edition (2017). JOSPT stands eighth of 65 journals in the category of rehabilitation, twelfth of 77 journals in orthopedics, and fourteenth of 81 journals in sport sciences. JOSPT''s 5-year impact factor is 4.061.
×
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