首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Evidence-Based Spine-Care Journal >The Outcomes of Manipulation or Mobilization Therapy Compared with Physical Therapy or Exercise for Neck Pain: A Systematic Review
【2h】

The Outcomes of Manipulation or Mobilization Therapy Compared with Physical Therapy or Exercise for Neck Pain: A Systematic Review

机译:手法或动员疗法与物理疗法或运动治疗颈部疼痛的结果:系统评价

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Study Design Systematic review.>Study Rationale Neck pain is a prevalent condition. Spinal manipulation and mobilization procedures are becoming an accepted treatment for neck pain. However, data on the effectiveness of these treatments have not been summarized.>Objective To compare manipulation or mobilization of the cervical spine to physical therapy or exercise for symptom improvement in patients with neck pain.>Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed using PubMed, the National Guideline Clearinghouse Database, and bibliographies of key articles, which compared spinal manipulation or mobilization therapy with physical therapy or exercise in patients with neck pain. Articles were included based on predetermined criteria and were appraised using a predefined quality rating scheme.>Results From 197 citations, 7 articles met all inclusion and exclusion criteria. There were no differences in pain improvement when comparing spinal manipulation to exercise, and there were inconsistent reports of pain improvement in subjects who underwent mobilization therapy versus physical therapy. No disability improvement was reported between treatment groups in studies of acute or chronic neck pain patients. No functional improvement was found with manipulation therapy compared with exercise treatment or mobilization therapy compared with physical therapy groups in patients with acute pain. In chronic neck pain subjects who underwent spinal manipulation therapy compared to exercise treatment, results for short-term functional improvement were inconsistent.>Conclusion The data available suggest that there are minimal short- and long-term treatment differences in pain, disability, patient-rated treatment improvement, treatment satisfaction, health status, or functional improvement when comparing manipulation or mobilization therapy to physical therapy or exercise in patients with neck pain. This systematic review is limited by the variability of treatment interventions and lack of standardized outcomes to assess treatment benefit.
机译:>研究设计系统评价。>研究依据颈痛是一种普遍的疾病。脊柱操纵和动员程序正成为公认的颈部疼痛治疗方法。但是,有关这些治疗方法有效性的数据尚未总结。>目的比较颈椎的颈椎病患者的物理疗法或运动与物理疗法或运动对改善症状的效果。>方法< / strong>使用PubMed,National Guideline Clearinghouse Database和主要文献目录对文献进行了系统的回顾,这些文献比较了颈痛患者的脊柱操纵或动员疗法与物理疗法或运动。 >结果从197篇文献中,有7篇文章符合所有纳入和排除标准。将脊柱操作与运动进行比较时,疼痛改善没有差异,并且在进行动员治疗与物理治疗的受试者中,疼痛改善的报道不一致。在急性或慢性颈部疼痛患者的研究中,治疗组之间没有残疾改善的报道。与运动疗法或动员疗法相比,与物理疗法相比,手法疗法对急性疼痛患者没有功能改善。与运动疗法相比,在接受颈椎手法治疗的慢性颈痛受试者中,短期功能改善的结果不一致。>结论现有数据表明,在短期和长期的治疗中差异很小。将操作或动员疗法与物理疗法或运动进行颈部疼痛患者的比较时,疼痛,残疾,患者评价的治疗改善,治疗满意度,健康状况或功能改善。这种系统的审查受到治疗干预措施的可变性以及缺乏评估治疗获益的标准化结果的限制。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号