腰痛或颈痛患者压痛阈值的可靠性:一项系统综述

IF 1.3 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY British Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-26 DOI:10.1177/20494637231196647
Anit Bhattacharyya, Lily D Hopkinson, Paul S Nolet, John Srbely
{"title":"腰痛或颈痛患者压痛阈值的可靠性:一项系统综述","authors":"Anit Bhattacharyya, Lily D Hopkinson, Paul S Nolet, John Srbely","doi":"10.1177/20494637231196647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Low-back and neck pain affect a great number of individuals worldwide. The pressure pain threshold has the potential to be a useful quantitative measure of mechanical pain in a clinical setting, if it proves to be reliable in this population. The objectives of this systematic review are to: (1) analyze the literature evaluating the reliability of pressure pain threshold (PPT) measurements in the assessment of neck and low-back pain, (2) summarize the evidence from these studies, and (3) characterize the limitations of PPT measurement.</p><p><strong>Databases and data treatment: </strong>Relevant literature from PubMed and the Web of Science electronic databases were screened in a 3-step process according to inclusion/exclusion criteria. Relevant studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies (QAREL) tool, and results of all studies were summarized and tabulated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 922 citations identified, 11 studies were deemed relevant for critical appraisal, and 8 studies were deemed to have low risk-of bias. Intra-rater reliability, reported in all studies (<i>n</i> = 637) and inter-rater reliability, reported in 2 studies (<i>n</i> = 200) were consistently reported to be good to excellent (ICC 0.75-0.99 and ICC 0.81-0.90, respectively). Studies were also found to have significant variation in PPT measurement procedures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Though intra- and inter-rater reliability was found to be high in all studies, the variation in PPT measurement protocols could affect validity and absolute reliability. As such, it is recommended that standard guidelines be developed for clinical use.</p>","PeriodicalId":46585,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Pain","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10642499/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The reliability of pressure pain threshold in individuals with low back or neck pain: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Anit Bhattacharyya, Lily D Hopkinson, Paul S Nolet, John Srbely\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20494637231196647\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Low-back and neck pain affect a great number of individuals worldwide. The pressure pain threshold has the potential to be a useful quantitative measure of mechanical pain in a clinical setting, if it proves to be reliable in this population. The objectives of this systematic review are to: (1) analyze the literature evaluating the reliability of pressure pain threshold (PPT) measurements in the assessment of neck and low-back pain, (2) summarize the evidence from these studies, and (3) characterize the limitations of PPT measurement.</p><p><strong>Databases and data treatment: </strong>Relevant literature from PubMed and the Web of Science electronic databases were screened in a 3-step process according to inclusion/exclusion criteria. Relevant studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies (QAREL) tool, and results of all studies were summarized and tabulated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 922 citations identified, 11 studies were deemed relevant for critical appraisal, and 8 studies were deemed to have low risk-of bias. Intra-rater reliability, reported in all studies (<i>n</i> = 637) and inter-rater reliability, reported in 2 studies (<i>n</i> = 200) were consistently reported to be good to excellent (ICC 0.75-0.99 and ICC 0.81-0.90, respectively). Studies were also found to have significant variation in PPT measurement procedures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Though intra- and inter-rater reliability was found to be high in all studies, the variation in PPT measurement protocols could affect validity and absolute reliability. As such, it is recommended that standard guidelines be developed for clinical use.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46585,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Pain\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10642499/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Pain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20494637231196647\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20494637231196647","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

腰痛和颈部疼痛影响着全世界许多人。如果压痛阈值在这一人群中被证明是可靠的,那么它有可能成为临床环境中机械疼痛的有用定量测量。本系统综述的目的是:(1)分析评估颈部和腰痛中压痛阈值(PPT)测量可靠性的文献,(2)总结这些研究的证据,以及(3)描述PPT测量的局限性。PubMed和Web of Science电子数据库的相关文献根据纳入/排除标准分三步筛选。使用可靠性研究质量评估(QAREL)工具评估相关研究的偏倚风险,并将所有研究的结果汇总并制成表格。在确定的922篇引文中,11项研究被认为与批判性评价相关,8项研究被视为偏倚风险较低。在所有研究中报告的评分者内部可靠性(n=637)和在2项研究(n=200)中报告的评级者间可靠性一致报告为良好至优秀(ICC分别为0.75–0.99和0.81–0.90)。研究还发现PPT测量程序存在显著差异。尽管在所有研究中,评分者内部和评分者之间的可靠性都很高,但PPT测量方案的变化可能会影响有效性和绝对可靠性。因此,建议制定临床使用的标准指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The reliability of pressure pain threshold in individuals with low back or neck pain: a systematic review.

Background and objective: Low-back and neck pain affect a great number of individuals worldwide. The pressure pain threshold has the potential to be a useful quantitative measure of mechanical pain in a clinical setting, if it proves to be reliable in this population. The objectives of this systematic review are to: (1) analyze the literature evaluating the reliability of pressure pain threshold (PPT) measurements in the assessment of neck and low-back pain, (2) summarize the evidence from these studies, and (3) characterize the limitations of PPT measurement.

Databases and data treatment: Relevant literature from PubMed and the Web of Science electronic databases were screened in a 3-step process according to inclusion/exclusion criteria. Relevant studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies (QAREL) tool, and results of all studies were summarized and tabulated.

Results: Of 922 citations identified, 11 studies were deemed relevant for critical appraisal, and 8 studies were deemed to have low risk-of bias. Intra-rater reliability, reported in all studies (n = 637) and inter-rater reliability, reported in 2 studies (n = 200) were consistently reported to be good to excellent (ICC 0.75-0.99 and ICC 0.81-0.90, respectively). Studies were also found to have significant variation in PPT measurement procedures.

Conclusions: Though intra- and inter-rater reliability was found to be high in all studies, the variation in PPT measurement protocols could affect validity and absolute reliability. As such, it is recommended that standard guidelines be developed for clinical use.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Pain
British Journal of Pain CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
11.10%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: British Journal of Pain is a peer-reviewed quarterly British journal with an international multidisciplinary Editorial Board. The journal publishes original research and reviews on all major aspects of pain and pain management. Reviews reflect the body of evidence of the topic and are suitable for a multidisciplinary readership. Where empirical evidence is lacking, the reviews reflect the generally held opinions of experts in the field. The Journal has broadened its scope and has become a forum for publishing primary research together with brief reports related to pain and pain interventions. Submissions from all over the world have been published and are welcome. Official journal of the British Pain Society.
期刊最新文献
What influences post-operative opioid requirements for tibial fractures? Botulinum toxin: Should we reconsider its place in the treatment of neuropathic pain? Experience of compassion-based practice in mindfulness for health for individuals with persistent pain. Prehabilitation: The underutilised weapon for chronic pain management. The interaction between psychological factors and conditioned pain modulation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1