Musculoskeletal science & practice · 2020
The pelvic girdle pain deadlock: 1. Would 'deconstruction' help?
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Meijer O G, Hu H, Wu W H, Prins M R
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Pelvic Girdle Pain (PGP) is an important clinical problem that deserves more attention. Several treatment regimens have been presented that appear to be somewhat promising, but it was reported that about 10% of patients still suffer from the problems 11 years after their inception. This situation should be improved.
PURPOSE: We present a personalized history, with first the acceptance of the concept of 'PGP', around 2005, and then continued problems in really understanding PGP's nature and causes. We propose to engage in 'deconstruction' of PGP, that is, disentangling the large variety of processes involved.
IMPLICATIONS: Deconstructing PGP is a venture into the unknown. Still, science should proceed on the basis of what we know already. To understand PGP, experts emphasize the importance of biomechanics or of psychology, and we propose to insert 'inflammation' between these two levels of understanding, that is to say, the full development from low grade local inflammation to systemic inflammation and neuroinflammation. Inflammation is bidirectionally related to biomechanical as well as psychological processes. For clinicians, challenging our "beliefs and understanding of PGP, rather than being 'stuck' with a preferred modus operandi" has major practical implications. It requires continuous monitoring of the patient, and a willingness to change direction. More scientific disciplines are relevant to understanding, and treating, PGP than a single human being can master. Creative flexibility of clinicians would be a promising starting point to improve overall treatment effects in PGP.
PURPOSE: We present a personalized history, with first the acceptance of the concept of 'PGP', around 2005, and then continued problems in really understanding PGP's nature and causes. We propose to engage in 'deconstruction' of PGP, that is, disentangling the large variety of processes involved.
IMPLICATIONS: Deconstructing PGP is a venture into the unknown. Still, science should proceed on the basis of what we know already. To understand PGP, experts emphasize the importance of biomechanics or of psychology, and we propose to insert 'inflammation' between these two levels of understanding, that is to say, the full development from low grade local inflammation to systemic inflammation and neuroinflammation. Inflammation is bidirectionally related to biomechanical as well as psychological processes. For clinicians, challenging our "beliefs and understanding of PGP, rather than being 'stuck' with a preferred modus operandi" has major practical implications. It requires continuous monitoring of the patient, and a willingness to change direction. More scientific disciplines are relevant to understanding, and treating, PGP than a single human being can master. Creative flexibility of clinicians would be a promising starting point to improve overall treatment effects in PGP.