MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The effect of ultrasound or phonophoresis as an adjuvant treatment for non-specific neck pain: systematic review of randomised controlled trials

2020· article· en· W6977126462 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLibraries and Information Services
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhonophoresisUltrasoundNeck painGrading (engineering)Randomized controlled trialAdjuvantPlaceboManual therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To determine the effectiveness of ultrasound/phonophoresis as an adjuvant to exercise or manual therapy for the improvement of patient-centred outcomes in adults with non-specific neck pain (NSNP). Seven electronic databases were systematically searched up to September 2020. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to judge the Quality of Evidence (QoE). Six studies involving 249 participants were included. The QoE was very low GRADE. Phonophoresis with capsaicin plus exercise improved pain at immediate post-treatment (MD: −3.30 [−4.05, −2.55]) but not with diclofenac sodium plus exercise as compared to exercise. Continuous ultrasound (CUS) plus exercise improved pain and pressure pain threshold (PPT) at immediate post-treatment (pain: MD: −3.42 [−4.08, −2.7]); (PPT: MD: 0.91 [0.68, 1.14]) and at intermediate-term as compared to exercise. CUS or high power pain threshold (HPPT) ultrasound plus manual therapy and exercise showed no benefit for pain reduction (MD: −0.75 [−2.08, 0.58]) did not improve function/disability (MD: −1.05 [−4.27, 2.17]) at immediate or short-term as compared to manual therapy and exercise. Due to high risk of bias, inconsistency, and indirectness the QoE is very low in support of benefit of ultrasound/phonophoresis as an adjuvant treatment for NSNP.Implication for rehabilitationDue to high risk of bias, inconsistency, and indirectness the quality of evidence (QoE) is very low in support of benefit of adding ultrasound or phonophoresis to exercise or manual therapy for pain reduction or improvement in function/disability for those with sub-acute and chronic myofascial associated neck pain. However, our confidence in the findings is very low and conclusions are likely to change as more evidences emerges.Clinicians using ultrasound therapy as an adjuvant intervention for management of chronic myofascial associated neck pain should carefully consider the available evidence on ultrasound, including the benefits and costs involved. Due to high risk of bias, inconsistency, and indirectness the quality of evidence (QoE) is very low in support of benefit of adding ultrasound or phonophoresis to exercise or manual therapy for pain reduction or improvement in function/disability for those with sub-acute and chronic myofascial associated neck pain. However, our confidence in the findings is very low and conclusions are likely to change as more evidences emerges. Clinicians using ultrasound therapy as an adjuvant intervention for management of chronic myofascial associated neck pain should carefully consider the available evidence on ultrasound, including the benefits and costs involved.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.932

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicLibraries and Information ServicesFrench-language works237,207