massage therapy

按摩疗法
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    临床实践指南(CPG)旨在确保基于证据的治疗易于实施。患者和临床医生是否遵循这些指南是模棱两可的。
    本研究的目的是在与脊柱外科医生协商之前,检查有多少主诉腰背痛(LBP)的患者接受了符合CPG建议的循证医学介入治疗。并评估CPG建议的依从性与基线因素之间的任何关联。
    这是三级护理中心的横断面队列分析。
    共有229例患者因选择性腰椎疾病而接受手术咨询。
    结果指标包括患者在转诊时或之前接受CPG推荐治疗的次数,经过验证的疼痛评分,EuroQol-5D(EQ-5D)健康状况,和Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)得分。
    在外科医生办公室收到转诊后,立即向患者发送评估人口统计学和功能特征以及总体医疗保健使用情况的问卷。
    药物治疗是咨询前最常见的方式(74.2%的患者),其中46.3%接受阿片类药物治疗。服用药物的数量与较高的ODI评分显着相关(R=0.23,p=.0004),较高的疼痛评分(R=0.15,p=.026),和较低的EQ-5D健康状况(R=-0.15,p=0.024)。相比之下,较低的疼痛评分(7.2vs.7.7,p=.037)和较低的ODI评分(26.6与29.9,p=.0023)与进行足够的锻炼有关。接受的治疗次数较少,疼痛评分较高(R=-0.14,p=0.035)。大多数(61.1%)的患者接受了两种或两种以下形式的治疗。
    在脊柱手术会诊前,LBP患者的循证医学介入治疗没有被利用。如果更多的患者接受CPG认可的保守模式,这可能会减少初级保健医生的不必要转诊,患者在漫长的等待名单上徘徊时可能不会恶化。需要进一步研究纳入知识翻译或卫生系统途径变化。
    Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are designed to ensure that evidence-based treatment is easily put into action. Whether patients and clinicians follow these guidelines is equivocal.
    The objectives of this study were to examine how many patients complaining of low back pain (LBP) underwent evidence-based medical interventional treatment in line with CPG recommendations before consultation with a spine surgeon, and to evaluate any associations between adherence to CPG recommendations and baseline factors.
    This is a cross-sectional cohort analysis at a tertiary care center.
    A total of 229 patients were referred for surgical consultation for an elective lumbar spinal condition.
    The outcome measures include the number of CPG-recommended treatments undertaken by patients at or before the time of referral, the validated pain score, the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) health status, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score.
    Questionnaires assessing demographic and functional characteristics as well as overall health care use were sent to patients immediately after their referral was received by the surgeon\'s office.
    Medications were the most common modality before consultation (74.2% of patients), of which 46.3% received opioids. The number of medications taken was significantly related to a higher ODI score (R=0.23, p=.0004), a higher pain score (R=0.15, p=.026), and a lower EQ-5D health status (R=-0.15, p=.024). In contrast, a lower pain score (7.2 vs. 7.7, p=.037) and a lower ODI score (26.6 vs. 29.9, p=.0023) were associated with performing adequate amounts of exercise. There was a significant association between lower numbers of treatments received and higher numerical pain rating scores (R=-0.14, p=.035). The majority (61.1%) of patients received two or less forms of treatment.
    Evidence-based medical interventional treatments for patients with LBP are not being taken advantage of before spine surgery consultation. If more patients were to undertake CPG-endorsed conservative modalities, it may result in fewer unnecessary referrals from primary care physicians, and patients might not deteriorate as much while lingering on long wait lists. Further studies incorporating knowledge translation or health system pathway changes are necessary.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:病例报告是一种基本工具,通过该工具,治疗性按摩和车身(TMB)从业人员可以通过详细介绍介绍来告知研究并影响其领域,治疗,以及在实践中遇到的单个人的后续行动。病例报告的不一致限制了其作为临床证据的基本来源的影响。使用适用于TMB的CAseREport(CARE)指南,本研究旨在对TMB从业人员在文献中撰写的TMB病例报告的报告质量提供丰富的描述.
    方法:1)对已发布的,由TMB从业人员根据PRISMA建议撰写的同行评审的TMB案例报告;2)基于TMB适应的CARE指南的审计开发;3)审计实施;4)对审计分数的描述性分析。
    结果:我们的搜索确定了977篇文章和35篇符合研究纳入标准。平均而言,TMB病例报告约占采用TMB的CARE指南确定的必要项目总数的58%。病例报告的介绍部分有最好的项目报告(平均80%),而病例介绍(54%)和结果(52%)部分总体得分中等,平均只包括20%的必需的从业者描述项目。审计分数显示抽象报告不一致,包括客户竞赛(20%)在内的审计案例报告很少,透视(26%),和职业/活动(40%);从业人员执业设置(12%),培训(12%),实践范围(29%),和认证(20%);不良事件或缺乏不良事件(17%);以及知情同意的某些方面(34%)。治疗描述符项目报告从高到低变化。讨论了各种关注的含义。
    结论:当前的审计和描述性分析突出了2015年之前TMB病例报告中的一些报告不一致之处。病例报告的报告准则是重要的,如果标准,和影响,需要TMB病例报告。遵守适用于TMB的CARE指南概述的报告规范可以提高TMB病例报告在研究中的影响和可用性,教育,和实践。
    BACKGROUND: Case reports are a fundamental tool through which therapeutic massage and bodywork (TMB) practitioners can inform research and impact their field by detailing the presentation, treatment, and follow-up of a single individual encountered in practice. Inconsistencies in case reporting limit their impact as fundamental sources of clinical evidence. Using the TMB-adapted CAse REport (CARE) guidelines, the current study sought to provide a rich description regarding the reporting quality of TMB practitioner authored TMB case reports in the literature.
    METHODS: 1) Systematic identification of published, peer-reviewed TMB case reports authored by TMB practitioners following PRISMA recommendations; 2) audit development based on TMB-adapted CARE guidelines; 3) audit implementation; and 4) descriptive analysis of audit scores.
    RESULTS: Our search identified 977 articles and 35 met study inclusion criteria. On average, TMB case reports included approximately 58% of the total items identified as necessary by the TMB-adapted CARE guidelines. Introduction sections of case reports had the best item reporting (80% on average), while Case Presentation (54%) and Results (52%) sections scored moderately overall, with only 20% of necessary Practitioner Description items included on average. Audit scores revealed inconsistent abstract reporting and few audited case reports including client race (20%), perspective (26%), and occupation/activities (40%); practitioner practice setting (12%), training (12%), scope-of-practice (29%), and credentialing (20%); adverse events or lack thereof (17%); and some aspect of informed consent (34%). Treatment descriptor item reporting varied from high to low. Various implications of concern are discussed.
    CONCLUSIONS: The current audit and descriptive analysis highlight several reporting inconsistencies in TMB case reports prior to 2015. Reporting guidelines for case reports are important if standards for, and impact of, TMB case reports are desired. Adherence to reporting specifications outlined by the TMB-adapted CARE guidelines could improve the impact and usability of TMB case reports in research, education, and practice.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    病例报告为治疗性按摩和车身(TMB)提供了基于实践的证据基础,以及许多其他与健康相关的领域。为了提高病例报告中包含的信息的一致性,CARE(CASEREport)小组为医学界制定并发布了一套指南,以促进系统的数据收集(http://www。care-statement.org/#).由于医学实践和TMB之间的差异,有必要修改CARE指南的某些部分,以使其与TMB病例报告兼容。因此,本文的目的是介绍CARE指南,将指南的每个部分应用于TMB实践和报告,并进行建议的调整,并强调关注,新的想法,以及TMB病例报告潜在作者的其他资源。适用于TMB病例报告的CARE指南的主要部分是诊断评估,后续行动和结果,和治疗干预。具体来说,因为诊断超出了大多数TMB从业者的范围,就如何将其他卫生保健提供者的诊断纳入TMB病例报告中提出建议.此外,建议案例介绍部分的两个新方面:a)评估措施,概述并描述了病例报告将重点关注的结果指标,和b)对TMB提供商的描述(即,实践范围,实践环境,经验水平,培训,认证,和/或专业知识)作为干预描述的一部分。本文以TMB从业人员撰写案例报告的实际资源为结尾,包括TMB病例报告模板-TMB从业人员可用于指导其撰写病例报告的单个文档。一旦TMB病例报告的作者采用了该模板,未来的努力可以探索对病例报告质量和数量的影响,以及它们如何影响TMB实践,研究,教育和,最终,客户。
    Case reports provide the foundation of practice-based evidence for therapeutic massage and bodywork (TMB), as well as many other health-related fields. To improve the consistency of information contained in case reports, the CARE (CAse REport) Group developed and published a set of guidelines for the medical community to facilitate systematic data collection (http://www.care-statement.org/#). Because of the differences between the practice of medicine and TMB, modifying some sections of the CARE guidelines is necessary to make them compatible with TMB case reports. Accordingly, the objectives of this article are to present the CARE guidelines, apply each section of the guidelines to TMB practice and reporting with suggested adaptations, and highlight concerns, new ideas, and other resources for potential authors of TMB case reports. The primary sections of the CARE guidelines adapted for TMB case reports are diagnostic assessment, follow-up and outcomes, and therapeutic intervention. Specifically, because diagnosis falls outside of the scope of most TMB practitioners, suggestions are made as to how diagnoses made by other health care providers should be included in the context of a TMB case report. Additionally, two new aspects of the case presentation section are recommended: a) assessment measures, which outline and describe the outcome measures on which the case report will focus, and b) a description of the TMB provider (i.e., scope of practice, practice environment, experience level, training, credentialing, and/or expertise) as part of the intervention description. This article culminates with practical resources for TMB practitioners writing case reports, including a TMB Case Report Template-a single document that TMB practitioners can use to guide his or her process of writing a case report. Once the template is adopted by authors of TMB case reports, future efforts can explore the impact on the quality and quantity of case reports and how they impact TMB practice, research, education and, ultimately, the clients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    BACKGROUND: The Academic Consortium for Complementary and Alternative Health Care (ACCAHC) is committed to advancing human health through the advancement and integration of the complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) professions within the American healthcare system. This will involve the maturation and integration of the licensed CAM professions into conventional healthcare delivery, and in turn, it will involve the development of competency in integrative healthcare and interprofessional education within the CAM professions.
    RESULTS: In 2010, ACCAHC resolved to identify the competencies necessary for this transformation, and in the process, discovered a parallel process of competency development within conventional healthcare, the Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC), representing the six major conventional healthcare professions.
    CONCLUSIONS: The ACCAHC competency document, its development, and its similarity to the IPEC document are discussed. The ACCAHC competency document identified two domains of competence that were not present in the IPEC document: evidence-informed practice and institutional healthcare practices. These two domains of competency are discussed with respect to their significance in both CAM and conventional healthcare practices.
    CONCLUSIONS: ACCAHC\'s goal is to foster collaboration among its member professions and with conventional healthcare professions, and to use these competency documents to improve and optimize healthcare delivery, practices, and outcomes in America. It is hoped that ACCAHC\'s competency document will catalyze interaction with IPEC leading to the adoption of a single shared competency document that will meet the needs of all healthcare providers and educators.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号