Management of thoracic spine pain and dysfunction: A survey of clinical practice in the UK

Management of non-specific thoracic spine pain: a cross-sectional study among physiotherapists

BACKGROUND

The thoracic area has mainly been neglected in research compared to the lumbar and cervical regions. No clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for non-specific thoracic spine pain (TSP) have been compiled. Therefore, it can be argued that the absence of specific CPGs raises questions about the management of non-specific TSP. Hence, this study aimed at determining the management of non-specific TSP among physiotherapists in Italy.

METHODS

A web cross-sectional survey investigating physiotherapists' management of non-specific TSP was conducted. The survey instrument was divided into three sections. The first section obtained participants' characteristics. The second section determined participants' agreement with 29 statements regarding the clinical management of non-specific TSP utilising a five-point Likert scale. Participants who partially or completely agreed (scores 4-5) were considered to agree with the statements. A ≥ 70% of agreement with a statement was considered as consensus according to previous literature. The third section asked the participants to indicate how often they adopted several treatments to manage non-specific TSP with a 5-point scale (always - often - sometimes - rarely - never). The frequencies of answers were calculated, and a visual representation through a bar chart was reported. The online version of the survey instrument was delivered through the newsletter of the Italian Association of Physiotherapists and the postgraduate master's degree in Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation of the University of Genova (Genova, Italy).

RESULTS

In total, 424 physiotherapists (mean age (SD): 35.1 years (10.5); 50% female) completed the survey. In the second section, physiotherapists achieved consensus for 22/29 statements. Those statements addressed the importance of psychosocial factors, exercise, education, and manual therapy techniques in managing non-specific TSP. In the third section, 79.7% of participants indicated they would always adopt a multimodal treatment (education, therapeutic exercise, manual therapy), followed by education and information (72.9%), therapeutic exercise (62.0%), soft tissue manual therapy (27.1%), and manual therapy (16.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Study participants considered fundamentally using a multimodal programme based on education, exercise and manual therapy to manage non-specific TSP. This approach aligns with the CPGs for other chronic musculoskeletal pain than non-specific TSP.

Knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of spinal manipulation: a cross-sectional survey of Italian physiotherapists

Background and Objective

High-velocity low-amplitude thrust spinal manipulation (SM) is a recommended and commonly used manual therapy intervention in physiotherapy. Beliefs surrounding the safety and effectiveness of SM have challenged its use, and even advocated for its abandonment. Our study aimed to investigate the knowledge and beliefs surrounding SM by Italian physiotherapists compared with similar practitioners in other countries.

Methods

An online survey with 41 questions was adapted from previous surveys and was distributed via a mailing list of the Italian Physiotherapists Association (March 22–26, 2020). The questionnaire was divided into 4 sections to capture information on participant demographics, utilization, potential barriers, and knowledge about SM. Questions were differentiated between spinal regions. Attitudes towards different spinal regions, attributes associated with beliefs, and the influence of previous educational background were each evaluated.

Results

Of the 7398 registered physiotherapists, 575 (7.8%) completed the survey and were included for analysis. The majority of respondents perceived SM as safe and effective when applied to the thoracic (74.1%) and lumbar (72.2%) spines; whereas, a smaller proportion viewed SM to the upper cervical spine (56.8%) as safe and effective. Respondents reported they were less likely to provide and feel comfortable with upper cervical SM (respectively, 27.5% and 48.5%) compared to the thoracic (respectively, 52.2% and 74.8%) and lumbar spines (respectively, 46.3% and 74.3%). Most physiotherapists (70.4%) agreed they would perform additional screening prior to upper cervical SM compared to other spinal regions. Respondents who were aware of clinical prediction rules were more likely to report being comfortable with SM (OR 2.38–3.69) and to perceive it as safe (OR 1.75–3.12). Finally, physiotherapists without musculoskeletal specialization, especially those with a traditional manual therapy background, were more likely to perform additional screening prior to SM, use SM less frequently, report being less comfortable performing SM, and report upper cervical SM as less safe (p < 0.001).

Discussion

The beliefs and attitudes of physiotherapists surrounding the use of SM are significantly different when comparing the upper cervical spine to other spinal regions. An educational background in traditional manual therapy significantly influences beliefs and attitudes. We propose an updated framework on evidence-based SM.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12998-022-00449-x.

Construction of Vertebral Body Tracking Algorithm Based on Dynamic Imaging Parameter Measurement and Its Application in the Treatment of Lumbar Instability

Static imaging measurements could not truly reflect the dynamic panorama of the lumbar movement process, and the abnormal activities between the lumbar vertebrae and their dynamic balance could not be observed, resulting in difficulties in the mechanism analysis of lumbar instability and the efficacy evaluation of manipulation therapy. Therefore, this paper constructed a vertebral tracking algorithm based on dynamic imaging parameter measurement through imaging parameter measurement and calculation. According to the imaging data obtained by vertebral body tracking algorithm, the corresponding statistical methods were used to compare the functional scores before and after manipulation and the changes of imaging data, so as to evaluate the therapeutic effect of manipulation on lumbar instability. Through the clinical observation and imaging analysis of 15 patients with lumbar instability before and after manipulation treatment, it is verified that the vertebra tracking algorithm is effective in the vertebra tracking and plays a positive role in the treatment of lumbar instability.

Trunk Injuries in Athletes

ABSTRACT

Trunk pain is a common cause of performance limitation and time away from sport in athletes. However, atraumatic trunk injuries are underrepresented in medical literature and underrecognized clinically. Delays in diagnosis and initiation of appropriate treatment can increase injury morbidity and return-to-play time. Currently, evidence-based guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of trunk pain in athletes are limited. Thus, we provide an overview of atraumatic sport-related injuries to the thoracic spine (disc herniation, scoliosis, kyphosis), ribcage (bone stress injury, costochondritis, Tietze syndrome, slipping rib syndrome, costovertebral or costotransverse joint dysfunction), and chest and abdominal wall musculature (intercostal, serratus anterior, oblique strains, regional myofascial pain), highlighting sport-specific biomechanical considerations. We aim to increase awareness of these causes of trunk pain among sports medicine providers in an effort to guide diagnostic and treatment recommendations that will ultimately improve overall musculoskeletal health in athletes.

Does Thoracic Manipulation Cause Extravasation at Joint Following Facet Injections?

Facet injections and other pain management interventions are commonly performed in combination with conservative therapy to address spinal pain. Joint mobilizations are a highly utilized intervention for manual practitioners to treat patients with spinal pain. Clinical reasoning and decision making models have not been well described in the literature assessing if and when joint mobilizations are appropriate interventions immediately or shortly following facet injection procedures. It has not been well studied if joint mobilizations immediately following facet injections negatively impact the injected solution at the respective joint and thus influence therapeutic effect. More specifically, there is a paucity of evidence assessing this at the thoracic spine. The purpose of this study was to assess if thoracic joint high-velocity low amplitude thrust manipulations caused extravasation of injected radiolucent material at respective thoracic facet joints on a cadaver. This study included an expert physician performing ultrasound-guided facet injections, an experienced manual physical therapist performing joint mobilization techniques, and fluoroscopic assessment of radiolucent material pre- and post-manipulation by a board-certified radiologist with experience in this field of study. Imaging interpretation confirmed that extravasation at respective joints did not occur following manipulation. This basic research can help guide clinical reasoning for practitioners considering implementing manual therapy techniques following facet injections and help guide further research. 

Intra- and inter-rater reliability of thoracic spine mobility and posture assessments in subjects with thoracic spine pain

Background

The thoracic spine (TS) has been neglected in the study of the spine despite its essential role in the stability and posture of the entire spinal complex. Therefore, there is an inevitable need to investigate the reproducibility of different thoracic spinal posture measures used in subjects with TS pain.

Methods

Thirty-two subjects (16 females and 16 males, mean age 39 years) were evaluated by two physiotherapists on the same day to gauge inter-rater reliability and on two consecutive days to gauge intra-rater reliability. TS posture was assessed by observation, and thoracic spine mobility was measured by manual assessment of segmental flexion and extension mobility in a seated position. Additionally, posterior-to-anterior accessory mobility in a prone position was assessed manually. Moreover, cervicothoracic flexion in a seated position, thoracic posture, and thoracic flexion and extension mobility in a standing position were assessed with a tape measure, and flexion and extension mobility in a seated position and TS posture in seated and standing positions were measured with an inclinometer. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), mean difference (MD), Bland-Altman (B&A) plot features and coefficient of repeatability (CR) were calculated.

Results

The mean and standard deviation (SD) of the duration of TS pain was 22 (SD 45) months, with the intensity of pain being rated at 27 (SD 21) mm on a visual analogue scale (VAS). Intra-rater reliability was very strong (ICC ≥ 0.80) for the evaluation of seated and standing upper TS posture, standing whole TS posture and seated lower TS posture with an inclinometer. Moreover, TS posture evaluation with a measuring tape, posture inspection in a seated position, and manual assessment of segmental extension were found to have very strong intra-rater reliability. Inter-rater reliability was very strong for inclinometer measurements of standing and seated upper TS posture as well as standing whole TS posture.

Conclusion

Intra-rater reliability was higher than inter-rater reliability in most of the evaluated measurements. Overall, posture measurements with an inclinometer were more reliable than mobility measurements with the same instrument. The manual assessments can be used reliably when same evaluator performs the examination.

Trial registration

Clinical Trials, NCT01884818. Registered 24 June 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01884818?cond=thoracic+spine&cntry=FI&rank=1

Physiotherapists' use of suprascapular nerve blocks: an online survey

BACKGROUND

There is some evidence to support the use of suprascapular nerve blocks (SSNBs) to manage shoulder pain. Although many patients with shoulder pain are referred to physiotherapy, there are no data describing whether physiotherapists currently use SSNBs for these patients.

OBJECTIVE

To explore if physiotherapists who manage musculoskeletal shoulder pain are using SSNBs and identify, of those who responded to an online questionnaire, how commonplace this practice is in the United Kingdom (UK) DESIGN: An online, cross-sectional, questionnaire survey was developed for physiotherapists involved in the management of patients with shoulder pain.

METHODS

A snowball sampling method was used to invite physiotherapists to complete the online survey, using email, research advertisements in a professional magazine and via social media. The questionnaire captured respondents' demographic and professional practice characteristics, their knowledge and use of SSNBs and their views and experiences regarding SSNBs as a treatment for shoulder pain.

RESULTS

In total, there were 529 responders to the survey. Of these, 492 were eligible and formed the sample for analyses. The majority of responders (290/474; 61%) were from the UK. Of these, the majority (259/282; 92%) were familiar with SSNBs as a method of treatment for shoulder pain, although few (9/149; 6%) reported regularly using SSNBs in their clinical practice. Only 8 of 287 responders from the UK (3%) reported delivering SSNBs to patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey provides preliminary evidence that the use and delivery of SSNBs by UK physiotherapists is uncommon. Future research is required to investigate the potential value of physiotherapists using this treatment option for their patients with shoulder pain.