How completely are physiotherapy interventions described in reports of randomised trials?

How completely are randomized controlled trials of non-pharmacological interventions following concussion reported? A systematic review

PURPOSE

The study aimed to examine the reporting completeness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of non-pharmacological interventions following concussion.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Web of Science up to May 2022. Two reviewers independently screened studies and assessed reporting completeness using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR), Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT), and international Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise aNd Training (i-CONTENT) checklists. Additional information was sought my study authors where reporting was incomplete. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed with the Cochrane ROB-2 Tool. RCTs examining non-pharmacological interventions following concussion.

RESULTS

We included 89 RCTs (n = 53 high ROB) examining 11 different interventions for concussion: sub-symptom threshold aerobic exercise, cervicovestibular therapy, physical/cognitive rest, vision therapy, education, psychotherapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, transcranial magnetic stimulation, blue light therapy, osteopathic manipulation, and head/neck cooling. Median scores were: TIDieR 9/12 (75%; interquartile range (IQR) = 5; range: 5-12), CERT 17/19 (89%; IQR = 2; range: 10-19), and i-CONTENT 6/7 (86%; IQR = 1; range: 5-7). Percentage of studies completely reporting all items was TIDieR 35% (31/89), CERT 24% (5/21), and i-CONTENT 10% (2/21). Studies were more completely reported after publication of TIDieR (t87 = 2.08; p = 0.04) and CERT (t19 = 2.72; p = 0.01). Reporting completeness was not strongly associated with journal impact factor (TIDieR: rs = 0.27; p = 0.01; CERT: rs = -0.44; p = 0.06; i-CONTENT: rs = -0.17; p = 0.48) or ROB (TIDieR: rs = 0.11; p = 0.31; CERT: rs = 0.04; p = 0.86; i-CONTENT: rs = 0.12; p = 0.60).

CONCLUSION

RCTs of non-pharmacological interventions following concussion demonstrate moderate to good reporting completeness, but are often missing key components, particularly modifications, motivational strategies, and qualified supervisor. Reporting completeness improved after TIDieR and CERT publication, but publication in highly cited journals and low ROB do not guarantee reporting completeness.

Physiotherapy assessment and treatment of patients with tibial external fixator: a systematic scoping review

PURPOSE

To map evidence regarding physiotherapy assessment and treatment of patients with tibial external fixator (EF), and to point out literature gaps for further research.

METHODS

Systematic scoping review conducted in four databases. We included both experimental and non-experimental studies involving patients with tibial EF and outcomes of interest. We recorded study design, population, sample size, sample age, reason for EF use, type of surgery, type of EF used, instruments used for assessing function, pain, quality of life, satisfaction, psychosocial aspects, and physiotherapy treatment descriptions from included studies. We categorised data accordingly to outcomes assessed and physiotherapy treatments description.

RESULTS

Eighty-six studies were included involving 3070 patients. Causes of fixator use were traumatic conditions, acquired and congenital deformities, and non-traumatic conditions, like compartmental osteoarthritis. Function was assessed in about three-quarters of included studies, though other outcomes were not presented in most studies. Only one study described satisfactorily the physiotherapy treatment. Almost half of the studies did not provide any description of the rehabilitation process.

CONCLUSIONS

There is little evidence about the assessment of function, pain, quality of life, satisfaction, psychosocial aspects, and other outcomes in tibial EF patients. Physiotherapy treatment in these patients is poorly reported.Protocol registration: Open Science Framework: doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/UT2DA.

Exposure to Meta-Analysis During Graduate and Postgraduate Trainings Predicts the Good Knowledge and Use of Randomized Controlled Trials, Systematic Reviews, and Meta-Analyses Among Nigerian Physiotherapists

Background Evidence-based practice (EBP) is essential for physiotherapy as an integral part of the multidisciplinary rehabilitation team. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, and meta-analyses are the gold standard in the hierarchy of evidence. However, the extent of knowledge, attitudes, and professional use of RCTs and meta-analyses among physiotherapists in Nigeria remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to describe and explore the predictors of Nigerian physiotherapists' knowledge, attitudes, and professional behaviors toward RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Methods In this observational study, an electronic version of an adapted questionnaire assessing the knowledge, attitudes, and professional use of RCTs and meta-analyses was shared across electronic platforms of Nigerian physiotherapy professional organizations. Results We found good overall knowledge (76 {80.8%}) and attitude (83 {88.3%}) toward the use of RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses for evaluating health interventions. Exposure to meta-analysis during graduate and postgraduate training (odds ratio {OR}, 7.102; 95% CI, 1.680-30.021; p = 0.008) and the presence of a medical library at the workplace (OR, 0.264; 95% CI, 0.070-0.997; p = 0.049) were significant predictors of good knowledge of RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Self-rated (OR, 56.476; 95% CI, 1.356-2357.430; p = 0.034) and overall levels of knowledge (OR, 0.013; 95% CI, 0.000-0.371; p = 0.011) predicted the good use of RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses among respondents. Discussion To equip physiotherapy practitioners with the requisite skill in using RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, graduate and postgraduate trainings should prioritize education on the use of RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses to inform clinical decisions and practice, while capable workplaces may set up medical libraries to ease access and enhance the use of RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.

Reproducibility of Exercise Interventions in Randomized Controlled Trials for the Treatment of Rotator Cuff-Related Shoulder Pain: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To determine the reproducibility of exercise therapy interventions in randomized controlled trials for rotator cuff-related shoulder pain (RCRSP).

DATA SOURCES

Data sources included Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and SPORTDiscus from studies published from database inception to April 23, 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials studying the use of exercise therapy for RCRSP.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers extracted exercise reporting details from all studies using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) and the modified Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT). The same 2 reviewers assessed risk of bias of all studies using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool version 2.0.

DATA SYNTHESIS

For 104 studies meeting inclusion criteria, the average number of items reported on the TIDieR was 5.27 (SD 2.50, range 1-12 out of 12) and 5.09 (SD 4.01, range 0-16 out of 16) on the CERT. Improved reporting over time was seen on both the TIDieR and CERT dating back to 1993 and through April 23, 2022. When comparing groups of studies published before and after the TIDieR (2014) and CERT (2016) were established, a statistically significant increase in median scores was noted on the TIDieR (P=.02) but not the CERT (P=.31). Quality of exercise therapy reporting was highest in studies with "low risk" of bias, and lowest in studies with "high risk" of bias on the RoB-2.

CONCLUSION

Overall exercise reporting in trials for RCRSP is incomplete despite the development of the TIDieR and CERT checklists. This has implications for translating evidence into practice.

Description of massage interventions in randomised clinical trials for neck pain; a review using the TIDieR checklist

OBJECTIVE

How interventions are reported can impact the ability to implement these intervention in clinical practice. Therefore, our aim is to assess the reporting of massage interventions in randomised controlled trials for patients with neck pain.

DATA SOURCES

This manuscript concerns a secondary analysis of trials evaluating massage for neck pain selected for a scoping review. An updated literature search was completed using four databases to 31 July 2023.

REVIEW METHODS

Trials were selected that evaluate massage interventions. Two independent assessors extracted descriptive information, methodological quality (PEDro-scale) and assessed completeness of reporting of the intervention using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDier-checklist). We present frequencies of the extracted data.

RESULTS

We included 35 trials (2840 patients) with neck pain. Most trials (n = 23) included patients with chronic non-specific neck pain. We found a wide variety of massage interventions from Chinese massage, Swedish massage to myofascial release. In addition, the dose, number of sessions and the duration of the intervention varied widely. The methodological quality overall was fair to good (varied between 4-8/10), and we found a moderate completeness of reporting. All trials provided the name of the intervention, 30 (86%) provided a rationale and 26 (74%) trials described details of the massage intervention.

CONCLUSION

The massage interventions were moderately described in trials in patients with neck pain, but provided enough information to guide the decision making for designing future Network Meta-analysis as to what trials need to be considered when grouping massage interventions in a clinically relevant way.

Elements of exercise prescription in Randomised controlled trials of musculoskeletal rehabilitation in a one-on-one setting. A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are used by clinicians to inform evidence-based practice including when providing exercise programs. They should sufficiently report exercise interventions to permit accurate replication and incorporation into clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this scoping review was to describe the elements used within the exercise prescription process for musculoskeletal rehabilitation in a one-on-one setting reported in RCTs including their methods and prescription in intervention or control groups.

METHODS

The databases CINHAL, COCHRANE, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PUBMED were searched using a predefined strategy. Articles were reviewed according to detailed inclusion/exclusion criteria which included whether they were RCTs prescribing exercises for musculoskeletal rehabilitation in a one-on-one setting published within the last 5 years. For studies retained following screening, data extracted included year of publication, musculoskeletal condition and interventions studied. A pre-determined checklist ascertained the elements of the exercise prescription process reported in each study. Data obtained were analysed descriptively and summarised.

RESULTS

After screening, 153 studies were retained for data extraction. The two most reported items included 'specific dosages provided' (75%, n = 115), and 'observe the patient performing the exercises' (71%. n = 108). Over half of studies reported basing their exercise intervention on existing evidence-based protocols (61%, n = 93). Elements considering biomechanical principles were the most 'unclear'. Most of the checklist items received an 'unclear' score due to inadequate descriptions of interventions.

CONCLUSION

Many RCTs under report the development and prescription of exercise interventions, limiting replication of findings in clinical practice. A comprehensive framework is needed to ensure exercise prescription is adequately reported.

Physical therapist-led interventions based on the biopsychosocial model provide improvement in disability and pain for spinal disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the effects of physical therapist-led interventions based on the biopsychosocial (BPS) model in spinal disorders compared to interventions with no BPS model through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials. TYPE: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

LITERATURE SURVEY

We searched the Web of Science, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and PEDro up to October 27, 2022.

METHODOLOGY

Pain intensity and disability were primary outcomes and psychological factors were secondary outcomes in spinal disorders. The included intervention was physical therapist-led interventions based on the BPS model. The control group received no physiotherapy intervention for BPS. Pooled effects were analyzed as standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and the random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis. The subgroup analysis was divided into low back pain group and neck pain group. Another subgroup analysis was conducted only of the groups that had received training of the BPS model.

SYNTHESIS

Fifty-seven studies with 5471 participants met the inclusion criteria. For pain intensity, there was a statistically significant effect for the BPS model led by physical therapists in the short, medium, and long terms. The SMDs with 95% CIs were -0.44 (-0.62, -0.27), -0.24 (-0.37, -0.12), and -0.17 (-0.28, -0.06), respectively. Outcomes were clinically significant, except in the long term. For disability, there was a statistically significant effect in the short, medium, and long terms. The SMDs with 95% CIs were -0.48 (-0.69, -0.27), -0.44 (-0.64, -0.25), and -0.37 (-0.58, -0.15), respectively. All periods were clinically significant. The quality of the evidence was low for all of the main outcomes for all of the terms.

CONCLUSION

Physical therapist-led interventions based on the BPS model effectively improve pain intensity and disability in patients with spinal disorders based on low-quality evidence.

The influence of lifestyle interventions and overweight on infertility: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of randomized controlled trials

This study aimed to investigate the effect of lifestyle intervention (LSI) on diagnosed infertility in overweight and obese women. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. A literature search was performed on the following databases from September 2022 to December 2022: PubMed, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus. The inclusion criteria were the following: women between 18 and 45 years of age, BMI over 25.0 kg/m2, diagnosed with infertility, a weight loss intervention, and control group part of RCTs. In total, 15 studies were identified and included. The meta-analysis shows a beneficial effect of LSI on reducing weight, waist circumference, and BMI and increasing infertility. A significantly beneficial effect of lifestyle intervention on weight reduction was observed for participants who initially had a higher BMI, while a non-significant effect was observed for individuals with a BMI above 35 kg/m2. The meta-analysis showed a beneficial effect of lifestyle intervention on ovulation incidence and sex hormone-binding globulin. The lifestyle intervention group had 11.23 times more ovulatory incidence than the control group, which in turn increased the ability to conceive. As robust evidence for the effect of lifestyle interventions on infertility in obese and overweight women was found, it is advised to integrate similar interventions into future infertility treatment processes.

Reporting Rigor of Cancer Rehabilitation Interventions: Application of the CReDECI-2 Guidelines

ABSTRACT

Clear reporting of cancer rehabilitation interventions is critical for interpreting and translating research into clinical practice. This study sought to examine the completeness of intervention reporting of cancer rehabilitation interventions addressing disability and to identify which elements are most frequently missing. This was a secondary analysis of randomized controlled trials included in two systematic reviews examining effectiveness of cancer rehabilitation interventions that address cancer-related disability, including functional outcomes. Eligible trials were reviewed for intervention reporting rigor using the Criteria for Reporting the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions in Healthcare 2 checklist. Intervention descriptions for cancer rehabilitation interventions were generally incomplete. Approximately 85% ( n = 157) of trials described ≤50% of Criteria for Reporting the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions in Healthcare 2 checklist items. Commonly underreported items included description of the intervention's underlying theoretical basis, fidelity, description of process evaluation or external conditions influencing intervention delivery, and costs or required resources for intervention delivery. The findings reveal that cancer rehabilitation intervention descriptions lacked necessary detail in this body of literature. Poor descriptions limit the translation of research to clinical practice. To ensure higher-quality study design and reporting, future intervention research should incorporate an intervention reporting checklist to ensure more complete descriptions for research and practice.

Completeness of intervention reporting in randomised trials of technology-enabled remote or hybrid exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review using the TIDieR framework

BACKGROUND

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation improves clinical outcomes and quality of life. Technology-enabled delivery of remote cardiac rehabilitation is as effective in improving health outcomes as in-person delivery and has the potential to transform clinical service delivery. However, for the successful translation of research to clinical practice, interventions must be adequately reported in the literature.

METHODS

Systematic review of MedLine, CINAHL, PubMed and SPORT Discus databases applying PRISMA guidance. Randomised controlled trials of remote or hybrid technology-enabled exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation interventions were included. Completeness of reporting was evaluated against the TIDieR checklist.

RESULTS

The search strategy returned 162 articles which, following screening, resulted in 12 randomised trials being included containing data for 1588 participants. No trial fully reported their rehabilitation intervention as per the 12-item TIDieR checklist, with a median score of eight out of 12 categories. Notably, intervention detail, dosage and modification were comparatively poorly reported.

CONCLUSION

Technology-enabled remotely delivered cardiac rehabilitation may be effective at improving cardiovascular fitness; however, the quality of reporting of these interventions in randomised trials is insufficient for replication which has material implications for translation into clinical practice.

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in prehabilitation: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Inadequate study reporting precludes interpretation of findings, pooling of results in meta-analyses, and delays knowledge translation. While prehabilitation interventions aim to enhance candidacy for surgery, to our knowledge, a review of the quality of reporting in prehabilitation has yet to be conducted. Our objective was to determine the extent to which randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of prehabilitation are reported according to methodological and intervention reporting checklists.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria: RCTs of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

search was conducted in March 2022 using MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane.

CHARTING METHODS

identified studies were compared to CONSORT, CERT & Modified CERT, TIDieR, PRESENT, and CONSORT-SPI. An agreement ratio (AR) was defined to evaluate if applicable guideline items were correctly reported. Data were analyzed as frequency (n, %) and mean with standard deviation (SD).

RESULTS

We identified 935 unique articles and included 70 trials published from 1994 to 2022. Most prehabilitation programs comprised exercise-only interventions (n = 40, 57%) and were applied before oncologic surgery (n = 32, 46%). The overall mean AR was 57% (SD: 20.9%). The specific mean ARs were as follows: CONSORT: 71% (SD: 16.3%); TIDieR: 62% (SD:17.7%); CERT: 54% (SD: 16.6%); Modified-CERT: 40% (SD:17.8%); PRESENT: 78% (SD: 8.9); and CONSORT-SPI: 47% (SD: 22.1).

CONCLUSION

Altogether, existing prehabilitation trials report approximately half of the checklist items recommended by methodological and intervention reporting guidelines. Reporting practices may improve with the development of a reporting checklist specific to prehabilitation interventions.

arly u ervised ncremental esistance raining (ESpIRiT) following cardiac surgery via a median sternotomy: a study protocol of a multicentre randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

There is no consistency in current practice pertaining to the prescription and progression of upper limb resistance exercise following cardiac surgery via median sternotomy. The aim of this study is to investigate whether less restrictive sternal precautions with the addition of early-supervised resistance training exercise improves upper limb function and facilitates recovery following median sternotomy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is double-blind randomised controlled trial, with parallel group, concealed allocation, blinding of patients and assessors, and intention-to-treat analysis. 240 adult participants who had median sternotomy from eight hospitals in Malaysia will be recruited. Sample size calculations were based on the unsupported upper limb test. All participants will be randomised to receive either standard or early supervised incremental resistance training. The primary outcomes are upper limb function and pain. The secondary outcomes will be functional capacity, multidomain recovery (physical and psychological), length of hospital stay, incidence of respiratory complications and quality of life. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarise data. Data will be analysed using the intention-to-treat principle. The primary hypothesis will be examined by evaluating the change from baseline to the 4-week postoperative time point in the intervention arm compared with the usual care arm. For all tests to be conducted, a p value of <0.05 (two tailed) will be considered statistically significant, and CIs will be reported. The trial is currently recruiting participants.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by a central ethical committee as well as the local Research Ethics Boards of the participating sites (UKM:JEP-2019-654; Ministry of Health: NMMR-50763; National Heart Centre: IJNREC/501/2021). Approval to start was given prior to the recruitment of participants commencing at any sites. Process evaluation findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant academic conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number (ISRCTN17842822).

Within- and between-therapist agreement on personalized parameters for robot-assisted gait therapy: the challenge of adjusting robotic assistance

BACKGROUND

Stationary robotic gait trainers usually allow for adjustment of training parameters, including gait speed, body weight support and robotic assistance, to personalize therapy. Consequently, therapists personalize parameter settings to pursue a relevant therapy goal for each patient. Previous work has shown that the choice of parameters influences the behavior of patients. At the same time, randomized clinical trials usually do not report the applied settings and do not consider them in the interpretation of their results. The choice of adequate parameter settings therefore remains one of the major challenges that therapists face in everyday clinical practice. For therapy to be most effective, personalization should ideally result in repeatable parameter settings for repeatable therapy situations, irrespective of the therapist who adjusts the parameters. This has not yet been investigated. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the agreement of parameter settings from session to session within a therapist and between two different therapists in children and adolescents undergoing robot-assisted gait training.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fourteen patients walked in the robotic gait trainer Lokomat on 2 days. Two therapists from a pool of 5 therapists independently personalized gait speed, bodyweight support and robotic assistance for a moderately and a vigorously intensive therapy task. There was a very high agreement within and between therapists for the parameters gait speed and bodyweight support, but a substantially lower agreement for robotic assistance.

CONCLUSION

These findings imply that therapists perform consistently at setting parameters that have a very clear and visible clinical effect (e.g. walking speed and bodyweight support). However, they have more difficulties with robotic assistance, which has a more ambiguous effect because patients may respond differently to changes. Future work should therefore focus on better understanding patient reactions to changes in robotic assistance and especially on how instructions can be employed to steer these reactions. To improve the agreement, we propose that therapists link their choice of robotic assistance to the individual therapy goals of the patients and closely guide the patients during walking with instructions.

Exercise therapy reporting in clinical trials for chronic neck pain: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to assess the reproducibility of exercise therapy used in clinical trials for chronic neck pain (CNP) based on reported items from the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) and the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklists.

METHODS

Two researchers systematically searched, screened, and selected trials that assessed exercise therapy for CNP between 2000 and 2021 from PubMed, CINAHL, and Ovid Medline. Included studies were published in English, and study participants experienced neck pain for longer than 3 months. Thoroughness of reporting of exercise therapy was assessed using the TIDierR and CERT checklists. Methodological quality of each study was screened with the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Data analysis was performed for descriptive and correlational statistics.

RESULTS

Sixty-three clinical trials using exercise therapy for treatment of CNP met the inclusion criteria. No study reported all TIDieR or CERT items. The mean number of items reported was 5.44 (SD 2.40, range of 1-11) on the TIDieR, and 8.27 (SD 4.14, range of 0-17) for the CERT. Risk of bias was high for 30 studies (47.6%), somewhat concerning for 20 studies (31.7%), and low for 13 studies (21.7%). Higher risk of bias was associated with a lower number of TIDieR and CERT items reported.

DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION

The majority of exercise therapy trials for CNP lack proper reporting, limiting reproducibility of the interventions in real world clinical practice and follow-on research. After checklists were published, reporting did not improve.

Well-described exercises for chronic low back pain in Life Science Literature: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic exercise (TE) is recommended in multimodal treatment for patients with non-specific chronic back pain (cLBP).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to identify an exercise or a spectrum of exercises, well described and reproducible by the clinician, for cLBP patients.

METHODS

Systematic review by researching in the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, CINAHL, and Scopus. Evidence from Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) supported the TE in patients with non-specific cLBP, provided that it was well described and could be repeated by another therapist. Methodological evaluation was performed using the PEDro scale and only studies with a score of ⩾ 6 were included. The assessment of the intervention description was carried out with the TIDieR checklist. The risk of bias was examined.

RESULTS

Twenty-one articles were included in this systematic review. The defective description and the poorly reporting of the intervention makes it more difficult for the clinician to include the TE into clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study showed that the reporting of the intervention in high quality RCT on chronic low back pain is low, threatening the external validity of the results.

Prehabilitation of elderly frail or pre-frail patients prior to elective surgery (PRAEP-GO): study protocol for a randomized, controlled, outcome assessor-blinded trial

BACKGROUND

Frailty is expressed by a reduction in physical capacity, mobility, muscle strength, and endurance. (Pre-)frailty is present in up to 42% of the older surgical population, with an increased risk for peri- and postoperative complications. Consequently, these patients often suffer from a delayed or limited recovery, loss of autonomy and quality of life, and a decrease in functional and cognitive capacities. Since frailty is modifiable, prehabilitation may improve the physiological reserves of patients and reduce the care dependency 12 months after surgery.

METHODS

Patients ≥ 70 years old scheduled for elective surgery or intervention will be recruited in this multicenter, randomized controlled study, with a target of 1400 participants with an allocation ratio of 1:1. The intervention consists of (1) a shared decision-making process with the patient, relatives, and an interdisciplinary and interprofessional team and (2) a 3-week multimodal, individualized prehabilitation program including exercise therapy, nutritional intervention, mobility or balance training, and psychosocial interventions and medical assessment. The frequency of the supervised prehabilitation is 5 times/week for 3 weeks. The primary endpoint is defined as the level of care dependency 12 months after surgery or intervention.

DISCUSSION

Prehabilitation has been proven to be effective for different populations, including colorectal, transplant, and cardiac surgery patients. In contrast, evidence for prehabilitation in older, frail patients has not been clearly established. To the best of our knowledge, this is currently the largest prehabilitation study on older people with frailty undergoing general elective surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04418271 . Registered on 5 June 2020. Universal Trial Number (UTN): U1111-1253-4820.

TIDieR-telehealth: precision in reporting of telehealth interventions used in clinical trials - unique considerations for the Template for the Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist

Background

Recent international health events have led to an increased proliferation of remotely delivered health interventions. Even with the pandemic seemingly coming under control, the experiences of the past year have fueled a growth in ideas and technology for increasing the scope of remote care delivery. Unfortunately, clinicians and health systems will have difficulty with the adoption and implementation of these interventions if ongoing and future clinical trials fail to report necessary details about execution, platforms, and infrastructure related to these interventions. The purpose was to develop guidance for reporting of telehealth interventions.

Methods

A working group from the US Pain Management Collaboratory developed guidance for complete reporting of telehealth interventions. The process went through 5-step process from conception to final checklist development with input for many stakeholders, to include all 11 primary investigators with trials in the Collaboratory.

Results

An extension focused on unique considerations relevant to telehealth interventions was developed for the Template for the Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist.

Conclusion

The Telehealth Intervention guideline encourages use of the Template for the Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist as a valuable tool (TIDieR-Telehealth) to improve the quality of research through a reporting guide of relevant interventions that will help maximize reproducibility and implementation.

If exercise is medicine, why don't we know the dose? An overview of systematic reviews assessing reporting quality of exercise interventions in health and disease

OBJECTIVE

To determine how well exercise interventions are reported in trials in health and disease.

DESIGN

Overview of systematic reviews.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and PsycINFO from inception until June 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Reviews of any health condition were included if they primarily assessed quality of exercise intervention reporting using the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) or the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR). We assessed review quality using a modified version of A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews.

RESULTS

We identified 7804 studies and included 28 systematic reviews. The median (IQR) percentage of CERT and TIDieR items appropriately reported was 24% (19%) and 49% (33%), respectively. TIDieR items 1, Brief name (median=100%, IQR 4) and 2, Why (median=98%, IQR 6), as well as CERT item 4, Supervision and delivery (median=68%, IQR 89), were the best reported. For replication of exercise interventions, TIDieR item 8, When and how much, was moderately well reported (median=62%, IQR 68) although CERT item 8, Description of each exercise to enable replication (median=23%, IQR 44) and item 13, Detailed description of the exercise intervention (median=24%, IQR 66) were poorly reported. Quality of systematic reviews ranged from moderate to critically low quality.

CONCLUSION

Exercise interventions are poorly reported across a range of health conditions. If exercise is medicine, then how it is prescribed and delivered is unclear, potentially limiting its translation from research to practice.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021261285; Open Science Framework: osf.io/my3ec/.

Application of the Templates TIDieR and CERT Reveal Incomplete Reporting and Poor Replicability of Exercise Interventions for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Exercise is strongly recommended for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, incomplete intervention reporting in clinical trials limits the replication of exercise protocols. As previously demonstrated by us for exercise and hypertension, the reporting quality might also be insufficient in studies with respect to T2DM and exercise.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to assess the completeness of exercise intervention reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for T2DM.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers applied the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) and the template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) to 23 exercise trials obtained from the most recent and frequently cited meta-analysis in current guidelines. The completeness of reporting was evaluated, focusing on the F.I.T.T. components (frequency, intensity, time, type). Interrater agreement and associations with publication year and journal impact factor were examined.

RESULTS

Mean CERT score was 11/19 (range 5-17), and 8/12 (range 4-12) for TIDieR. F.I.T.T. components were almost completely described, whereas overall completeness of exercise reporting was 60% and 68% (CERT and TIDieR). Replication of each exercise of the respective program was not possible in 52% of interventions. The majority of items had shown excellent agreement. No associations with publication year or impact factor were found.

CONCLUSION

Exercise interventions were not found to be sufficiently reported in RCTs that currently guide clinical practice in T2DM. Replication in further studies or clinical practice is limited due to poor exercise description. We suggest the use of more specific CERT for reporting results of exercise interventions. Further refinement for internal diseases is needed to better describe exercise interventions.

Making exercise count: Considerations for the role of exercise in back pain treatment

INTRODUCTION

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is pain that has persisted for greater than three months. It is common and burdensome and represents a significant proportion of primary health presentations. For the majority of people with CLBP, a specific nociceptive contributor cannot be reliably identified, and the pain is categorised as 'non-specific'. Exercise therapy is recommended by international clinical guidelines as a first-line treatment for non-specific CLBP.

AIM

This comprehensive review aims to synthesise and appraise the current research to provide practical, evidence-based guidance concerning exercise prescription for non-specific CLBP. We discuss detailed initial assessment and being informed by patient preferences, values, expectations, competencies and goals.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) using broad search terms from January 2000 to March 2021, to identify the most recent clinical practice guidelines, systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials on exercise for CLBP.

RESULTS/DISCUSSION

Systematic reviews show exercise is effective for small, short-term reductions in pain and disability, when compared with placebo, usual care, or waiting list control, and serious adverse events are rare. A range of individualised or group-based exercise modalities have been demonstrated as effective in reducing pain and disability. Despite this consensus, controversies and significant challenges remain.

CONCLUSION

To promote recovery, sustainable outcomes and self-management, exercise can be coupled with education strategies, as well as interventions that enhance adherence, motivation and patient self-efficacy. Clinicians might benefit from intentionally considering their own knowledge and competencies, potential harms of exercise and costs to the patient. This comprehensive review provides evidence-based practical guidance to health professionals who prescribe exercise for people with non-specific CLBP.

Training of Physical Therapists to Deliver Individualized Biopsychosocial Interventions to Treat Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

Current guidelines recommend management of musculoskeletal pain conditions from a biopsychosocial approach; however, biopsychosocial interventions delivered by physical therapists vary considerably in effectiveness. It is unknown whether the differences are explained by the intervention itself, the training and/or competency of physical therapists delivering the intervention, or fidelity of the intervention. The aim was to investigate and map the training, competency assessments, and fidelity checking of individualized biopsychosocial interventions delivered by physical therapists to treat musculoskeletal pain conditions.

METHODS

A scoping review methodology was employed, using Arksey and O'Malley's framework. Seven electronic databases were searched between January and March 2019, with a bridge search completed in January 2020. Full-text peer-reviewed articles, with an individualized biopsychosocial intervention were considered, and 35 studies were included.

RESULTS

Reporting overall was sparse and highly variable. There was a broad spectrum of training. More sophisticated training involved workshops combining didactic and experiential learning over longer durations with supervision and feedback. Less sophisticated training was brief, involving lectures or seminars, with no supervision or feedback. Competency assessments and fidelity testing were underperformed.

CONCLUSIONS

Training in some interventions might not have facilitated the implementation of skills or techniques to enable the paradigm shift and behavior change required for physical therapists to effectively deliver a biopsychosocial intervention. Lack of competency assessments and fidelity checking could have impacted the methodological quality of biopsychosocial interventions.

IMPACT

This study highlighted problematic reporting, training, assessment of competency, and fidelity checking of physical therapist-delivered individualized biopsychosocial interventions. Findings here highlight why previous interventions could have shown small effect sizes and point to areas for improvement in future interventions. These findings can help inform future research and facilitate more widespread implementation of physical therapist-delivered biopsychosocial interventions for people with musculoskeletal pain and thereby improve their quality of life.

Systematic Review of Lumbar Elastic Tape on Trunk Mobility: A Debatable Issue

Objectives

To systematically review the literature to analyze the effect of lumbar elastic tape application on trunk mobility, surpassing the minimal detectable change of the used outcome measurement tool, and to analyze the additional effect of applied tension and direction of elastic tape application in low back pain and participants without low back pain.

Data Sources

Four databases were used: PubMed, Web of Science, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), and Google Scholar.

Study Selection

The inclusion criteria were randomized and clinical controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of lumbar elastic tape application on trunk mobility.

Data Extraction

Two researchers executed the search and a third author was consulted to resolve disagreements. The methodological quality was scored using the PEDro scale, with studies scoring ≤5 being excluded.

Data Synthesis

Eight out of 6799 studies were included; 5 studied individuals with low back pain, and 3 studied participants without low back pain. Two studies scored low on the PEDro scale and were excluded. None of the reported significant changes in trunk mobility due to elastic tape application exceeded the indicated minimal detectable change. No conclusions can be drawn from the direction and applied tension of elastic tape application.

Conclusions

Based on the results of this systematic review, there is no evidence supporting the effect of lumbar elastic tape application. We recommend consensus in the use of more reliable and valid instruments in future studies.

Has Reporting on Physical Therapy Interventions Improved in 2 Decades? An Analysis of 140 Trials Reporting on 225 Interventions

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the completeness of reporting of physical therapy interventions in randomized controlled trials before and after publication of the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist (a reporting guideline for interventions).

DESIGN

Meta-research.

METHODS

We searched 6 journals for trials using physical therapy interventions that were published in 2000 and 2018. Two independent assessors scored the TIDieR checklist and extracted descriptive information, including Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale scores. We identified control or treatment interventions, exercise-based interventions, and area of physical therapy. We performed a descriptive analysis and defined a priori a 20% difference between studies published in 2000 and 2018 as meaningful. We assessed correlations between TIDieR and PEDro scale scores for all interventions.

RESULTS

In total, 140 articles that met selection criteria evaluated 225 interventions (2000, n = 61; 2018, n = 164). Mean ± SD TIDieR score (2000, 7.52 ± 2.62; 2018, 8.26 ± 2.26) did not show a meaningful difference between years for all interventions (+5%), controls (+6%), treatment interventions (+6%), exercise-based interventions (+9%), or musculoskeletal (+4%) or neurological (+7%) physical therapy. For exercise interventions, number of sessions was reported more (+21%) in 2018 than in 2000. For musculoskeletal trials, 2 items were reported more completely in 2018 than in 2000 (materials, +29%; individual versus group, +22%) and 3 items were reported more completely in neurological trials (mode of delivery, +20%, [item 8.1] when +45%, and assessment of fidelity, +20%). The item "Who delivered the intervention?" was reported less completely (-23%) in 2018 than in 2000 in neurological trials. We found no correlation (r = 0.12) between PEDro scale score and TIDieR score.

CONCLUSION

There were few meaningful improvements in how physical therapy interventions were described after publication of the TIDieR reporting guideline. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(10):503-509. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10642.

Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programmes: a systematic scoping review and analysis using the TIDieR checklist for reporting interventions

PURPOSE

Aphasia is an acquired language disorder that typically occurs as a result of a stroke. People with aphasia experience communication difficulties and risk secondary impacts, for example, affecting social and work life and mental health. Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programmes (ICAPs) aims to address the multiple consequences of aphasia using intensive intervention and a wide range of therapy approaches. Although basic parameters of ICAP intervention have been defined, a fuller characterisation is needed. This systematic scoping review aimed to determine what constitutes an ICAP.

METHODS

Peer-reviewed and Grey databases were searched for articles on ICAPs using Joanna Brigg's Institute methodology. Data was extracted following the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist for reporting interventions and synthesised using a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

17 ICAPs were reported in 20 peer-reviewed literature sources (9 ICAPs supplemented by Grey literature sources). There were high degrees of variation in dose, professionals involved, and no qualitative data from participants. Of note, ICAP intervention was highly tailored to individual participants on the same ICAP, and intervention content varied between ICAPs. ICAPs appear to be rationalised as intensive impairment-based programmes with other components added for comprehensiveness. Stronger rationale and a logic model are required to justify the core components of ICAPs. The input of stakeholders into designing future ICAP interventions is recommended.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe ICAP model is in its infancy when it comes to mainstream clinical application as only the intensity component of the ICAP has clear theoretical underpinning as reported in the peer-reviewed literature.There have been clinical uptakes of the ICAP model which is likely to continue and is valid in the context of an under-researched area of aphasia therapy and on a background of a less than perfect relationship between evidence base and practice.Aspects of the ICAP model are valid for clinicians to implement, for example, intensive evidence-based aphasia therapy in combination with therapy which addresses some of the broader implications of aphasia, for example, social isolation.Clinicians can use the ICAP model to review their existing service provision and explore whether their service provides aphasia therapy that addresses the multiple aspects of aphasia (i.e., ensuring the focus is not only on impairment-based therapy).

What is the evidence for abdominal and pelvic floor muscle training to treat diastasis recti abdominis postpartum? A systematic review with meta-analysis

Background

Diastasis recti abdominis (DRA) affects a significant number of women in the postpartum period.

Objective

To systematically review whether abdominal and pelvic floor muscle (PFM) exercise programs are effective in the treatment of DRA postpartum.

Methods

Electronic search was conducted from inception to March 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) or pilot RCTs that compared abdominal training, PFM training, or a combination of both in at least one arm of the trial were included. The primary outcome was presence of DRA (numbers/percentage) or inter-recti distance (IRD) change. GRADE was used to rate the overall quality of evidence. Pooled effect sizes were expressed as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

Seven RCTs totaling 381 women were included. Two studies comparing transversus abdominis (TrA) training with minimal intervention provided data to be included in a meta-analysis. The results provided very low level quality evidence that TrA training reduced IRD (MD = -0.63 cm, 95% confidence interval: -1.25, -0.01, I² = 0%). Two studies included curl-up exercises as part of their intervention. Level of evidence based on single trials of high risk of bias show very low evidence that curl-up training is more effective than minimal intervention for treating DRA. Similarly, analyses based on single trials provided low to very low quality evidence that PFM training is not more effective than minimal intervention for treating DRA.

Conclusion

There is currently very low-quality scientific evidence to recommend specific exercise programs in the treatment of DRA postpartum.

•

Trials investigating abdominal and PFM exercises on DRA have mostly been performed on women with mild DRA.

•

The abdominal and PFM exercise programs identified were heterogenous in terms of type of exercises and training dose.

•

We found low quality evidence that TrA and curl-up training are more effective than minimal intervention for treating DRA.

•

There is low to very low evidence that PFM training is not more effective than minimal intervention.

Expert consensus on the important chronic non-specific neck pain motor control and segmental exercise and dosage variables: An international e-Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Chronic non-specific neck pain is highly prevalent, resulting in significant disability. Despite exercise being a mainstay treatment, guidance on optimal exercise and dosage variables is lacking. Combining submaximal effort deep cervical muscles exercise (motor control) and superficial cervical muscles exercise (segmental) reduces chronic non-specific neck pain, but evaluation of optimal exercise and dosage variables is prevented by clinical heterogeneity.

OBJECTIVE

To gain consensus on important motor control and segmental exercise and dosage variables for chronic non-specific neck pain.

METHODS

An international 3-round e-Delphi study, was conducted with experts in neck pain management (academic and clinical). In round 1, exercise and dosage variables were obtained from expert opinion and clinical trial data, then analysed thematically (two independent researchers) to develop themes and statements. In rounds 2 and 3, participants rated their agreement with statements (1-5 Likert scale). Statement consensus was evaluated using progressively increased a priori criteria using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven experts participated (10 countries). Twenty-nine responded to round 1 (79%), 26 round 2 (70%) and 24 round 3 (65%). Round 1 generated 79 statements outlining the interacting components of exercise prescription. Following rounds 2 and 3, consensus was achieved for 46 important components of exercise and dosage prescription across 5 themes (clinical reasoning, dosage variables, exercise variables, evaluation criteria and progression) and 2 subthemes (progression criteria and progression variables). Excellent agreement and qualitative data supports exercise prescription complexity and the need for individualised, acceptable, and feasible exercise. Only 37% of important exercise components were generated from clinical trial data. Agreement was highest (88%-96%) for 3 dosage variables: intensity of effort, frequency, and repetitions.

CONCLUSION

Multiple exercise and dosage variables are important, resulting in complex and individualised exercise prescription not found in clinical trials. Future research should use these important variables to prescribe an evidence-informed approach to exercise.

The quality of intervention reporting in trials of therapeutic exercise for hip osteoarthritis: a secondary analysis of a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic exercise is recommended as a core treatment for hip osteoarthritis (HOA). Whilst it is widely accepted that exercise can improve pain and disability, optimal type and dose of exercise are yet to be agreed upon. This may, in part, be attributed to the wide variation and inadequate reporting of interventions within the literature. This study evaluates the quality of intervention reporting among trials of therapeutic exercise in HOA.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were sourced in a systematic review, completed in August 2020. Two raters independently used the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) and Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) to evaluate intervention reporting. Correlations between quality assessment scores and CERT and TIDieR scores evaluated the relationship between internal validity and external applicability. The year of publication was compared to the quality of reporting scores.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs were included in the analysis. On average, studies were awarded 9.43 ± 1.95 out of 12 points for the TIDieR checklist (range 4-12) and 13.57 ± 4.01 out of 19 points for the CERT (range 5-19). Pearson's correlation coefficient suggested that the quality of reporting had improved over time and that there was a fair, positive relationship between internal validity and external applicability.

DISCUSSION

Whilst the quality of intervention reporting is improving, many RCTs of therapeutic exercise in HOA lack the detail necessary to allow accurate evaluation and replication. Researchers are encouraged to utilise the standardised reporting guidelines to increase the translation of effective interventions into clinical practice.

Completeness of exercise reporting among randomized controlled trials on pelvic floor muscle training for women with pelvic organ prolapse: A systematic review

AIMS

This systematic review aimed to assess the completeness of exercise reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) for women with pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

METHODS

MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, CINHAL, Embase, SCOPUS, and PEDro databases were searched up to October 2020. Full-text RCTs comparing PFMT to any type of intervention among women with any type and stage of POP were eligible for inclusion. Completeness of intervention was evaluated with t20he template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) and the consensus on exercise reporting template (CERT). Inter-rater agreement for each item of the tools was calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty-six RCTs were included. None of the studies completely reported all intervention descriptors. On average 57.1% (6.8 ± 2.4; out of 12) of the overall TIDieR items and 35.3% (6.7 ± 2.9; out of 19) of the CERT were well described. In particular, 7 and 5 items were completely reported more than 50% of the time for the TIDieR and CERT, respectively. Frequent shortcomings were the undetailed reporting of information regarding tailoring and modifications of exercises and their adherence. Detailed descriptions of exercise repetitions to enable replication were missing in 53.8%. According to the CERT, only 11.5% of the RCTs sufficiently described the main providers' characteristics.

CONCLUSION

The completeness of PFMT reporting for women with POP is still below desirable standards and it is insufficient to ensure transferability into practice. The present results may add relevant knowledge and contribute to improving adequate reporting of exercise.

Intervention Reporting of Published Trials Is Insufficient in Orthopaedic Surgery Journals: Application of the Template for Intervention Description and Replication Checklist

Purpose

Outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been shown to influence clinical decision making. Thus, the quality and reliability of these outcomes are essential for both patients and medical care providers. To date, no study has assessed the quality of intervention reporting of RCTs in orthopaedics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of intervention reporting of published RCTs in the field of orthopaedics using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist.

Methods

In this cross-sectional analysis, we applied the TIDieR checklist to assess the quality of intervention reporting in orthopaedic RCTs. Additionally, we evaluated the TIDieR checklist’s influence on intervention reporting by comparing overall adherence to checklist items in trials published before the TIDieR checklist’s release versus trials published after its release. Finally, we assessed whether certain factors were associated with the quality of intervention reporting.

Results

From a random sample of 300 publications in orthopaedic journals, 175 parallel-arm and cluster RCTs were identified. The overall rate of adherence to TIDieR items was 58.4%. Only 31.4% of orthopaedic RCTs adhered to at least 6 of the 12 TIDieR checklist items, whereas 0% adhered to all 12 items. We found no significant improvement in the quality of intervention reporting in studies published after the TIDieR checklist’s release compared with studies published before its release (P = .97). Additionally, preregistered trials were associated with more complete intervention reporting.

Conclusions

Our results suggest suboptimal reporting of orthopaedic RCT interventions. In addition, the TIDieR checklist’s intended effect—to better the quality of RCT intervention reporting—appears to have fallen short of its goal.

Clinical Relevance

Because outcomes of RCTs are used to guide clinical decision making, it is essential that orthopaedic surgeons and clinical practice guideline panels are equipped with high-quality published research. Increasing the accuracy of intervention reporting may lead to more accurate clinical application. Thus, adoption of more stringent reporting of trial interventions by researchers, authors, and journal editors may improve the quality of orthopaedic research, as well as improve patient outcomes.

The Template for Intervention Description and Replication as a Measure of Intervention Reporting Quality: Rasch Analysis

Objective

To determine whether the 12 items of the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) can be combined into a single summary score reflecting intervention reporting completeness and quality.

Design

Systematic review and reanalysis of published data. After a systematic search of the published literature, 16 review articles were retrieved with 489 sets of 12 TIDieR ratings of experimental intervention, comparator, or the 2 combined as reported in primary studies. These 489 sets were recoded into a common format and analyzed using Rasch analysis for binary items.

Setting

Not applicable.

Participants

Not applicable.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures

Psychometric qualities of a Rasch Analysis-based TIDieR summary score.

Results

The data fit the Rasch model. Infit and outfit values were generally acceptable (range, 0.70-1.45). TIDieR was reasonably unidimensional in its structure. However, the person (here: study) separation ratio was 1.25 with a corresponding reliability of 0.61. In addition, the confidence interval around each estimate of reporting completeness was wide (model standard error of 0.78).

Conclusion

Several Rasch indicators suggested that TIDieR is not a strong instrument for assessing the quality of a researcher's reporting on an intervention. It is recommended that it be used with caution. Improvements in TIDieR itself may make it more helpful as a reporting tool.

Completeness of Intervention Reporting of Clinical Trials Published in Highly Ranked Obesity Journals

OBJECTIVE

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) play a crucial role in the research and advancement of medical treatment. A cross-sectional study design was utilized to analyze the completeness of intervention reporting using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and to evaluate factors associated with intervention reporting. A comparison of the completeness of intervention reporting before and after the publication of TIDieR was sought.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for RCTs in the top 10 obesity journals per the Google h5-index. After excluding non-RCTs, 300 articles were randomly sampled. After assessing each publication for eligibility, two authors (SLR and DT) extracted data related to intervention reporting from records in an independent, masked fashion. Data were then verified and analyzed.

RESULTS

The analysis revealed that the quality of intervention reporting is quite variable. Overall, no statistically significant difference in the quality of intervention reporting before and after the release of TIDieR guidelines was found. In general, obesity research has good intervention reporting in areas such as the mode of delivery, material lists for intervention, and procedure lists. However, four main areas in which obesity researchers can improve reporting quality were determined. These include providing the expertise and background of intervention providers and providing statements regarding the assessment of fidelity of the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Urgent intervention is warranted to improve the quality of research reporting in obesity research, which is a fundamental component of obesity management. This will likely require a unified approach from researchers, journals, and funding sources.

Overview of Reviews Using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) as a Measure of Trial Intervention Reporting Quality

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the quality of descriptions of interventions in health care research reports, based on a synthesis of reviews that used the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) to rate the completeness and quality of intervention reporting.

DESIGN

Overview of published reviews. In a systematic search of the literature, 56 review articles were retrieved that had evaluated 3454 primary studies (index articles) using all or most of the 12 TIDieR items, applied to experimental treatment only or treatment and comparator both, separately. If available, percentages "reported completely" were extracted based on the index article, the index article supplemented by related information, and these 2 supplemented by e-mailing the author. Information on the review's methodology was also extracted.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PARTICIPANTS

Not applicable.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Percentage of primary studies receiving "adequately reported" ratings on each of the 12 TIDieR items.

RESULTS

While for treatment arms TIDieR items 1 (name of treatment) and 2 (why of treatment) are generally judged to be reported adequately, the percentage is between 25% and 75% for most other items and is as low as 10% for item 10 (modifications). Comparators are reported even more poorly. Use of additional publications on a trial increased percentages "reported adequately" marginally; e-mailing resulted in significant increases in completeness of reporting. Rehabilitation trials were reported better than nonrehabilitation trials for some TIDieR items and worse for others.

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting on the interventions and comparators of trials is substandard. More extensive use of supplemental digital content and of versions of TIDieR customized for specific domains of research may improve the situation.

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

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to quantify and analyze the presence and type of self-acknowledged limitations (SALs) in a sample of manual therapy (MT) randomized controlled trials.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We randomly selected 120 MT trials. We extracted data related to SALs from the original reports and classified them into 12 categories. After data extraction, specific limitations within each category were identified. A descriptive analysis was performed using frequencies and percentages for qualitative variables.

RESULTS

The number of SALs per trial article ranged from 0 to 8, and more than two-thirds of trials acknowledged at least two different limitations. Despite its small proportion, 9% of trials did not report SALs. The most common limitation declared, in almost half of our sample, related to sample size (47.5%) followed by limitations related to study length and follow-up (33.3%) and inadequate controls (32.5%).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that at least two different limitations are consistently acknowledged in MT trial reports, the most common being those related to sample size, study length, follow-up, and inadequate controls. Analysis of the reasons behind the SALs gives some insights about the main difficulties in conducting research in this field and may help develop strategies to improve future research.

A systematic review exploring the evidence reported to underpin exercise dose in clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis

We aimed to evaluate the evidence reported to underpin exercise dose in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using strengthening exercise in RA. We searched six different databases between 1 January 2000 and 3 April 2019. We included RCTs, where a main component of the intervention and/or control used strengthening exercise. Evidence sources cited to underpin dose were judged for their quality, consistency and applicability. Thirty-two RCTs were reviewed. Four (12.5%) piloted the intervention without using dose-escalation designs to determine optimal dose-response. Twenty (62.5%) reported no evidence underpinning dose. Where reported, quality, consistency and applicability of the underpinning evidence was a cause for methodological concern. The majority of RCTs did not report the evidence underpinning dose. When reported, the evidence was often not applicable to the clinical population. Frequently, the dose used differed to the dose reported/recommended by the underpinning evidence. Our findings illustrate exercise dose may not be optimised for use with clinical populations prior to evaluation by RCT.

The management of lower back pain using pilates method: assessment of content exercise reporting in RCTs

PURPOSE

To evaluate the quality of the reporting of exercise interventions with Pilates method for the treatment of lower back pain (LBP) in adults.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two independent evaluators selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of moderate and high methodological quality included in a Cochrane Systematic Review (SR) and from an additional updated search in the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and SPORTDiscus. Three assessment tools (Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise Training (CONTENT) scale, Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklist) were utilized by three pairs of two independent researchers trained. The scales' concordance was measured using the Kappa coefficient.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs were included. The CONTENT scale score was 5.3 (± 1.33) out of 9 points; the TIDieR checklist was 8.5 (± 1.71) out of 12 points and the CERT checklist was 9.5 (± 3.62) out of 19 points. The CONTENT and CERT had moderate concordance, while there was fair concordance between the other tools.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall reporting quality for the Pilates exercises in ten moderate-to-high quality RTCs for the management of LBP was low according to CONTENT scale and CERT checklist and high according to TIDieR checklist.Implications for RehabilitationReporting of Pilates exercise program in moderate-to-high quality RCTs for the management of lower back pain remains incomplete.Pilates exercise program should be personalized and contextualized to individual participants.There may be a need to consider adding to or combining the information available from various trials.

How Commercially Available Virtual Reality-Based Interventions Are Delivered and Reported in Gait, Posture, and Balance Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Virtual reality (VR) technologies are increasingly used in physical rehabilitation; however, it is unclear how VR interventions are being delivered, and, in particular, the role of the therapist remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate how commercially available VR technologies are being implemented in gait, posture, and balance rehabilitation, including justification, content, procedures, and dosage of the intervention and details of the therapist role.

METHODS

Five databases were searched between 2008 and 2018. Supervised interventional trials with >10 adult participants using commercially available VR technologies to address mobility limitations were independently selected by 2 authors. One author extracted reported intervention characteristics into a predesigned table and assessed methodological quality, which was independently verified by a second author. A total of 29 studies were included.

RESULTS

Generally, minimal clinical reasoning was provided to justify technology or activity selection, with recreational systems and games used most commonly (n = 25). All but 1 study used a single interventional technology. When explicitly described, the intervention was delivered by a physical therapist (n = 14), a therapist assistant (n = 2), both (n = 1), or an occupational therapist (n = 1). Most studies reported supervision (n = 12) and safeguarding (n = 8) as key therapist roles, with detail of therapist feedback less frequently reported (n = 4). Therapist involvement in program selection, tailoring, and progression was poorly described.

CONCLUSION

Intervention protocols of VR rehabilitation studies are incompletely described and generally lack detail on clinical rationale for technology and activity selection and on the therapist role in intervention design and delivery, hindering replication and translation of research into clinical practice. Future studies utilizing commercially available VR technologies should report all aspects of intervention design and delivery and consider protocols that allow therapists to exercise clinical autonomy in intervention delivery.

IMPACT STATEMENT

The findings of this systematic review have highlighted that VR rehabilitation interventions targeting gait, posture, and balance are primarily delivered by physical therapists, whose most reported role was supervision and safeguarding. There was an absence of detail regarding complex clinical skills, such as tailoring of the intervention and reasoning for the choice of technology and activity. This uncertainty around the role of the therapist as an active ingredient in VR-based rehabilitation hinders the development of implementation guidelines. To inform the optimal involvement of therapists in VR rehabilitation, it is essential that future studies report on all aspects of VR intervention design and delivery.

Argentine tango in the care of Parkinson's disease: A systematic review and analysis of the intervention

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the content of the interventions reported in studies investigating the applicability and efficacy of Argentine tango in participants with Idiopathic Parkinson Disease.

METHODS

Independent reviewers searched databases (PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and PEDro) from their inception to November 2019. Eligible studies were randomised, controlled and uncontrolled clinical trials, and case reports.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The Template for Intervention Description and Replication guidelines and checklist were used to assess quality and quantity of the content of Argentine tango interventions' description.

RESULTS

We found 21 papers investigating the applicability and efficacy of Argentine tango in participants with Idiopathic Parkinson Disease. Completeness of the reporting of intervention was satisfying. The intervention is intended to affect a variety of aspects of functioning relevant to individuals with Idiopathic Parkinson Disease. Detailed information on the intervention's procedure and dosing is usually provided. The delivery of the Tango dance program was predominantly extensive; however, the intervention has been provided with various approaches and showed to be very adaptable. Attrition- and adherence- rates described are acceptable. The Adapted Tango dance program is the earliest and most researched modality of tango intervention in participants with Idiopathic Parkinson Disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Argentine tango is appropriately described in the studies investigating the applicability and efficacy of the intervention in participants with Idiopathic Parkinson Disease. However, the reporting could be ameliorated.

Variability and effectiveness of comparator group interventions in smoking cessation trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To examine variability and effectiveness of interventions provided to comparator (control) groups in smoking cessation trials.

METHODS

Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of behavioral interventions for smoking cessation, with or without stop-smoking medication. We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register for RCTs with objective outcomes measured at ≥ 6 months. Study authors were contacted to obtain comprehensive descriptions of their comparator interventions. Meta-regression analyses examined the relationships of smoking cessation rates with stop-smoking medication and behavior change techniques.

RESULTS

One hundred and four of 142 eligible comparator groups (n = 23 706) had complete data and were included in analyses. There was considerable variability in the number of behavior change techniques delivered [mean = 15.97, standard deviation (SD) = 13.54, range = 0-45] and the provision of smoking cessation medication (43% of groups received medication) throughout and within categories of comparator groups (e.g. usual care, brief advice). Higher smoking cessation rates were predicted by provision of medication [B = 0.334, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.030-0.638, P = 0.031] and number of behavior change techniques included (B = 0.020, 95% CI = 0.008-0.032, P < 0.001). Modelled cessation rates in comparator groups that received the most intensive support were 15 percentage points higher than those that received the least (23 versus 8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions delivered to comparator groups in smoking cessation randomized controlled trials vary considerably in content, and cessation rates are strongly predicted by stop-smoking medication and number of behavior change techniques delivered.

Exercise for people with a fragility fracture of the pelvis or lower limb: a systematic review of interventions evaluated in clinical trials and reporting quality

BACKGROUND

To aid design of exercise trials for people with pelvic and lower limb fragility fractures a systematic review was conducted to identify what types of exercise interventions and mobility outcomes have been assessed, investigate intervention reporting quality, and evaluate risk of bias in published trials.

METHODS

Systematic searches of electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro) 1996-2019 were conducted to identify randomised controlled trials of exercise for pelvic or lower limb fragility fractures. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts. One reviewer extracted data, a second verified. Two reviewers independently assessed risk of bias. Intervention reporting quality was based on TIDieR, assessed by one reviewer and verified by a second. Narrative synthesis was undertaken. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42017060905.

RESULTS

Searches identified 37 trials including 3564 participants, median sample size 81 (IQR 48-124), participants aged 81 years (IQR 79-82) and 76% (2536/3356) female. All trials focussed on people with hip fracture except one on ankle fracture. Exercise types focussed on resistance exercise in 14 trials, weight bearing exercise in 5 trials, 13 varied dose of sessions with health professionals, and 2 trials each focussed on treadmill gait training, timing of weight bearing or aerobic exercise. 30/37 (81%) of trials reported adequate sequence generation, 25/37 (68%) sufficient allocation concealment. 10/37 (27%) trials lacked outcome assessor blinding. Of 65 exercise interventions, reporting was clear for 33 (51%) in terms of when started, 61 (94%) for where delivered, 49 (75%) for who delivered, 47 (72%) for group or individual, 29 (45%) for duration, 46 (71%) for session frequency, 8 (12%) for full prescription details to enable the exercises to be reproduced, 32 (49%) clearly reported tailoring or modification, and 23 (35%) reported exercise adherence. Subjectively assessed mobility was assessed in 22/37 (59%) studies and 29/37 (78%) used an objective measure.

CONCLUSIONS

All trials focussed on hip fracture, apart from one ankle fracture trial. Research into pelvic and other lower limb fragility fractures is indicated. A range of exercise types were investigated but to date deficiencies in intervention reporting hamper reproducibility. Adoption of TIDieR and CERT guidelines should improve intervention reporting as use increases. Trials would be improved by consistent blinded outcome assessor use and with consensus on which mobility outcomes should be assessed.

Effectiveness and optimal dosage of exercise training for chronic non-specific neck pain: A systematic review with a narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines make vague recommendations as to exercise training (ET) type and dosage to manage chronic non-specific neck pain (CNSNP).

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of different ET programmes to reduce CNSNP and associated disability, and whether dosage affects outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review and data synthesis was conducted according to a published registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD42018096187). A sensitive topic-based search was conducted of CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, grey literature sources and key journals from inception to 6th January 2020 for randomised controlled trials, investigating ET for CNSNP or disability. Two reviewers independently completed eligibility screening, data extraction, risk of bias assessment (Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool) and rated the overall strength of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Data was tabulated for narrative synthesis and grouped by intervention, outcome and time point to compare across studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-six trials from 3990 citations (n = 2288 participants) investigated fifteen ET programmes. High RoB and low sample sizes reduced evidence quality. Clinical heterogeneity prevented meta-analyses. A range of ET programmes reduce pain/disability in the short term (low to moderate evidence). Pillar exercises reduce pain/disability in the intermediate term (low level evidence). Moderate to very large pain reduction is found with ET packages that include motor control + segmental exercises (low to moderate evidence). No high-quality trials investigated long term outcomes. Increased frequency of motor control exercises and progressively increased load of pillar exercise may improve effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Motor control + segmental exercises are the most effective ET to reduce short term pain/disability, but long-term outcomes have not been investigated. Optimal motor control + segmental exercise variables and dosage is unknown and requires clarification. An adequately powered, low RoB trial is needed to evaluate the effectiveness and optimal dosage of motor control + segmental on long term outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018096187.

Completeness of intervention reporting in neurology randomized controlled trials: a retrospective, cross-sectional study

AIM

Incomplete reporting of interventions in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) may hinder the replicability of studies and thus lead to adverse clinical outcomes for patients. Currently, little is known about the completeness of intervention reporting in neurology clinical trials. This study's primary objective was to determine the completeness of intervention reporting in neurology RCTs, as measured by the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist. The secondary objectives of this study were to compare the completeness of intervention reporting before and after TIDieR publication and to evaluate factors associated with intervention reporting.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional, pilot-tested, double-blind investigation of 141 neurology RCTs to determine the completeness of intervention reporting in neurology.

RESULTS

Overall, the average number of TIDieR checklist items that reached completion per study was 7.4 out of 12 (61.7%). We found no increase in intervention reporting following the publication of TIDieR (P = 0.35). Our generalized estimating equation analysis found that poorer TIDieR adherence was associated with trials lacking a trial registration (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Our findings showed that on average, authors reported only 61.7% of items on the TIDieR checklist. These findings have significant implications, because incomplete reporting may hinder the replicability of studies and thus negatively affect clinical outcomes for patients.

What are physiotherapists and occupational therapists doing in services that replace acute hospital admission? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Alternatives to acute hospital admission are required to accommodate the increasing pressures on health services. Since physiotherapists and occupational therapists are integral to inpatient teams, they may also be integral to admission replacement services, and thus their roles in these services merit investigation.

AIMS

Primarily to determine the presence and roles of physiotherapists and occupational therapists in services replacing acute hospital admission. The secondary outcome is to determine the impact of therapists in such services.

METHODS

Five electronic databases were searched, with keywords related to therapy, discharge, and admission replacement. Inclusion criteria were that studies explicitly described at least one therapist role within a service replacing acute hospital admissions. Two authors independently reviewed all potentially eligible studies. Two reviewers independently assessed data extracted from included studies into a standardized data extraction form.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (3 Hospital at Home, 12 Early Supported Discharge) were included. Both clinical (eg, exercise prescription) and non-clinical (eg, organization and study outcome assessments) therapist roles were described in different admission substitution services. Some roles were only reported among teams, not individually ascribed to therapists.

CONCLUSIONS

The roles of therapists in services that replace hospital admission are rarely described in detail, with wide variation in reported roles, including across service types and patient populations. This review could not determine the impact of individual therapists on patient or service-level outcomes. Future studies need to more clearly define therapist roles and impact.

Assessing the reporting quality of physical activity programs in randomized controlled trials for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis using three standardized assessment tools

BACKGROUND

The reporting quality of physical activity (PA) programs in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) remains unknown. This study aimed to assess and compare the reporting quality of PA programs in RCTs for the management of JIA using three difference standardized assessment tools, and to describe the elements that were similar and different between these tools.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted for moderate-to high-quality RCTs of PA programs in JIA, published up until January 2019. Two reviewers independently included 10 RCTs and scored the reporting quality of PA programs using the following tools: Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklist, Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise Training (CONTENT) scale, and Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist.

RESULTS

Results showed that reporting of PA programs in 10 moderate- to high-quality RCTs for JIA management remains incomplete. The average reporting quality (± standard deviation) for all RCTs combined was moderate for the three standardized assessment tools with 70.8 (±14.3)% for the TIDieR checklist, 53.2 (±20.2)% for the CERT checklist, and 70.0 (±18.9)% for the CONTENT scale. Despite some overlap, the three standardized assessment tools (TIDieR, CERT, CONTENT) included different elements resulting in different scores. All tools assess elements linked to PA programs (provider, location, timing, personalization and adherence), but the CERT checklist includes other essential elements (e.g., additional resources, motivational strategies, adverse events).

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of complete reporting of PA programs in RCTs for the management of JIA and the variation in scores and assessed elements among standardized assessment tools show the need to improve reporting. Using the most comprehensive standardized tool (i.e., the CERT) and providing accessible supplemental information on PA programs may improve the reporting quality of PA programs in RCTs and help reproduce PA programs in research and clinical practice.

What Really Works in Intervention? Using Fidelity Measures to Support Optimal Outcomes

A critical factor to move the field of physical therapy forward is the measurement of fidelity during comparisons of interventions. Fidelity translates as "faithfulness"; thus, fidelity of intervention means faithful and correct implementation of the key components of a defined intervention. Fidelity measurement guards against deviations from, or drift in, the delivery of a targeted intervention, a process necessary for evaluating the efficacy of rehabilitation approaches. Importantly, attention to fidelity measurement differentiates rehabilitation approaches from each other. However, earlier research comparing physical therapist interventions often reported findings without careful attention to fidelity measurement. The purpose of this paper is 2-fold: (1) to support the development of intervention-specific fidelity measures in physical therapy research as the gold standard for translating research findings to clinical practice, and (2) to describe the process of creating a multi-dimensional fidelity measurement instrument in rehabilitation intervention. Improved attention to fidelity measurement will allow the rehabilitation field to communicate interventions clearly with a direct link to outcomes and target the implementation of our improved intervention for the right patient problem with the right dose and the right ingredients at the right time.

Replicating group-based education interventions for the management of type 2 diabetes: a review of intervention reporting

AIMS

To assess the completeness of reporting of group-based education interventions for the management of type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A previous systematic review of group-based education programmes for adults with type 2 diabetes identified eligible intervention studies. Data were extracted and assessed using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication ('TIDieR') checklist. Missing data were sourced from other published material, or by contacting authors.

RESULTS

Fifty-three publications describing 47 studies were included. No publications sufficiently described all items. Authors of 43 of the 47 included studies (91%) were contacted via e-mail to obtain missing data in order to complete the TIDieR checklist. Seven (16%) did not respond. Additional data were obtained for 33/47 studies (70%). Most studies (45/47, 96%) described the intervention duration and frequency, detailed the procedures and rationale (40/47, 85%), provided a brief intervention name and explained any individual tailoring (38/47, 81%), defined whether providers received training and adequately described how the programme was delivered (37/47, 79%). However, few described any modifications (28/47, 60%), whether the intervention was delivered as planned (27/47, 57%), where it was delivered (21/47, 45%), whether materials were provided (19/47, 40%), and who delivered the intervention (13/47, 28%).

CONCLUSIONS

Group-based education interventions for the management of type 2 diabetes are poorly reported. To translate effective research into practice, practitioners need sufficient detail to implement evidence-based interventions. Researcher adoption of the TIDieR checklist will assist the translation and replication of published interventions.

Focusing on fidelity: narrative review and recommendations for improving intervention fidelity within trials of health behaviour change interventions

Background: Interventions to change behaviour have substantial potential to impact positively on individual and overall public health. Despite an increasing focus on health behaviour change intervention research, interventions do not always have the desired effect on outcomes, while others have diluted effects once implemented into real-life settings. There is little investment into understanding how or why such interventions work or do not work. Methodological inadequacies of trials of behavioural interventions have been previously suggested as a barrier to the quality and advancement of behavioural research, with intervention fidelity acknowledged as a key area for improvement. However, there is much ambiguity regarding the terminology and conceptualisation of intervention fidelity and a lack of practical guidance regarding how to address it sufficiently, particularly within trials of complex behavioural interventions. Objectives: This article outlines specific issues concerning intervention fidelity within trials of health behaviour change interventions and suggests practical considerations and specific recommendations for researchers, with examples from the literature presented. Conclusions: Recommendations pertain to (1) clarifying how fidelity is defined and conceptualised, (2) considering fidelity beyond intervention delivery, (3) considering strategies to both enhance and assess fidelity, (4) making use of existing frameworks and guidance, (5) considering the quality and comprehensiveness of fidelity assessment strategies, (6) considering the balance between fidelity and adaptation and (7) reporting the use of fidelity enhancement and assessment strategies and their results. Suggestions for future research to improve our understanding of, and ability to, address fidelity in behaviour change interventions are also provided.

Completeness of the description of manipulation and mobilisation techniques in randomized controlled trials in neck pain; A review using the TiDieR checklist

STUDY DESIGN

A secondary analysis of a systematic review.

BACKGROUND

Manipulations or mobilizations are commonly used interventions in patients with mechanical neck pain. The treatment effects have often been studied in randomized controlled trials (RCT) which are generally considered the gold standard in evaluating the treatment effects, mainly due to its high internal validity. External validity is defined as the extent to which the effects can be generalised to clinical practice. An important prerequisite for this is that interventions used in clinical trials can be replicated in clinical practice. It can be questioned if interventions utilized in randomized controlled trials can be translated into clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

The overall aim of this study is to examine whether the quality of the description of manipulation and mobilization interventions is sufficient for to replication of these interventions in clinical practice.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed. Two independent researchers used the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) which is a 12-item checklist for describing the completeness of the interventions.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven articles were included that used manipulation and/or mobilization interventions for patients with mechanical neck pain. None of the articles describe the intervention e.g. all the items on the TIDieR list. Considering item 8 (a-f) of the TIDieR checklist only one article described the used techniques completely.

CONCLUSION

Manipulation or a mobilization interventions are poorly reported in RCTs, which jeopardize the external validity of RCTs, making it difficult for clinicians and researchers to replicate these interventions.