Advertisement

Manuelle Medizin

, Volume 43, Issue 5, pp 297–304 | Cite as

Anerkannte Evidenz der Wirksamkeit konservativer Behandlungen akuter und chronischer Nackenschmerzen

Eine Übersicht
  • J. J. M. Pool
  • S. M. Rubinstein
  • M. van Tulder
Originalien

Zusammenfassung

Die Forderung nach evidenzbasierter Medizin (EbM) hat in der letzten Dekade drastisch zugenommen. Im vorliegenden Artikel wird der Vorteil der EbM im Allgemeinen, besonders aber ihre Rolle in der Therapie chronischer Nackenschmerzen diskutiert. Obwohl die Evidenz der Wirksamkeit zur konservativen Behandlung chronischer Nackenschmerzen überwiegend uneinheitlich ist, erzielen Manipulation und/oder Mobilisationen in Kombination mit Physiotherapie noch die besten Ergebnisse. Außerdem scheint die Manipulationsbehandlung eine höhere Kosteneffektivität aufzuweisen als die physikalische Therapie oder die Standardbehandlung beim Hausarzt. Dennoch sind mehr qualitativ hochwertige Studien nötig, die klar die Behandlungsmethoden beschreiben, an möglichst homogenen Studienpopulationen durchgeführt werden und auch die ökonomischen Aspekte berücksichtigen. Dies würde die Erstellung und die Überarbeitung von klinischen Leitlinien und die Anwendung der EbM deutlich erleichtern.

Schlüsselwörter

Evidenzbasierte Medizin (EbM) Wirksamkeit konservativer Behandlungen Nackenschmerzen Akut oder chronisch 

The current evidence for conservative treatment modalities for acute and chronic neck pain

A summary of findings

Abstract

The demand for evidence-based medicine (EBM) has increased dramatically in the last decade. In this article, we discuss the benefit of EBM in general, and its role in the treatment of chronic neck pain, in specific. Although much evidence for conservative therapy for chronic neck pain is inconclusive, manipulative therapy and/or mobilization in combination with exercise seems to have the most promising results. Additionally, manipulative therapy would appear to be more cost-effective than physical therapy or standard medical care by the general practitioner (GP). However, more high-quality studies are needed which clearly describe the content of the intervention used, performed for more homogeneous study populations, as well as, including studies which perform an economic evaluation. This will facilitate the role in writing and revising clinical guidelines and the practice of EBM.

Keywords

Current evidence Conservative treatment Neck pain, acute or chronic 

Notes

Interessenkonflikt:

Keine Angaben

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Aker PD, Gross AR, Goldsmith CH, Peloso P (1996) Conservative management of mechanical neck pain: systematic overview and meta-analysis. BMJ 313: 1291–1296PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ariens GAM, Borghouts AJ, Koes BW (1999) Neck Pain. In: Crombie IK (ed) Epidemiology of Pain. IASP Seattle, pp 235–255Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Assendelft WJ, Bouter LM, Knipschild PG (1996) Complications of spinal manipulation. J Fam Pract 42: 475–480PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bogduk N, Barnsley L. (2000) Back pain and neck pain: an evidence-based update. In: Devor M, Rowbotham MC, Wiesenfeld-Hallin Z (eds) Progress in Pain Research and Management. IASP, Seattle, pp 371–377Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bombardier C, Esmail R, Nachemson AL et al. (1997) The Cochrane Collaboration back review group for spinal disorders. Spine 22: 837–840CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Borghouts JA, Koes BW, Vondeling H, Bouter LM (1999) Cost-of-illness of neck pain in The Netherlands in 1996. Pain 80: 629–636CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bos IBCK, Hoving JL, Tulder MW van, et al. (2003) Cost effectiveness of physiotherapy, manual therapy, and GP care for neck pain: economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial. Commentary: Bootstrapping simplifies appreciation of statistical inferences. BMJ 326: 911CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bronfort G, Haas M, Evans RL, Bouter LM (2004) Efficacy of spinal manipulation and mobilization for low back pain and neck pain: a systematic review and best evidence synthesis. Spine J 4: 335–356Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Croft PR, Lewis M, Papageorgiou AC et al. (2001) Risk factors for neck pain: a longitudinal study in the general population. Pain 93: 317–325CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Drummond MF, O’Brien B, Stoddard GL (1997) Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programs. Oxford Medical Publications, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ernst E (2003) Chiropractic spinal manipulation for neck pain: a systematic review. J Pain 4: 417–421Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fouyas IP, Statham PF, Sandercock PA (2002) Cochrane review on the role of surgery in cervical spondylotic radiculomyelopathy. Spine 27: 736–747CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB (1996) Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gross AR, Hoving JL, Haines TA et al. (2004) A Cochrane review of manipulation and mobilization for mechanical neck disorders. Spine 29: 1541–1548CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haldeman S, Carey P, Townsend M, Papadopoulos C (2001) Arterial dissections following cervical manipulation: the chiropractic experience. CMAJ 165: 905–906PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hoving JL, Koes BW, Vet HC de et al. (2002) Manual therapy, physical therapy, or continued care by a GP for patients with neck pain. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 136: 713–722PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Karjalainen K, Malmivaara A, Tulder M van et al. (2003) Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for neck and shoulder pain among working age adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3: CD002194Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Korthals-de Bos IB, Hoving JL, Tulder MW van et al. (2003) Cost effectiveness of physiotherapy, manual therapy, and GP care for neck pain: economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial. BMJ 326: 911CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Linton SJ (2000) A review of psychological risk factors in back and neck pain. Spine 25: 1148–1156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mior S (2001) Exercise in the treatment of chronic pain. Clin J Pain 17: S77–S85CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Niemisto L, Kalso E, Malmivaara A, Seitsalo S, Hurri H (2003) Radiofrequency denervation for neck and back pain: a systematic review within the framework of the Cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine 28: 1877–1888CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Offringa M, Assendelft WJ, Scholten RJ (2000) Inleiding in evidence-based medicine. Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum, Houten/DiegemGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Picavet HS, Schouten JS (2003) Musculoskeletal pain in the Netherlands: prevalences, consequences and risk groups, the DMC3-study. Pain 102: 167–178CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rubinstein SM, Peerdeman SM, Tulder MW van, Riphagen I, Haldeman S (2005) A systemic review of the risk factors for cervical artery dissection. Stroke 36: 1575CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS (1996) Evidence-based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 312: 71–72PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Scholten-Peeters GG, Bekkering GE, Verhagen AP et al. (2002) Clinical practice guideline for the physiotherapy of patients with whiplash-associated disorders. Spine 27: 412–422CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schonstein E, Kenny D, Keating J, Koes B, Herbert RD (2003) Physical conditioning programs for workers with back and neck pain: a Cochrane systematic review. Spine 28: E391–E395CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Straus SE ,Sackett DL (1998) Getting research findings into practice: using research findings in clinical practice. BMJ 317: 339–342PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tulder M van, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L (2003) Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine 28: 1290–1299CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tulder M van, Goossens ME, Hoving JL 2000. Nonsurgical Treatment of Chronic Neck Pain. In: Nachemson A, Jonsson E (eds) Neck and back pain: the scientific evidence of causes, diagnosis, and treatment. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 339–354Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Verhagen AP, Scholten-Peeters GG, Bie RA de, Bierma-Zeinstra SM (2004) Conservative treatments for whiplash. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4: CD003338Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. J. M. Pool
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • S. M. Rubinstein
    • 1
  • M. van Tulder
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Research in Extramural MedicineVU University Medical Center Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  2. 2.Medical Center IMPACT Zoetermeer, The Netherlands
  3. 3.Institute for Research in Extramural MedicineVU University Medical CenterAmsterdam

Personalised recommendations