共 50 条
Stretch for the treatment and prevention of contracture: an abridged republication of a Cochrane Systematic Review
被引:53
|作者:
Harvey, Lisa A.
[1
]
Katalinic, Owen M.
[1
]
Herbert, Robert D.
[2
]
Moseley, Anne M.
[3
]
Lannin, Natasha A.
[4
]
Schurr, Karl
[5
]
机构:
[1] Univ Sydney, Sydney Sch Med, Northern Clin Sch, John Walsh Ctr Rehabil Res, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Neurosci Res Australia, Randwick, NSW, Australia
[3] Univ Sydney, George Inst Global Hlth, Sydney Med Sch, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[4] La Trobe Univ, Coll Sci Hlth & Engn, Dept Community & Clin Allied Hlth, Sch Allied Hlth,Occupat Therapy, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[5] Physiotherapy Consultant, Sydney, NSW, Australia
关键词:
Stretch;
Physical therapy;
Contracture;
Systematic review;
MARIE-TOOTH-DISEASE;
ANKLE DORSIFLEXION;
WRIST CONTRACTURE;
RANDOMIZED-TRIAL;
SUBACUTE STROKE;
ADULTS;
CHILDREN;
PEOPLE;
RANGE;
PROGRAM;
D O I:
10.1016/j.jphys.2017.02.014
中图分类号:
R826.8 [整形外科学];
R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学];
R726.2 [小儿整形外科学];
R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号:
摘要:
Question: Is stretch effective for the treatment and prevention of contractures in people with neurological and non-neurological conditions? Design: A Cochrane Systematic Review with meta-analyses of randomised trials. Participants: People with or at risk of contractures. Intervention: Trials were considered for inclusion if they compared stretch to no stretch, or stretch plus co-intervention to co-intervention only. The stretch could be administered in anyway. Outcome measures: The outcome of interestwas joint mobility. Two sets of meta-analyses were conducted with a random-effects model: one for people with neurological conditions and the other for people with non-neurological conditions. The quality of evidence supporting the results of the two sets of meta-analyses was assessed using GRADE. Results: Eighteen studies involving 549 participants examined the effectiveness of stretch in people with neurological conditions, and provided useable data. The pooled mean difference was 2 deg (95% CI 0 to 3) favouring stretch. This was equivalent to a relative change of 2% (95% CI 0 to 3). Eighteen studies involving 865 participants examined the effectiveness of stretch in people with non-neurological conditions, and provided useable data. The pooled standardised mean difference was 0.2 SD (95% CI 0 to 0.3) favouring stretch. This translated to an absolute mean increase of 1 deg (95% CI 0 to 2) and a relative change of 1% (95% CI 0 to 2). The GRADE level of evidence was high for both sets of meta-analyses. Conclusion: Stretch does not have clinically important effects on joint mobility. (C) 2017 Australian Physiotherapy Association. Published by Elsevier B. V.
引用
收藏
页码:67 / 75
页数:9
相关论文