10 research outputs found
超伝導技術を応用した近未来船
Background: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most disabling and costly disorders affecting modern society, and approximately 90% of patients are labelled as having non-specific LBP (NSLBP). Several interventions for patients with NSLBP have been assessed in clinical trials, but heterogeneous reporting of outcomes in these trials has hindered comparison of results and performance of meta-analyses. Moreover, there is a risk of selective outcome reporting bias. To address these issues, the development of a core outcome set (COS) that should be measured in all clinical trials for a specific health condition has been recommended. A standardized set of outcomes for LBP was proposed in 1998, however, with evolution in COS development methodology, new instruments, interventions, and understanding of measurement properties, it is appropriate to update that proposal. This protocol describes the methods used in the initial step in developing a COS for NSLBP, namely, establishing a core domain set that should be measured in all clinical trials. Methods/Design: An International Steering Committee including researchers, clinicians, and patient representatives from four continents was formed to guide the development of this COS. The approach of initiatives like Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) was followed. Participants were invited to participate in a Delphi study aimed at generating a consensus-based core domain set for NSLBP. A list of potential core domains was drafted and presented to the Delphi participants who were asked to judge which domains were core. Participant suggestions about overlap, aggregation, or addition of potential core domains were addressed during the study. The patients' responses were isolated to assess whether there was substantial disagreement with the rest of the Delphi panel. A priori thresholds for consensus were established before each Delphi round. All participants' responses were analysed from a quantitative and qualitative perspective to ascertain that no substantial discrepancies between the two approaches emerged. Discussion: We present the initial step in developing a COS for NSLBP. The next step will be to determine which measurement instruments adequately cover the domains
Neuropathic pain screening questionnaires have limited measurement properties. A systematic review
Systematic review of prognostic factors predicting outcome in non-surgically treated patients with sciatica
Scientific Assessment and Innovation in Neurosurgical Treatment Strategie
Exercise for osteoarthritis of the knee
〈LEAP〉 highlights the findings and application of Cochrane reviews and other evidence pertinent to the practice of physical therapy. The Cochrane Library is a respected source of reliable evidence related to health care. Cochrane systematic reviews explore the evidence for and against the effectiveness and appropriateness of interventions - medications, surgery, education, nutrition, exercise - and the evidence for and against the use of diagnostic tests for specific conditions. Cochrane reviews are designed to facilitate the decisions of clinicians, patients, and others in health care by providing a careful review and interpretation of research studies published in the scientific literature.1Each article in this new PTJ series will summarize a Cochrane review or other scientific evidence resource on a single topic and will present clinical scenarios based on real patients to illustrate how the results of the review can be used to directly inform clinical decisions. This article focuses on a patient with moderate osteoarthritis in both knees. Can exercise help this patient
Prognosis of Physical Function Following Ankle Fracture: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis
•STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. •OBJECTIVES: To quantify the prognosis of physical function following ankle fracture. •BACKGROUND: Information about the course of recovery of physical function after ankle fracture is essential for patient care and health care policy. The existing data have not previously been included in a meta-analysis. •METHODS: Studies were identified using searches of electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PEDro, AMED, SPORTDiscus) and gray literature to September 2012. Studies of people with traumatic ankle fracture were included. Two reviewers independently screened references for inclusion, then extracted data and evaluated risk of bias. The outcome of interest was physical function (physical activity and activity limitation). Outcomes were converted to a common 100-point scale, on which higher scores indicated better outcomes. Meta-regression was conducted using generalized estimating equations. •RESULTS: Thirty-one studies (37 articles) were included. Adults with ankle fracture, present with significant activity limitation in the short term (mean at 1 month, 31.9; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.8, 45.1), recovered markedly but incompletely in the short to medium term (mean at 6 months, 78.3; 95% CI: 70.1, 85.1), and showed little further improvement in the long term (mean at 24 months, 86.6; 95% CI: 78.2, 95.0). Studies with older participants and predominantly male participants tended to report worse functional outcomes. •CONCLUSION: Adults typically experience a rapid initial recovery of physical function after ankle fracture (approximately 80% function at 6 months), but, on average, recovery remains incomplete 24 months after injury. PROSPERO registration number: 42012002979
Surgical versus conservative treatment for high-risk stress fractures of the lower leg (anterior tibial cortex, navicular and fifth metatarsal base): a systematic review
Aim To compare surgical and conservative treatment for high-risk stress fractures of the anterior tibial cortex, navicular and proximal fifth metatarsal. Methods Systematic searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and PEDro were performed to identify relevant prospective and retrospective studies. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Main outcomes were return to sport and complication rate. Results 18 studies were included (2 anterior tibia (N=31), 8 navicular (N=200) and 8 fifth metatarsal (N=246)). For anterior tibial fracture, no studies on initial surgery were eligible. Conservative treatment resulted in high complication rates and few cases returned to sport. For navicular fracture, a weighted mean return to sport of 22 for conservative and 16 weeks for surgical treatment was found. Six weeks of non-weightbearing cast was mostly used as conservative treatment. Surgical procedures varied widely. For the fifth metatarsal fracture, weighted mean return to sport was 19 for conservative and 14 weeks for surgical treatment. Surgery consisted of intramedullary screw fixation or tension band wiring. For conservative methods, insufficient details were reported. Overall, there was a high risk of bias; sample sizes were small and GRADE level of evidence was low. Conclusions Strong conclusions for surgical or conservative therapy for these high-risk stress fractures cannot be drawn; quality of evidence is low and subjected to a high risk of bias. However, there are unsatisfying outcomes of conservative therapy in the anterior tibia. The role of initial surgery is unknown. For the navicular, surgery provided an earlier return to sport; and when treated conservatively, weightbearing should be avoided. For the fifth metatarsal, surgery provided the best results. Treatment decision-making would greatly benefit from further prospective research
Surgical versus conservative treatment for high-risk stress fractures of the lower leg (anterior tibial cortex, navicular and fifth metatarsal base): a systematic review
Accuracy of the Canadian C-spine rule and NEXUS to screen for clinically important cervical spine injury in patients following blunt trauma: A systematic review
Background: There is uncertainty about the optimal approach to screen for clinically important cervical spine (C-spine) injury following blunt trauma. We conducted a systematic review to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the Canadian C-spine rule and the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) criteria, 2 rules that are available to assist emergency physicians to assess the need for cervical spine imaging. Methods: We identified studies by an electronic search of CINAHL, Embase and MEDLINE. We included articles that reported on a cohort of patients who experienced blunt trauma and for whom clinically important cervical spine injury detectable by diagnostic imaging was the differential diagnosis; evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the Canadian C-spine rule or NEXUS or both; and used an adequate reference standard. We assessed the methodologic quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies criteria. We used the extracted data to calculate sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and post-test probabilities. Results: We included 15 studies of modest methodologic quality. For the Canadian Cspine rule, sensitivity ranged from 0.90 to 1.00 and specificity ranged from 0.01 to 0.77. For NEXUS, sensitivity ranged from 0.83 to 1.00 and specificity ranged from 0.02 to 0.46. One study directly compared the accuracy of these 2 rules using the same cohort and found that the Canadian C-spine rule had better accuracy. For both rules, a negative test was more informative for reducing the probability of a clinically important cervical spine injury. Interpretation: Based on studies with modest methodologic quality and only one direct comparison, we found that the Canadian C-spine rule appears to have better diagnostic accuracy than the NEXUS criteria. Future studies need to follow rigorous methodologic procedures to ensure that the findings are as free of bias as possible
Does adherence to treatment mediate the relationship between patients' treatment outcome expectancies and the outcomes of pain intensity and recovery from acute low back pain?
It is believed that patients' expectancies about the effectiveness of treatment influence their treatment outcomes, but the working mechanism is rarely studied in patients with low back pain. Theoretical models suggest that adherence to treatment may be an important pathway. The aim of this study was to assess the mediating role of adherence to treatment in the relationship between expectancies and the outcomes of recovery and pain intensity in patients with acute low back pain. This study used data from a randomized placebo-controlled trial of paracetamol for acute low back pain. Expectancies were measured with the Credibility Expectancy Questionnaire. Adherence was measured with a medication diary. Pain intensity was recorded daily in a diary on a 0 to 10 pain scale, and recovery was defined as the first of 7 consecutive days scoring 0 or 1 on a 6-point pain scale. Cox regression (dependent variable: recovery) and linear mixed-model analyses (dependent variable: daily pain intensity scores) were performed. The "difference in coefficients" approach was used to establish mediation. A total of 1573 participants were included in current analyses. There was a small but highly significant relationship between expectancies and outcomes; 3.3% of the relationship between expectancies and recovery and 14.2% of the relationship between expectancies and pain intensity were mediated by adherence to treatment. This study does not convincingly support the theory that adherence is a key pathway in the relationship between treatment outcome expectancies and recovery and pain intensity in this acute low back pain population