...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of hand therapy: Official journal of the American Society of Hand Therapists >Effectiveness of edema management techniques for subacute hand edema: A systematic review
【24h】

Effectiveness of edema management techniques for subacute hand edema: A systematic review

机译:水肿管理技术对亚脚后手的效力水肿:系统审查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Abstract Study Design Systematic review. Introduction Prolonged hand edema can have detrimental effects on range of motion and function. There is no consensus on how best to manage traumatic subacute edema. This is the first systematic review which examines the clinical effectiveness of edema treatments on hand volume. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the evidence of effectiveness of treatments for sub-acute hand edema. Methods A literature search of AMED, CINAHL, Embase, and OVID MEDLINE (from inception to August 2015) was undertaken. Studies were selected if they met the following inclusion criteria: randomized controlled or controlled trials in adults who have subacute swelling after a recent upper limb musculoskeletal trauma or cerebral vascular attack or after surgery. Two independent assessors rated study quality and risk of bias using the 24-point MacDermid Structured Effectiveness Quality Evaluation Scale (SEQES). Results Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. Study quality ranged from 23 to 41 out of 48 points on the SEQES. A total of 16 edema interventions were evaluated across the studies. Due to heterogeneity of the patient characteristics, interventions, and outcomes assessed, it was not possible to pool the results from all studies. Therefore, a narrative best evidence synthesis was undertaken. There is low to moderate quality evidence with limited confidence in the effect estimate to support the use of manual edema mobilization methods in conjunction with standard therapy to reduce problematic hand edema. Conclusion Manual edema mobilization techniques should be considered in conjunction with conventional therapies, in cases of excessive edema or when the edema has not responded to conventional treatment alone; however, manual edema mobilization is not advocated as a routine intervention. Level of Evidence 2b.
机译:抽象研究设计系统评价。介绍延长手机水肿可能对运动范围和功能产生不利影响。没有关于如何最好地管理创伤性亚克斯水肿的共识。这是第一次系统综述,检查水肿治疗的临床效果。该研究的目的是这种系统审查的目的是检查亚急性手水肿治疗有效性的证据。方法采用琥珀,CINAHL,EMBASE和OVID MEDLINE(从成立于2015年8月)的文献搜索。如果他们符合以下纳入标准,则选择研究:在最近的上肢肌肉骨骼创伤或脑血管攻击或手术后,在成年人中的随机控制或受控试验。两个独立评估员使用24点MacDermid结构效能质量评估规模(SEQES)进行评级研究质量和偏置风险。结果十项研究达到了纳入标准。 SEQES在48分中的学习质量范围为23至41分。在研究中,共评估了16个水肿干预。由于患者特征的异质性,干预和结果评估,因此无法从所有研究中汇总结果。因此,进行了叙事最佳证据综合。较低的质量证据具有有限的效果估计,支持使用手动水肿动员方法与标准治疗,以减少有问题的手动水肿。结论手动水肿动员技术应与常规疗法一起考虑,在过量水肿或水肿尚未单独响应常规治疗时;但是,手动水肿动员未被倡导为常规干预。证据级别2B。

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