Aspecifieke nekpijn: diagnose en behandeling - KCE
Aspecifieke nekpijn: diagnose en behandeling - KCE
Aspecifieke nekpijn: diagnose en behandeling - KCE
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
38 Non-Specific Neck Pain: diagnosis and treatm<strong>en</strong>t <strong>KCE</strong> Reports 119<br />
QUALITY APPRAISAL: RCTS ON TREATMENT<br />
Author (y) Questions (Dutch Cochrane for RCT’s instrum<strong>en</strong>t) TOTAL/<br />
9<br />
Medium/High<br />
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9<br />
Helewa, 2007 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 7 H<br />
O’Leary, 2007 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Ylin<strong>en</strong>, 2007 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Cleland, 2007 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Hakkin<strong>en</strong>, 2008 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Hakkin<strong>en</strong>, 2007 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Itoh, 2007 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 8 H<br />
Vas, 2006 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Willich, 2006 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 5 M<br />
Ma, 2008 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 6 M<br />
Bernaards, 2008 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Voerman, 2007 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 6 M<br />
Brockow, 2001<br />
For all questions 1=yes<br />
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 H<br />
Questions: 1. Is the randomisation well performed? 2. Was there an allocation concealm<strong>en</strong>t? 3. Were the<br />
pati<strong>en</strong>ts blinded for treatm<strong>en</strong>t? 4. Were the administrators blinded for treatm<strong>en</strong>t? 5. Was there a blinding<br />
of outcome assessm<strong>en</strong>t? 6. Was there similarity of groups at the start of the study? 7. Was the description<br />
of losses to follow up/withdrawals available? 8. Was the int<strong>en</strong>tion-to-treat reported? 9. Were the groups<br />
equally provided of care? Note: Publications with a score < 4 were excluded.<br />
QUALITY APPRAISAL: SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS<br />
Author (y) Questions (Dutch Cochrane for SR instrum<strong>en</strong>t) TOTAL/<br />
8<br />
Medium/High<br />
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8<br />
Borghouts, 1998 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Chow, 2005 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 H<br />
Ezzo, 2007 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 H<br />
Gemmell, 2006 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Graham, 2006 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 5 M<br />
Gross, 2007 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 H<br />
Gross, 1998 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 H<br />
Gross, 2002 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 6 M<br />
Gross, 2004 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 H<br />
Haines, 2008 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Haraldsson, 2006 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 7 H<br />
Hurwitz, 2008 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Karjalain<strong>en</strong>, 2003 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 6 M<br />
Kay, 2005 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 6 M<br />
Kroeling, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 H<br />
Macauly, 2007 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 7 H<br />
Peloso, 2007 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 H<br />
Sarig-Bahat, 2003 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 6 M<br />
Saragiovannis, 2005 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 7 H<br />
Shields, 2006 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 7 H<br />
Trinh, 2006 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 H<br />
Vernon, 2007 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 H<br />
Vernon, 2005 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 5 M<br />
Vernon, 2007(b)<br />
For all questions 1=yes<br />
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 6 M<br />
Questions: 1. Is the question adequately formulated? 2. Is search strategy adequately performed? 3. Is the<br />
selection procedure of the publications adequately performed? 4. Is the quality appraisal adequately<br />
performed? 5. Is the description of the data-extraction adequately performed? 6. Is the description of the<br />
study baseline characteristics adequate? 7. Is the meta-analysis correctly performed? 8. Is the statistical<br />
pooling correctly performed? Note: Publications with a score < 4 were excluded.
Change language