Papers by Rob A.B. Oostendorp
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2001
BACKGROUND: Many treatments are available for whiplash-patients, but to date, no evidence exists ... more BACKGROUND: Many treatments are available for whiplash-patients, but to date, no evidence exists for their effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of conservative treatment in patients with whiplash-injuries (rated as Whiplash-Associated Disorders [WAD] I or II). SEARCH STRATEGY: A computerized literature search of Medline, Embase, Cinahl, Psychlit and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register through June 1998 was carried out. We also screened reference lists of publications of identified randomized trials and relevant systematic reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were selected for inclusion if they fit the following criteria: design was a (randomized) clinical trial (RCT); all patients had suffered a whiplash-injury; the type of intervention was a conservative one; pain, global perceived effect, or participation in daily activities was used as one of the outcome measures; and the publication was written in English, French, German or Dutch. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The methodological quality of the studies was independently assessed by two reviewers using the Maastricht-Amsterdam list. Three quality scores were calculated using this criteria list: the Overall methodological Quality Score, the Internal Validity Score and the Delphi Quality Score. The conclusion of the review was based on articles that scored a quality score of at least 50 percent of the maximum available score on two out of three quality scores. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. A broad variety of conservative interventions were evaluated, and only one study was performed in chronic whiplash patients. Only three studies satisfied at least 50 percent on two out of three quality scores indicating poor overall methodological quality. A high rank correlation was observed among the three methods of quality. Because of the heterogeneity of patient selection, interventions and outcome measures, no statistical pooling was performed. This review indicates that active treatments show a beneficial effect on at least one of the primary outcome measures, preferably pain. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: It appears that "Rest makes rusty." In other words, rest and immobilization using collars are not recommended for the treatment of whiplash, while active interventions, such as advice to 'maintain usual activities' might be effective in whiplash-patients. Nevertheless, caution is needed when attempting to draw conclusions regarding the efficacy of conservative treatments in whiplash-patients, because of the paucity of high-quality studies. No conclusions can be drawn about the most effective therapy for chronic whiplash-patients because only one low quality trial was identified.
Item does not contain fulltex
protocols.io, Oct 18, 2018
protocols.io, Oct 18, 2018
Appendix 2 -Steps clinical reasoning process -Overview of varaiables -October 18 2018.pdf DOI dx.... more Appendix 2 -Steps clinical reasoning process -Overview of varaiables -October 18 2018.pdf DOI dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.utgewjw Rob A B Oostendorp 2018. 2. Steps of Clinical Reasoning Process and Variables of Quality Indicators for Physiotherapy Care Process of Patients with WAD for Analysis. protocols.io protocols.io protocol ,
Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Fysiotherapie, 2005
Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Fysiotherapie, 2000
Item does not contain fulltext6 p
Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Fysiotherapie, 2000
Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Fysiotherapie, 2006
Randomized clinical trial of short-term compression therapy for short-lasting, aspecific neck pai... more Randomized clinical trial of short-term compression therapy for short-lasting, aspecific neck pain: a pilot study OBJECTIVE. To compare the efficacy of short-term compression therapy with that of short-term cervical traction for acute (<3 months) aspecific neck pain. METHODS. Patients with aspecific neck pain, aged 18 to 70 years, were recruited from a private primary care practice. Patients were randomized to the traction and compression groups and received three treatments over 2 weeks. Intensity of pain and stiffness of movement of the neck (Visual Analogue Scale [vas]), range of motion of cervical spine (Cervical Range Of Motion [CROM]), and activities and participation (Neck Disability Index [NDI]) were measured. RESULTS. Thirty-three patients were included (compression group n=17; traction group n=16). Compression therapy was significantly better than traction therapy in improving mobility of the cervical spine (right lateroflexion [p=0.00; effect size o.84] and flexion [p=0.01; effect size o.85]), and NDI (p=0.02). Compression therapy tended to be better, but not significantly so, than traction therapy in improving the other variables assessed. No adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSION. Short-term compression therapy is a more effective than short-term traction therapy for acute aspecific neck pain, especially in terms of mobility of the neck and activities and participation. This abstract was translated into English by the publisher or author.
Item does not contain fulltex
Physiotherapy Theory and Practice, Dec 11, 2020
Cephalalgia, 2005
Item does not contain fulltex
Uploads
Papers by Rob A.B. Oostendorp