Re: The association of the involvement of financial compensation with the outcome of cervicobrachial pain that is treated conservatively, by Rasmussen et al.
Re: The association of the involvement of financial compensation with the outcome of cervicobrachial pain that is treated conservatively, by Rasmussen et al.
复制标题
回复：Rasmussen 等人提出经济补偿与保守治疗的颈臂疼痛结果之间的关联。
DOI：
10.1093/rheumatology/41.7.832
复制
发表时间：
2002
期刊：
影响因子：
5.5
通讯作者：
L. Barnsley
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Barnsley
S ir，Rasmussen等人的文章。[1]关于颈臂疼痛和补偿是一个重要的尝试，以回答一个棘手的问题。然而，我担心的是，在这篇文章中所作的断言不能坚持仔细审查的方法和结果。首先，它指出，在转诊时，病人的唯一信息来自转诊医生的信。在我自己的国家，这封信往往提供了病人是否参与赔偿的充分证据（例如问题开始的性质）。这将有可能确定病人的经济补偿评估医生。其次，我对数据被排除在研究之外的群体感到困惑。据报告，19名患者未能提供关于其赔偿状况的充分信息，也没有提供关于其疼痛和残疾评分的信息。然而，这些患者的临床信息被清楚地收集起来，因此我们被告知这些患者中有多少人患有“轻瘫”，有多少人接受了手术。为什么在收集这些临床信息时没有获得或检查他们的问卷数据？
S ir, The article by Rasmussen et al.[1] concerning cervicobrachial pain and compensation is an important attempt to answer a vexed question. However, I am concerned that the assertions made in this article cannot be sustained on careful scrutiny of the methods and results.First, it is stated that the only information on the patients at the time of referral came from the referring practitioner's letter. In my own country, this letter often provides ample evidence of whether the patient was involved in compensation (eg the nature of the onset of the problem). This would have potentially identified the patients with financial compensation to the assessing doctors. Secondly, I am puzzled by the group whose data were excluded from the study. It is reported that 19 patients failed to provide adequate information about their compensation status, and no information concerning their pain and disability scores is provided. However, clinical information was clearly collected on these patients, so that we are told how many of these patients had ‘paresis’ and how many had undergone surgery. Why was their questionnaire data not obtained or checked when this clinical information was collected?