4.6 Article

Course and prognostic factors of whiplash: A systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

PAIN
卷 138, 期 3, 页码 617-629

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2008.02.019

关键词

whiplash; course; prognosis; systematic review; meta-analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We conducted it systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies of subjects with acute whiplash injuries. The aim was to describe the course of recovery, pain and disability symptoms and also to assess the influence of different prognostic factors oil outcome. Studies were selected for inclusion if they enrolled Subjects with neck pain within six weeks of a car accident and measured pain and/or disability Outcomes. Studies were located via it sensitive search of electronic databases; Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane database, ACP Journal club, DARE and Psychinfo and through hand-searches of relevant previous reviews. Methodological quality of all Studies wits assessed using a six item checklist. Sixty-seven articles, describing 38 separate cohorts were included. Recovery rates were extremely variable across studies but homogeneity was improved when only data from Studies of more robust methodological quality were considered. These data Suggest that recovery occurs for a substantial proportion of subjects in the initial 3 months after the accident but after this time recovery rates level off. Pain and disability symptoms also reduce rapidly in the initial months after the accident but show little improvement after 3 months have elapsed. Data regarding the prognostic factors associated with poor recovery were difficult to interpret due to heterogeneity of the techniques used to assess Such associations and the way in which they are reported. There wits also wide variation in the measurement of outcome and the use of validated measures Would improve interpretability and comparability of future Studies. (C) 2008 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据