...
首页> 外文期刊>Chiropractic and Manual Therapies >Comparative effectiveness of manipulation, mobilisation and the Activator instrument in treatment of non-specific neck pain: a systematic review
【24h】

Comparative effectiveness of manipulation, mobilisation and the Activator instrument in treatment of non-specific neck pain: a systematic review

机译:操纵,动员和激活器工具在治疗非特异性颈部疼痛中的比较有效性:系统评价

获取原文

摘要

Background Neck pain is a common problem and different forms of manual therapy are used in its treatment. The purpose of this systematic review was to critically appraise the literature that directly compared manipulation, mobilisation and the Activator instrument for non-specific neck pain. Methods Electronic databases (MEDLINE, MANTIS and CINAHL) were searched from their inception to October 2005 for all English language randomised clinical trials that directly compared manipulation, mobilisation and the Activator instrument. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to select the studies and these studies were then evaluated using validated criteria. Results Five such studies were identified. The methodological quality was mostly poor. Findings from the studies were mixed and no one therapy was shown to be more effective than the others. Conclusion Further high quality research has to be done before a recommendation can be made as to the most effective manual method for non-specific neck pain.
机译:背景技术颈痛是一个普遍的问题,在其治疗中使用了不同形式的手动疗法。这篇系统综述的目的是对直接比较操纵,动员和Activator器械治疗非特异性颈部疼痛的文献进行严格评估。方法从电子数据库(MEDLINE,MANTIS和CINAHL)开始搜索到2005年10月,以查找直接比较操作,动员和Activator仪器的所有英语随机临床试验。应用纳入和排除标准选择研究,然后使用经过验证的标准对这些研究进行评估。结果确定了五项此类研究。方法学质量大多较差。从研究中得出的结论参差不齐,没有一种疗法显示比其他疗法更有效。结论在对非特异性颈部疼痛的最有效的手动方法提出建议之前,必须进行进一步的高质量研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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