4.7 Review

Specific versus Non-Specific Exercises for Chronic Neck or Shoulder Pain: A Systematic Review

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 10, 期 24, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm10245946

关键词

chronic pain; musculoskeletal pain; exercise therapy; neck pain; shoulder pain; systematic review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study compared the effects of injury-focused specific exercises with more general non-specific exercises on pain in patients with chronic neck or shoulder pain. It found that non-specific exercises were more effective in acute pain relief, while specific exercises may be more beneficial in short-term and long-term effects.
The current systematic review aimed to compare the effect of injury-focused (specific) exercises versus more general (non-specific) exercises on pain in patients with chronic neck or shoulder pain. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Two reviewers screened and selected studies, extracted outcomes, assessed risk of bias, and rated the quality of evidence. A total of nine eligible studies, represented in 13 articles, were identified, with a considerable risk of bias. One article investigated the acute effect of single bouts of exercise on pain and reported an immediate pain reduction after non-specific exercise. Regarding short-term effects, seven out of the nine studies found no differences in pain between interventions, with inconsistent results among two other studies. Concerning the long-term effects, while pain reduction seems to be favored by specific exercises (two out of four articles), the best format is still unclear. Based on the acute effects, a single bout of non-specific exercise seems to be a better option for pain-relief for patients with chronic neck or shoulder pain. For short-term effects, there are no differences in pain between specific and non-specific exercises. Regarding long-term effects, specific exercises seem to be the best option. Nevertheless, more studies are warranted.

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

4.7
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