| Literature DB >> 23531493 |
Liselotte Persson1, Leif Anderberg.
Abstract
STUDYEntities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23531493 PMCID: PMC3592766 DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1327805
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Spine Care J ISSN: 1663-7976
Fig. 1Study design.
Selected demographic and social data.*
| No. (%) | Women | 78 (56) |
| Men | 62 (44) | |
| Age, y | Mean ± SD | 52 ± 8.9 |
| Median (q1–q3) | 52 (46–58) | |
| Pain duration, mo | Mean ± SD | 23 ± 16 |
| Median (q1–q3) | 20 (12–30) | |
| Symptomatic nerve root, No. (%) | C IV | 5 (4) |
| C V | 9 (6) | |
| C VI | 72 (52) | |
| C VII | 45 (32) | |
| C VIII | 9 (6) | |
| Symptomatic side, No. (%) | Right | 75 (54) |
| Left | 65 (46) |
Mean ± SD and median, quartiles (q1 and q3) are given. N = 140.
Fig. 2Pain distribution according to VAS for all patients (n = 140) during the study.
Localizations of pain reduction at follow-up in patients with positive response to treatment (n = 69).*
| Pain | No. (%) with ≥ 50% pain reduction on VAS | No. (%) with 100% pain reduction on VAS |
|---|---|---|
| Neck | 68 (49) | 28 (20) |
| Shoulder | 65 (46) | 34 (24) |
| Arm | 69 (49) | 38 (27) |
VAS indicates Visual Analog Scale.
Neck Disability Index (NDI) total score in percentage before and at follow-up in the group with positive response and in nonresponders to the treatment.
| NDI before treatment | NDI at follow-up | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (median) | 44 (40) | 30 (28) | .000 |
| SD (range) | ± 18.0 (6–94) | ± 18.3 (4–86) | |
| Mean (median) | 47 (46) | 46 (48) | .698 |
| SD (range) | ± 14.1 (14–76) | ± 13.5 (10–76) | |
Patients’ subjective effects and reactions at follow-up (n = 140).
| Unchanged | Better | Worse | |
|---|---|---|---|
| How is your overall reaction to the treatment? | 28 (20%) | 109 (78%) | 3 (2%) |
| Have you felt any changes in neck pain? | 54 (39%) | 81 (58%) | 5 (3%) |
| Have you felt any changes in arm pain? | 41 (29%) | 94 (67%) | 5 (4%) |
| Have you felt any changes in headache? | 72 (52%) | 62 (44%) | 6 (4%) |
| Has your neck mobility undergone any changes? | 95 (68%) | 43 (31%) | 2 (1%) |
| Have your shoulder/arm mobility undergone any changes? | 99 (71%) | 41 (29%) | 0 (0%) |
| Have you changed your intake of analgesics? | 71 (51%) | 65 (46%) | 4 (3%) |
| Has your quality of sleep undergone any changes? | 82 (59%) | 51 (36%) | 7 (5%) |
| Final class of evidence-treatment | |
|---|---|
| Study design | |
| RCT | |
| Cohort | |
| Case control | |
| Case series | • |
| Methods | |
| Concealed allocation (RCT) | |
| Intention to treat (RCT) | |
| Blinded/independent evaluation of primary outcome | |
| F/U ≥85% | • |
| Adequate sample size | |
| Control for confounding | |
| The definiton of the different classes of evidence is available on page 63. | |