首页> 外文期刊>Spine >Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Extensible and Inextensible Lumbosacral Orthoses and Standard Care Alone in the Management of Lower Back Pain
【24h】

Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Extensible and Inextensible Lumbosacral Orthoses and Standard Care Alone in the Management of Lower Back Pain

机译:随机化的临床试验比较可伸缩和不可互生的腰骶部,并单独在腰痛管理中单独进行标准护理

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Summary of Background Data. LSOs are commonly used for the management of LBP, but their effectiveness may vary because of design. An inextensible LSO (iLSO) reduces trunk motion and increases trunk stiffness, whereas an extensible LSO (eLSO) does not. Methods A total of 98 participants with LBP were randomized to 3 groups: (1) standard care (SC) group, which included medication and physical therapy (n = 29), (2) SC with eLSO (eLSO group) (n = 32), and (3) SC with iLSO (iLSO group) (n = 37). Outcome measures were evaluated before and after 2 weeks of treatment: modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Patient Specific Activity Scale, pain ratings, and Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire. Results. There were no statistically significant differences between groups at baseline. Compared with the SC alone, iLSO group showed greater improvement on the ODI scores (P = 0.01) but not the eLSO group. The ODI scores improved by a mean of 2.4 (95% confidence interval [Cl], 2.2-7.1), 8.1 (95% CI, 2.8-13.4), and 14.0 (95% Cl, 8.2-19.8) points for SC, eLSO, and iLSO groups, respectively. Individuals wearing the iLSO had 4.7 times higher odds of achieving 50% or greater improvement in the ODI scores than those assigned to SC (95% Cl, 1.2-18.5, P = 0.03). Both the eLSO and iLSO groups had a greater improvement in the Patient Specific Activity Scale scores than the SC group (P = .05 and P = 0.01, respectively), but the change did not meet the minimal clinically important difference. Pain ratings improved for all 3 groups, with no statistical difference between them. Finally, no significant differences across groups were found for the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire. Conclusion. An iLSO led to greater improvement in ODI scores than SC and an eLSO. We surmise that the likely mechanism responsible for this difference in outcome was the added trunk stiffness and motion restriction by the iLSO.
机译:背景数据摘要。当地销售代表处通常用于LBP的管理,但其效果可能会因设计的不同而不同。不可延伸的LSO(ILSO)减小躯干运动和躯干的增加刚度,而可扩展LSO(ELSO)没有。方法对98名参与者LBP被随机分为3组:(1)标准护理(SC)基团,其中包括药物治疗和物理治疗(N = 29),(2)与ELSO(ELSO组)(N = 32 SC ),以及(3)与ILSO(ILSO组SC)(N = 37)。结局指标进行评价之前和治疗2周后:改性Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI),患者的具体活动量表,疼痛评分和恐惧避免信仰问卷。结果。目前还没有统计在基准组间差异显著。单独用SC相比,ILSO组显示在ODI分数(P = 0.01),但不是ELSO组更大的改善。通过的平均2.4(95%置信区间[CL],2.2-7.1),8.1(95%CI,2.8-13.4)和14.0改善了ODI分数(95%的Cl,8.2-19.8)点SC,ELSO和ILSO组,分别。穿着ILSO个人必须在ODI得分高于那些分配给SC实现50%或更大的改善的高4.7倍的赔率(95%的Cl,1.2-18.5,P = 0.03)。两者ELSO和ILSO组具有在患者特定活动量表得分高于SC组(P = 0.05和P = 0.01)了较大的改进,但这种变化没有达到最小临床重要差异。疼痛评级提高为所有3组,他们之间无统计学差异。最后,跨组间无显著差异被发现的恐惧回避信念问卷。结论。一个ILSO导致ODI得分高于SC和ELSO较大的改善。我们推测,负责结局这种差异可能的机制是由ILSO增加躯干僵硬和运动限制。

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