promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted
asked in 社會與文化語言 · 1 decade ago

醫學文獻...幫忙翻譯一下 謝謝(急

拜託 了 謝謝

The present study is the second systematic review in which all conservative treatments have been taken into account. Marshall et al. performed a systematic review considering only local sterold injection while O’connor et al. focused on non-surgical treatment other than local steroids. On the other hand, only one of the previous four reviews considers all conservative forms of therapies and their efficary, although this is limited to the year 2000, thus inevitably confinling their research to only 14 articles. In our review we were able to analyse a greater number of articles, which allowed us to reach more confident results.

From the reported data we can conclude the following:(1) Locally injected steroids produce a significant improvement,even if this is temporary (strong evidence, level 1). (2)In terms of oral treatments, vitamin B6 is ineffective (moderate evidence, level 2) whereas NSAIDs and diuretics are effective (limited evidence, level 3). Steroids are effective at both low and high doses, though they may give side-effects (strong evidence, level 1). (3) Among physical treatments there are conflicting evidences (level 3) concerning the efficacy of laser and ultrasound therapy in carpal tunnel syndrome treatment (we should bear in mind, however, that theavailable studies are not comparable in terms of physical parameters, patient numbers and duration of therapy). (4) Exercise therapy is not effective (limited evidence, level 3).(5)Two studies show the efficacy of yoga posture versus splint and the inefficacy of the botulinum toxin B injection versus placebo respectively (limited evidence, full-time (moderate evidence, level 2).

1 Answer

Rating
  • 小均
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    本研究是所有保守的治療被考慮了到的第二系統的回顧。馬歇爾・等執行了系統的回顧考慮唯一地方sterold 射入當O'connor 等集中於non-surgical 治療除地方類固醇之外。另一方面, 只早先四回顧的當中一個考慮所有保守的形式的療法和他們efficary, 雖然這對年2000 年被限制, 如此不可避免地confinling 他們的研究對只14 篇文章。在我們的回顧我們能分析文章的一個更加了不起的數字, 允許我們到達更加確信的結果。從被報告的資料我們能結束following:(1) 當地被注射的類固醇產物重大改善, 既使這是臨時的(有力的證據, 水平1) 。(口頭治療, 維生素B6 的2)In 期限是無效的(適度證據, 水平2) 但是NSAIDs 和利尿藥是有效的(有限的證據, 水平3) 。類固醇是有效的在低和大劑量,

    雖然他們也許給副作用(有力的證據, 水平1) 。(3) 在物理治療之中有矛盾的證據(平實3) 關於laser 和超聲波療法效力在腕骨隧道綜合症狀治療(我們應該記住, 然而, theavailable 研究不是可比較的根據物理參量、耐心療法的數字和期間) 。(4) 鍛煉療法不是有效的(有限的證據, 水平3).(5)Two 研究顯示瑜伽姿勢效力對藤條和botulinum 毒素B 射入的低效對安慰劑各自(有限的證據, 全時(適度證據, 水平2) 。

    不知對不對

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.