The application of the Neurac technique vs. manual therapy in patients during the acute phase of subacromial impingement syndrome: A randomized single-blinded controlled trial

Adverse Events Reported in Trials Assessing Manual Therapy to the Extremities: A Systematic Review

Objective: This review aimed to describe the quality and comprehensiveness of adverse event (AE) reporting in clinical trials incorporating manual therapy (MT) as an intervention for extremity conditions using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)-Harms extension as the benchmark. The secondary aim was to determine whether the quality of AE reporting improved after the availability of the CONSORT reporting checklist. Design: Systematic review. Methods: A literature search was conducted using multiple databases to identify trials where MT was used to treat extremity conditions. Studies that reported AEs were identified and evaluated using the CONSORT-Harms extension. The frequency of trials reporting study AEs before and after the publication of the updated 2010 CONSORT statement was calculated, along with the categorization of how study AEs were reported. Results: Of the 55,539 studies initially identified, 220 trials met all inclusion criteria. Eighty trials (36.4%) reported AE occurrence. None of the studies that reported AEs adhered to all 10 criteria proposed by the 2010 CONSORT-Harms extension. The most commonly reported criterion was number four, which clarified how AE-related information was collected (30% of trials). The least reported criterion was number six, which describes the participant withdrawals for each arm due to AEs and the experience with the allocated treatment (1.3% of trials). The nomenclature used to describe AEs varied substantially. Fifty-nine of 76 trials (33.3%) were published after the updated CONSORT Harms-checklist was available, compared to 21 of 44 trials (46.7%) published before it was available. Conclusion: Reporting of AEs in trials investigating MT for extremity conditions is poor. Every included trial lacked adherence to all 10 criteria proposed by the CONSORT-Harms Extension. The quality and comprehensiveness of AE reporting did not improve after the most recent CONSORT update recommending AE reporting. Clinicians must obtain informed consent before performing any intervention, including MT, which requires disclosing potential risks, which could be better known with improved tracking, analyzing, and reporting of AEs. The authors recommend improved adherence to best practices for adequately tracking and reporting AEs in future MT trials.

Is there 'trustworthy' evidence for using manual therapy to treat patients with shoulder dysfunction?: A systematic review

The primary objective of this review was to create a 'trustworthy,' living systematic review and meta-analysis for the application of manual therapy interventions in treating patients with shoulder dysfunction. Included studies were English-language randomized controlled trials published between 1/1/2010 and 8/3/2023, with searches performed in: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINHAL, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health, EBSCO Medline, and PEDro. The population of focus included adults 18 years and older with musculoskeletal impairments related to shoulder dysfunction. Our primary outcomes included pain and region-specific outcome measures. We excluded trials, including participants having shoulder dysfunction resulting from surgery, radicular pain, instability/dislocation, fracture, lymphedema, and radiation. Our screening methodology was based upon a previously published 'trustworthy' systematic review protocol. This included the application of our PICOTS criteria in addition to screening for prospective clinical trial registration and following of prospective intent, as well as assessment of PEDro scores, risk-of-bias ratings, GRADE scoring, and examination of confidence in estimated effects. Twenty-six randomized controlled trials met our PICOTS criteria; however, only 15 of these were registered. Only three were registered prospectively. Two of these did not have discussions and conclusions that aligned with their primary outcome. The remaining single study was found to have a high risk-of-bias, meaning the remainder of the protocol could not be employed and that no randomized controlled trials could undergo further assessment or meta-analysis. The results of this systematic review indicate there are no 'trustworthy' randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of manual therapy interventions for the treatment of patients with shoulder dysfunction, as defined by the prospectively established methodology. Therefore, these findings signal that creating a 'trustworthy,' living systematic review on this clinically relevant topic is not yet possible due to a lack of 'trustworthy' randomized controlled trials.

Exercise therapy for tendinopathy: a mixed-methods evidence synthesis exploring feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness

Background

Tendinopathy is a common, painful and functionally limiting condition, primarily managed conservatively using exercise therapy.

Review questions

(i) What exercise interventions have been reported in the literature for which tendinopathies? (ii) What outcomes have been reported in studies investigating exercise interventions for tendinopathy? (iii) Which exercise interventions are most effective across all tendinopathies? (iv) Does type/location of tendinopathy or other specific covariates affect which are the most effective exercise therapies? (v) How feasible and acceptable are exercise interventions for tendinopathies?

Methods

A scoping review mapped exercise interventions for tendinopathies and outcomes reported to date (questions i and ii). Thereafter, two contingent systematic review workstreams were conducted. The first investigated a large number of studies and was split into three efficacy reviews that quantified and compared efficacy across different interventions (question iii), and investigated the influence of a range of potential moderators (question iv). The second was a convergent segregated mixed-method review (question v). Searches for studies published from 1998 were conducted in library databases (n = 9), trial registries (n = 6), grey literature databases (n = 5) and Google Scholar. Scoping review searches were completed on 28 April 2020 with efficacy and mixed-method search updates conducted on 19 January 2021 and 29 March 2021.

Results

Scoping review - 555 included studies identified a range of exercise interventions and outcomes across a range of tendinopathies, most commonly Achilles, patellar, lateral elbow and rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. Strengthening exercise was most common, with flexibility exercise used primarily in the upper limb. Disability was the most common outcome measured in Achilles, patellar and rotator cuff-related shoulder pain; physical function capacity was most common in lateral elbow tendinopathy. Efficacy reviews - 204 studies provided evidence that exercise therapy is safe and beneficial, and that patients are generally satisfied with treatment outcome and perceive the improvement to be substantial. In the context of generally low and very low-quality evidence, results identified that: (1) the shoulder may benefit more from flexibility (effect sizeResistance:Flexibility = 0.18 [95% CrI 0.07 to 0.29]) and proprioception (effect sizeResistance:Proprioception = 0.16 [95% CrI -1.8 to 0.32]); (2) when performing strengthening exercise it may be most beneficial to combine concentric and eccentric modes (effect sizeEccentricOnly:Concentric+Eccentric = 0.48 [95% CrI -0.13 to 1.1]; and (3) exercise may be most beneficial when combined with another conservative modality (e.g. injection or electro-therapy increasing effect size by ≈0.1 to 0.3). Mixed-method review - 94 studies (11 qualitative) provided evidence that exercise interventions for tendinopathy can largely be considered feasible and acceptable, and that several important factors should be considered when prescribing exercise for tendinopathy, including an awareness of potential barriers to and facilitators of engaging with exercise, patients' and providers' prior experience and beliefs, and the importance of patient education, self-management and the patient-healthcare professional relationship.

Limitations

Despite a large body of literature on exercise for tendinopathy, there are methodological and reporting limitations that influenced the recommendations that could be made.

Conclusion

The findings provide some support for the use of exercise combined with another conservative modality; flexibility and proprioception exercise for the shoulder; and a combination of eccentric and concentric strengthening exercise across tendinopathies. However, the findings must be interpreted within the context of the quality of the available evidence.

Future work

There is an urgent need for high-quality efficacy, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and qualitative research that is adequately reported, using common terminology, definitions and outcomes.

Study registration

This project is registered as DOI: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00175 (scoping review); PROSPERO CRD 42020168187 (efficacy reviews); https://osf.io/preprints/sportrxiv/y7sk6/ (efficacy review 1); https://osf.io/preprints/sportrxiv/eyxgk/ (efficacy review 2); https://osf.io/preprints/sportrxiv/mx5pv/ (efficacy review 3); PROSPERO CRD42020164641 (mixed-method review).

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) HTA programme and will be published in full in HTA Journal; Vol. 27, No. 24. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Effectiveness of Glenohumeral Joint Mobilization on Range of Motion and Pain in Patients With Rotator Cuff Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of glenohumeral joint mobilization (JM) on range of motion and pain intensity in patients with rotator cuff (RC) disorders.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed in the MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, PEDro, LILACS, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases. The eligibility criteria for selecting studies included randomized clinical trials that investigated the effect of glenohumeral JM techniques with or without other therapeutic interventions on range of motion, pain intensity, and shoulder function in patients older than 18 years with RC disorders. Two authors independently performed the search, study selection, and data extraction, and assessed risk of bias. Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation ratings were used to evaluate the quality of evidence in this study.

RESULTS

Twenty-four trials met the eligibility criteria, and 15 studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. At 4 to 6 weeks, for glenohumeral JM with other manual therapy techniques vs other treatments, the mean difference (MD) for shoulder flexion was -3.42° (P = .006), abduction 1.54° (P = .76), external rotation 0.65° (P = .85), and Shoulder and Pain Disability Index score 5.19 points (P = .5), and standard MD for pain intensity was 0.16 (P = .5). At 4 to 5 weeks, for the addition of glenohumeral JM to an exercise program vs exercise program alone, the MD for the visual analog scale was 0.13 cm (P = .51) and the Shoulder and Pain Disability Index score was -4.04 points (P = .01).

CONCLUSION

Compared with other treatments or an exercise program alone, the addition of glenohumeral JM with or without other manual therapy techniques does not provide significant clinical benefit with respect to shoulder function, range of motion, or pain intensity in patients with RC disorders. The quality of evidence was very low to high according to Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation ratings.

Effect of side-sling plank exercise on trunk and hip muscle activation in subjects with gluteus medius weakness

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of side-sling plank (SSP) exercises on trunk and hip muscle activation in subjects with gluteus medius (Gmed) weakness is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify muscle activation of the rectus abdominis (RA), external oblique (EO), erector spinae (ES), lumbar multifidus (LM), Gmed, gluteus maximus (Gmax), and tensor fasciae latae (TFL) during SSP with three different hip rotations compared to side-lying hip abduction (SHA) exercise in subjects with Gmed weakness.

METHODS

Twenty-two subjects with Gmed weakness were recruited. SHA and three types of SSP exercises were performed: SSP with neutral hip (SSP-N), hip lateral rotation (SSP-L), and hip medial rotation (SSP-M). Surface electromyography was used to measure the activation of the trunk and hip muscles.

RESULTS

The trunk and hip muscles activations were generally significantly higher level during three SSP than SHA. SSP-M showed significantly lower EO activation while significantly higher ES and LM activation than SSP-L. Gmed activation was significantly higher during SSP-M than during SSP-L. TFL activation was significantly lower during SSP-M than during SSP-N and SSP-L.

CONCLUSIONS

SSP could be prescribed for patients who have reduced Gmed strength after injuries. Especially, SSP-M could be applied for patients who have Gmed weakness with dominant TFL.

Use of Behavior Change Techniques Alongside Exercise in the Management of Rotator Cuff-Related Shoulder Pain: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this scoping review were to: (1) determine the frequency and types of behavior change techniques (BCTs) and education utilized in trials investigating exercise interventions for rotator cuff related shoulder pain (RCRSP); (2) subcategorize the BCTs and education found in the trials to summarize all behavior change approaches reported by trials; and (3) compare the frequency, types, and subcategories of BCTs and education utilized in the clinical guidelines for managing RCRSP between the trials.

METHODS

Data sources included Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Google Scholar and PubMed, which were searched from inception to June 2020. Trials assessing exercise interventions for RCRSP were included. Three authors independently determined eligibility and extracted data. The frequency and types of BCTs and education in the trials and clinical practice guidelines were reported and compared descriptively. Two authors assessed the content of the BCTs to develop subcategories.

RESULTS

Most trials reported including at least 1 type of BCT (89.2%), which was most commonly feedback and monitoring (78.5%). There were many different approaches to the BCTs and education; for example, feedback and monitoring was subcategorized into supervised exercise, exercise monitoring, and feedback through external aids, such as mirrors. Clinical guidelines recommend supervision, goal setting, activity modification, pain management recommendations, information about the condition, and exercise education.

CONCLUSION

Although over two-thirds of trials reported including a BCT alongside exercise interventions for RCRSP, the breadth of these interventions is limited (supervision is the only common one). Future trialists should consider using any type of BCT that may improve exercise adherence and outcomes.

IMPACT

The findings of this review have: (1) identified gaps in the literature; and (2) contributed to the design of future exercise interventions for RCRSP.