...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Spine >Re: Chou R, Loeser JD,Owens DK, et al. Interventional therapies, surgery, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation for low back pain: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline from the American Pain Society. Spine 2009; 34:1066-77.
【24h】

Re: Chou R, Loeser JD,Owens DK, et al. Interventional therapies, surgery, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation for low back pain: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline from the American Pain Society. Spine 2009; 34:1066-77.

机译：回复：Chou R，Loeser JD，Owens DK等。腰背痛的介入疗法，手术和跨学科康复：美国疼痛学会的循证临床实践指南。脊柱2009; 34：1066-77。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Guidelines on low back pain published by American Pain Society and later published in Spine, while using similar criteria such as USPTF (United States Preventive Task Force) and the AHRQ (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality) guidelines and the ASIPP guidelines (American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians) arrived at dissimilar results, thus pointing to the question of "subjectivity" bias in a so-called objective measure of review. Two studies included in the review but excluded by the ASIPP guidelines were the Zahar and the Ackerman et at studies. Zahar compared 2 different pathologies (herniated nucleus pulposus and spinal stenosis) and used very high volumes (sterile saline with local anesthetic with or without steroid 30 mL) injected blindly without fluoroscopic guidance and without any imaging studies to demonstrate contrast spread (epidurography).
机译：美国腰痛协会发布的下腰痛指南，后来在Spine上发表，同时使用类似的标准，例如USPTF（美国预防性工作组）和AHRQ（医疗保健研究与质量机构）指南以及ASIPP指南（美国介入性疼痛医师）得出的结果不尽相同，因此在所谓的客观评估中指出了“主观性”偏差的问题。评价中包括但被ASIPP指南排除的两项研究是Zahar和Ackerman等人的研究。 Zahar比较了2种不同的病理学（椎间盘突出症和椎管狭窄），并使用了非常大的体积（局部麻醉药加或不加30mL的类固醇的无菌生理盐水）在无荧光检查的情况下盲目注射，也没有任何影像学检查来显示造影剂扩散（肾盂造影）。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号