物理治疗实践中疼痛量化的方法——系统综述

Shahrukh Abbasi, Shahzaib Naseer, S. Farooqui
{"title":"物理治疗实践中疼痛量化的方法——系统综述","authors":"Shahrukh Abbasi, Shahzaib Naseer, S. Farooqui","doi":"10.29052/2412-3188.v9.i1.2022.39-50","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: This study aimed to determine the most common pain intensity assessment tool that has been used in different physical therapy management-based studies as a primary outcome measure for the quantification of pain. \nMethodology: The electronic databases including PubMed, Google Scholar, PEDro, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies from January 2015 to September 2021 by using keywords like 'pain,' 'pain intensity,' 'Visual Analogue Scale,' and 'Numeric Pain Rating Scale.' Randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies in which pain management is considered an outcome measure published in the English language were included. In contrast, Non-RCTs were excluded that were based on pain management strategies other than physical therapy or conducted in inpatient department or based on approaches of telerehab. \nResults: The findings revealed that n=1,292 participants were given different physical therapy interventions in which n=792 (61.3%) were evaluated for their pain on VAS, followed by n=453 (35%) on NPRS and n=169 (13%) on PPT of the total population. \nConclusion: VAS was the most frequently used tool to determine the patient's perception of pain, followed by NPRS and McGill Pain Questionnaire.","PeriodicalId":34185,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Psychophysiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Approaches used for the Quantification of Pain in Physical Therapy Practices-A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Shahrukh Abbasi, Shahzaib Naseer, S. Farooqui\",\"doi\":\"10.29052/2412-3188.v9.i1.2022.39-50\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: This study aimed to determine the most common pain intensity assessment tool that has been used in different physical therapy management-based studies as a primary outcome measure for the quantification of pain. \\nMethodology: The electronic databases including PubMed, Google Scholar, PEDro, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies from January 2015 to September 2021 by using keywords like 'pain,' 'pain intensity,' 'Visual Analogue Scale,' and 'Numeric Pain Rating Scale.' Randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies in which pain management is considered an outcome measure published in the English language were included. In contrast, Non-RCTs were excluded that were based on pain management strategies other than physical therapy or conducted in inpatient department or based on approaches of telerehab. \\nResults: The findings revealed that n=1,292 participants were given different physical therapy interventions in which n=792 (61.3%) were evaluated for their pain on VAS, followed by n=453 (35%) on NPRS and n=169 (13%) on PPT of the total population. \\nConclusion: VAS was the most frequently used tool to determine the patient's perception of pain, followed by NPRS and McGill Pain Questionnaire.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34185,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Psychophysiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Psychophysiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29052/2412-3188.v9.i1.2022.39-50\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Psychophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29052/2412-3188.v9.i1.2022.39-50","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究旨在确定在不同的基于物理治疗管理的研究中使用的最常见的疼痛强度评估工具,作为量化疼痛的主要结果指标。方法:检索PubMed、Google Scholar、PEDro和Cochrane Library等电子数据库,使用“疼痛”、“疼痛强度”、“视觉模拟量表”和“数字疼痛评定量表”等关键词,确定2015年1月至2021年9月的相关研究包括以英语发表的随机对照试验或准实验研究,其中疼痛管理被视为一种结果衡量标准。相反,基于物理治疗以外的疼痛管理策略、在住院部进行或基于远程康复方法的非随机对照试验被排除在外。结果:研究结果显示,1292名参与者接受了不同的物理治疗干预,其中792名(61.3%)在VAS上评估了他们的疼痛,其次是453名(35%)在NPRS上和169名(13%)在PPT上。结论:VAS是确定患者疼痛感知的最常用工具,其次是NPRS和McGill疼痛问卷。
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
Approaches used for the Quantification of Pain in Physical Therapy Practices-A Systematic Review
Background: This study aimed to determine the most common pain intensity assessment tool that has been used in different physical therapy management-based studies as a primary outcome measure for the quantification of pain. Methodology: The electronic databases including PubMed, Google Scholar, PEDro, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies from January 2015 to September 2021 by using keywords like 'pain,' 'pain intensity,' 'Visual Analogue Scale,' and 'Numeric Pain Rating Scale.' Randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies in which pain management is considered an outcome measure published in the English language were included. In contrast, Non-RCTs were excluded that were based on pain management strategies other than physical therapy or conducted in inpatient department or based on approaches of telerehab. Results: The findings revealed that n=1,292 participants were given different physical therapy interventions in which n=792 (61.3%) were evaluated for their pain on VAS, followed by n=453 (35%) on NPRS and n=169 (13%) on PPT of the total population. Conclusion: VAS was the most frequently used tool to determine the patient's perception of pain, followed by NPRS and McGill Pain Questionnaire.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Psychophysiology of Wellbeing; A must to introduce in undergraduate programs The 6-AF Evaluation of Neuroprotective Activity against Cd- Induced Oxidative Stress and Degenerative Brain Disease including PD in Mice Assessing BDNF correlations with non-invasive indicators of neurological decline in different age groups Investigating the impact of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) in reducing birth trauma symptoms The Be aware and grateful for little things: The Relative Contribution of Mindfulness and Gratitude in Predicting Satisfaction
×
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