Sample size, study length, and inadequate controls were the most common self-acknowledged limitations in manual therapy trials: A methodological review

Self-acknowledged limitations in exercise therapy trials for low back pain

RATIONALE

Despite the widespread recommendation to engage in therapeutic exercise for the treatment of low back pain (LBP), there is conflicting evidence regarding clinical outcomes and effectiveness. Poor methodological quality may be to blame for reducing the overall strength of evidence for this intervention, yet little is known about the difficulties researchers encounter when designing and implementing their study methods.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to characterize the extent and type of self-acknowledged limitations (SALs) in exercise therapy trials for LBP to gain a better understanding of challenges encountered when conducting this research.

METHODS

This is a methodological review of clinical trials in which SALs were extracted, categorized by theme and subcategorized within each theme. Counts and prevalence rates were tabulated for the number of SALs in each category and subcategory.

RESULTS

There were 914 SALs among the 312 included trials, with a mean of 2.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.77-3.09) per trial. Analysis of the data resulted in the development of 13 distinct categories of limitations, among which were 37 subcategories. The top three categories pertained to statistical power (14.3% of total SALs), study length and/or follow-up (14.3%) and inclusion criteria (14.2%). The top three subcategories were lack of long-term follow-up (13.8% of total SALs), inadequate sample size (13.3%) and inclusion of specific populations (12.3%).

CONCLUSION

Statistical power, study length and/or follow-up, and inclusion criteria were the three most commonly reported categories of SALs in exercise trials for LBP. Lack of long-term follow-up, inadequate sample size and inclusion of specific populations were the most common subcategories. Research protocols recognizing and avoiding these limitations will enhance the overall quality of evidence of exercise therapy trials for LBP.

Automatic categorization of self-acknowledged limitations in randomized controlled trial publications

OBJECTIVE

Acknowledging study limitations in a scientific publication is a crucial element in scientific transparency and progress. However, limitation reporting is often inadequate. Natural language processing (NLP) methods could support automated reporting checks, improving research transparency. In this study, our objective was to develop a dataset and NLP methods to detect and categorize self-acknowledged limitations (e.g., sample size, blinding) reported in randomized controlled trial (RCT) publications.

METHODS

We created a data model of limitation types in RCT studies and annotated a corpus of 200 full-text RCT publications using this data model. We fine-tuned BERT-based sentence classification models to recognize the limitation sentences and their types. To address the small size of the annotated corpus, we experimented with data augmentation approaches, including Easy Data Augmentation (EDA) and Prompt-Based Data Augmentation (PromDA). We applied the best-performing model to a set of about 12K RCT publications to characterize self-acknowledged limitations at larger scale.

RESULTS

Our data model consists of 15 categories and 24 sub-categories (e.g., Population and its sub-category DiagnosticCriteria). We annotated 1090 instances of limitation types in 952 sentences (4.8 limitation sentences and 5.5 limitation types per article). A fine-tuned PubMedBERT model for limitation sentence classification improved upon our earlier model by about 1.5 absolute percentage points in F1 score (0.821 vs. 0.8) with statistical significance (p<.001). Our best-performing limitation type classification model, PubMedBERT fine-tuning with PromDA (Output View), achieved an F1 score of 0.7, improving upon the vanilla PubMedBERT model by 2.7 percentage points, with statistical significance (p<.001).

CONCLUSION

The model could support automated screening tools which can be used by journals to draw the authors' attention to reporting issues. Automatic extraction of limitations from RCT publications could benefit peer review and evidence synthesis, and support advanced methods to search and aggregate the evidence from the clinical trial literature.

Meta-epidemiologic review: blinding and sham treatment in clinical trial design for osteopathic manipulative treatment research

Objective

To analyze the consistency of study designs in osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) research, focusing on blinding protocols and the use of sham treatments.

Data Source and Study Selection

PubMed and CINAHL were searched in January 2022. A total of 83 research studies between 2009 and 2021 were selected based on the presence of a double- or single-blind study design and/or sham treatment.

Data Extraction and Analysis

Data regarding the primary outcome measures, blinding design, measures used to determine success of blinding, osteopathic technique used, and sham technique used for each eligible study were extracted and compared among different study designs.

Results

A total of 5968 subjects participated in the 83 trials. The study population mainly consisted of asymptomatic individuals (25%) and chronic back pain patients (19%). Light touch was employed most commonly (49%) as the sham treatment, followed by unrelated sham (20%) and incomplete maneuvers (20%). Most studies blinded the subjects (80%) or the outcome evaluator/data analyzer (71%), while only 20% studies blinded the osteopathic physicians.

Conclusions

Strict double-blinding is achievable for OMT clinical research by blinding the subjects and data collectors/analyzers rather than the osteopaths providing the actual treatment. The use of questionnaires to determine the success of blinding should be considered. Additionally, including OMT-naïve subjects is preferred to enhance blinding success. When designing a sham treatment, careful consideration should be given to blinding the data collector, accounting for the placebo effect, and incorporating an additional no-treatment control group to improve the rigor of the study design.

Chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy for acute neck pain: A 4-arm clinical placebo randomized controlled trial. A prospective study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Neck pain poses enormous individual and societal costs worldwide. Spinal manipulative therapy and Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug treatment are frequently used despite a lack of compelling efficacy data. This protocol describes a multicentre 4-arm, clinical placebo randomized controlled trial (RCT), investigating the efficacy of chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy (CSMT) versus sham CSMT, ibuprofen, and placebo medicine for acute neck pain. This superiority study will employ parallel groups, featuring a 1:1:1:1 allocation ratio.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We will randomize 320 participants equally into four groups: CSMT, sham CSMT, ibuprofen, or placebo medicine. CSMT groups are single-blinded, while the medicine groups are double-blinded. Data will be collected at baseline (Day 0), during treatment and post-treatment. The primary endpoint will assess the difference in mean pain intensity from Day 0 to Day 14 on a numeric rating scale 0-10; the CSMT group is compared to sham CSMT, ibuprofen, and placebo medicine groups, respectively. Secondary endpoints will assess mean pain intensity and mean duration at different time points, and adverse events, blinding success, and treatment satisfaction, including comparison between ibuprofen and placebo medicine. Power calculation is based on a mean neck pain rating of 5 at Day 0, with standard deviation of 1 in all groups. Mean pain reduction at Day 14 is expected to be 60% in the CSMT group, 40% in sham CSMT and ibuprofen groups, and 20% in the placebo medicine group. A linear mixed model will compare the mean values for groups with corresponding 95% confidence intervals. P values below 0.017 will be considered statistically significant. All analyses will be conducted blinded from group allocation.

DISCUSSION

This RCT aims towards the highest research standards possible for manual-therapy RCTs owing to its two placebo arms. If CSMT and/or ibuprofen proves to be effective, it will provide evidence-based support for CSMT and/or ibuprofen for acute neck pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05374057. EU Clinical Trials Register: EudraCT number: 2021-005483-21.

"Do Not Mix Apples with Oranges" to Avoid Misinterpretation of Placebo Effects in Manual Therapy: The Risk Is Resulting in a Fruit Basket. Comment on Molina-Àlvarez et al. Manual Therapy Effect in Placebo-Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 14021

We read with interest the systematic review with the meta-analysis by Miguel Molina-Álvarez et al. [...].

Blinding and sham control methods in trials of physical, psychological, and self-management interventions for pain (article I): a systematic review and description of methods

ABSTRACT

Blinding is challenging in randomised controlled trials of physical, psychological, and self-management therapies for pain, mainly because of their complex and participatory nature. To develop standards for the design, implementation, and reporting of control interventions in efficacy and mechanistic trials, a systematic overview of currently used sham interventions and other blinding methods was required. Twelve databases were searched for placebo or sham-controlled randomised clinical trials of physical, psychological, and self-management treatments in a clinical pain population. Screening and data extraction were performed in duplicate, and trial features, description of control methods, and their similarity to the active intervention under investigation were extracted (protocol registration ID: CRD42020206590). The review included 198 unique control interventions, published between 2008 and December 2021. Most trials studied people with chronic pain, and more than half were manual therapy trials. The described control interventions ranged from clearly modelled based on the active treatment to largely dissimilar control interventions. Similarity between control and active interventions was more frequent for certain aspects (eg, duration and frequency of treatments) than others (eg, physical treatment procedures and patient sensory experiences). We also provide an overview of additional, potentially useful methods to enhance blinding, as well as the reporting of processes involved in developing control interventions. A comprehensive picture of prevalent blinding methods is provided, including a detailed assessment of the resemblance between active and control interventions. These findings can inform future developments of control interventions in efficacy and mechanistic trials and best-practice recommendations.

Sedentary time and the risk of metabolic syndrome: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

The dose-response association between sedentary time and the risk of metabolic syndrome is unclear, which indicates an important knowledge gap in public health. The objective of this study was to determine the categorical and continuous dose-response associations between sedentary time and the risk of metabolic syndrome. A systematic literature search of English articles published in PubMed, CINHAL, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection prior to June 2022 was conducted. All cohort and cross-sectional studies that examined the association between sedentary time and the risk of metabolic syndrome were considered, and duplicate and non-related studies were excluded. Data extraction using a standardized chart and quality assessment using two appraisal tools were also performed. Two independent reviewers were involved in these processes. In categorical meta-analyses, the pooled effect sizes for metabolic syndrome associated with different categories of sedentary time were calculated by comparing the highest and intermediate with the lowest categories. In continuous meta-analyses, the linear and nonlinear dose-response associations were estimated using generalized least squares and restricted cubic spline models, respectively. Data were collected and analyzed from March to June 2022. Four prospective cohort studies and 22 cross-sectional studies with 105,239 participants and 16,185 MetS cases were included in this study. In categorical analyses, both intermediate (median duration: 4.11 h/day; pooled OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.08-1.26, P &lt; 0.001) and high levels (median duration: 7.26 h/day; pooled OR: 1.71, 95% CI: 1.43-2.04, P &lt; 0.001) of total sedentary time were significantly associated with an increased risk of metabolic syndrome. Similarly, a significant association between screen time and the risk of metabolic syndrome was also found in intermediate (median duration: 2.22 h/day; pooled OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.10-1.32, P &lt; 0.001) and high levels (median duration: 3.40 h/day; pooled OR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.44-1.86, P &lt; 0.001) of exposure. Of note, these associations were significantly stronger in women. Different patterns of the behavior-disease association were not observed in children, adolescents, and adults. The findings of continuous meta-analyses could not provide solid evidence for the linearity and nonlinearity of the behavior-disease association. This study demonstrated that long-time sedentary behavior was associated with a higher risk of MetS independent of physical activity and the patterns of association varied by gender instead of age. These findings have implications for future guideline recommendations on physical activity, sedentary behavior, and prevention of metabolic syndrome.

To Use or Not Use Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) in Psychiatric Care: Interviews with Clinical Decision-Makers in Sweden

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is used as a complementary intervention in psychiatric healthcare. The reasons for using or not using CAM in psychiatric care in Sweden, and how such decisions are taken, are largely unknown. The aim was to investigate arguments for and against the use of CAM in Swedish psychiatric care, and how decisions are made. Interviews with 10 persons in decision-making positions in psychiatric health care were analysed thematically. The result shows diverging understandings of the evidence base for CAM. Arguments against CAM referred to scepticism, the importance of evidence-based practice and the obligation to follow national guidelines. Arguments in favour of CAM were that CAM was person-centred, safe, cost-effective, nursing interventions with positive effects, appreciated and demanded by patients, providing space for non-verbal communication and reflection, supporting the therapeutic alliance. Decision paths were described as top-down through a hierarchical structure, or bottom-up, driven by committed staff members. We discuss how detailed national guidelines should be to achieve equal and evidence-based care, while still allowing clinics to make local exceptions, adjusting the care according to clinical expertise and patients' preferences. Conclusion: Evidence-based, safe and cost-effective CAM methods may be relevant complementary interventions in psychiatric care, or as self-care, not to cure the psychiatric disease, but to reduce symptoms and promote sleep. With better knowledge of CAM, health professionals could guide patients through the jungle of CAM methods. Due to research problems on complex multicomponent interventions, high-quality pragmatic trials, including biomarkers, and qualitative studies are recommended.

Do manual therapies have a specific autonomic effect? An overview of systematic reviews

Background

The impact of manual therapy interventions on the autonomic nervous system have been largely assessed, but with heterogeneous findings regarding the direction of these effects. We conducted an overview of systematic reviews to describe if there is a specific autonomic effect elicited by manual therapy interventions, its relation with the type of technique used and the body region where the intervention was applied.

Methods

We conducted an overview according to a publicly registered protocol. We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, EPISTEMONIKOS and SCOPUS, from their inception to march 2021. We included systematic reviews for which the primary aim of the intervention was to assess the autonomic effect elicited by a manual therapy intervention in either healthy or symptomatic individuals. Two authors independently applied the selection criteria, assessed risk of bias from the included reviews and extracted data. An established model of generalisation guided the data analysis and interpretation.

Results

We included 12 reviews (5 rated as low risk of bias according the ROBIS tool). The findings showed that manual therapies may have an effect on both sympathetic and parasympathetic systems. However, the results from included reviews were inconsistent due to differences in their methodological rigour and how the effects were measured. The reviews with a lower risk of bias could not discriminate the effects depending on the body region to which the technique was applied.

Conclusion

The magnitude of the specific autonomic effect elicited by manual therapies and its clinical relevance is uncertain. We point out some specific recommendations in order to improve the quality and relevance of future research in this field.

Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Acute Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

(1) Background: Acute neck pain is common and usually managed by medication and/or manual therapy. General practitioners (GPs) hesitate to refer to manual therapy due to uncertainty about the effectiveness and adverse events (AEs); (2) Method: To review original randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) for acute neck pain. Data extraction was done in duplicate and formulated in tables. Quality and evidence were assessed using the Cochrane Back and Neck (CBN) Risk of Bias tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, respectively; (3) Results: Six studies were included. The overall pooled effect size for neck pain was very large −1.37 (95% CI, −2.41, −0.34), favouring treatments with SMT compared with controls. A single study that showed that SMT was statistically significantly better than medicine (30 mg ketorolac im.) one day post-treatment, ((−2.8 (46%) (95% CI, −2.1, −3.4) vs. −1.7 (30%) (95% CI, −1.1, −2.3), respectively; p = 0.02)). Minor transient AEs reported included increased pain and headache, while no serious AEs were reported; (4) Conclusions: SMT alone or in combination with other modalities was effective for patients with acute neck pain. However, limited quantity and quality, pragmatic design, and high heterogeneity limit our findings.

Safety concerns with glass particle contamination: improving the standard guidelines for preparing medication injections

Background

Glass ampoules are widely used to contain injection medications because of their properties. However, the existing literature reports that glass particle contamination is found in opening glass ampoules. To date, nursing practice standards on this issue have not gained attention in terms of the manual breaking methods generally used for opening ampoules in a clinical setting that can minimize the risk of glass particle contamination and, therefore, increase patient safety.

Objective

This study aimed to compare manual breaking methods commonly used to open ampoules in clinical practice that affected the number of glass particles and to identify the factors influencing glass particle contamination.

Methods

We used a comparative research design to evaluate the manual breaking methods for opening medication ampoules among 56 registered nurses from diverse clinical areas in a university hospital. Each participant broke 12 ampoules in two sizes using six methods, each method combined with wrapping material and one breaking direction. We measured the number of glass particles in five sizes for each method and the factors influencing glass particle contamination.

Results

In total, 449 of 672 ampoules were contaminated with glass particles. Breaking the ampoule with a cotton ball (partial ampoule neck wrapping) from an outward direction resulted in the fewest glass particles, while breaking the ampoule with a gauze pad (entire ampoule neck wrapping) from an inward direction resulted in the most glass particles. Breaking method, ampoule size and clinical experience significantly influence glass particle contamination (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

The method (wrapping technique and breaking direction) that nurses use to break ampoules affects the number of glass particles. Therefore, improving the standard guidelines for preparing medication injections and training in breaking methods for opening ampoules is essential.