首页> 外文期刊>Chiropractic and Manual Therapies >Exploring the definition of ?acute? neck pain: a prospective cohort observational study comparing the outcomes of chiropractic patients with 0–2?weeks, 2–4?weeks and 4–12?weeks of symptoms
【24h】

Exploring the definition of ?acute? neck pain: a prospective cohort observational study comparing the outcomes of chiropractic patients with 0–2?weeks, 2–4?weeks and 4–12?weeks of symptoms

机译:探索“急性”的定义颈部疼痛:一项前瞻性队列研究,比较了0至2周,2至4周和4至12周症状的脊椎按摩治疗患者的结局

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Neck pain is a common complaint in chiropractic patients. Amongst other baseline variables, numerous studies identify duration of symptoms as a strong predictor of outcome in neck pain patients. The usual time frame used for ‘acute’ onset of pain is between 0 and 4?weeks. However, the appropriateness of this time frame has been challenged for chiropractic low back pain patients. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare outcomes in neck pain patients with 0–2 vs 2–4 and 4–12?weeks of symptoms undergoing chiropractic treatment. Methods This is a prospective cohort observational study with 1?year follow-up including 495 patients whose data was collected between October 2009 and March 2015. Patients were divided into high-acute (0–2?weeks), mid-acute (2–4?weeks) and subacute (4–12?weeks) corresponding to duration of their symptoms at initial treatment. Patients completed the numerical pain rating scale (NRS) and Bournemouth questionnaire for neck pain (BQN) at baseline. At follow-up time points of 1?week, 1?month, 3?months, 6?months and 1?year the NRS and BQN were completed along with the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale. The PGIC responses were dichotomized into ‘improved’ and ‘not improved’ patients and compared between the 3 subgroups. The Chi-square test was used to compare improved patients between the 3 subgroups and the unpaired Student’s t-test was used for the NRS and BQN change scores. Results The proportion of patients ‘improved’ was only significantly higher for patients with symptoms of 0–2?weeks compared to 2–4?weeks at the 1?week outcome time point ( p =?0.015). The NRS changes scores were significantly greater for patients with 2–4?weeks of symptoms compared to 4–12?weeks of symptoms only at 1?week ( p =?0.035). Conclusions The time period of 0–4?weeks of symptoms as the definition of “acute” neck pain should be maintained. Independent of the exact duration of symptoms, medium-term and long-term outcome is favourable for acute as well as subacute neck pain patients. Trial registration Not applicable for prospective cohort studies. Ethics approval prior to study EK 19/2009.
机译:背景技术颈椎疼痛是脊椎按摩治疗患者的常见病。在其他基线变量中,许多研究都将症状持续时间确定为颈痛患者预后的强有力指标。通常,“急性”疼痛发作的时间范围是0到4个星期。然而,对于脊椎按摩疗法的腰痛患者来说,这个时间框架的适用性受到了挑战。因此,本研究的目的是比较接受脊骨按摩治疗的0至2周,2至4周和4至12周症状的颈部疼痛患者的预后。方法这是一项前瞻性队列观察性研究,为期1年,包括2009年10月至2015年3月期间收集的495例患者。患者分为高急性(0–2?周),中急性(2–3周)。 4周)和亚急性(4-12周),对应于他们在初次治疗时的症状持续时间。患者在基线时完成了数字疼痛评分量表(NRS)和伯恩茅斯颈部疼痛问卷(BQN)。在1周,1月,3月,6月和1年的随访时间点,完成了NRS和BQN以及患者总体变化印象(PGIC)量表。 PGIC反应分为“改善”和“未改善”患者,并在3个亚组之间进行比较。卡方检验用于比较3个亚组之间的病情改善,未配对的学生t检验用于NRS和BQN变化评分。结果症状为0–2周的患者,“改善”的患者比例仅显着高于1周结果点的2–4周(p =?0.015)。症状为2–4周的患者的NRS变化评分显着高于仅在1周时为4–12周的患者(p =?0.035)。结论应维持0到4周的症状周期,即“急性”颈部疼痛的定义。与症状的确切持续时间无关,中期和长期结果对急性以及亚急性颈部疼痛患者均有利。试验注册不适用于前瞻性队列研究。在研究EK 19/2009之前获得伦理学批准。

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