Corrigendum to "Effect of exercise therapy in patients with hip osteoarthritis: A systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis" [Osteoarthr Cartil Open 5 (2023) 100338]

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.ocarto.2023.100338.].

Sleep as a prognostic factor in low back pain: a systematic review of prospective cohort studies and secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials

Sleep problems are common in individuals with low back pain (LBP) and sleep restriction seems to be associated with impaired pain processing. Our objective was to investigate whether sleep is associated with future LBP outcomes (i.e. pain intensity, disability, and recovery) in adults. We conducted a systematic review of prospective cohort studies and secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials (registration-PROSPERO CRD42022370781). In December 2022, we searched the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases. Fourteen studies, totaling 19 170 participants were included. Thirteen studies were rated as having high risk of bias (QUIPS tool). We used vote-counting and meta-analysis approaches to synthesize the data. We found associations between baseline sleep with future pain intensity, recovery, and between changes in sleep with changes in pain intensity, changes in disability, and recovery. We further synthesized outcomes as "overall LBP improvement" outcomes. Baseline poor sleep was moderately associated with non-improvement in LBP in the long-very long term (OR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.39 to 1.73; three studies providing unadjusted effect sizes), and non-improvement in sleep was largely associated with non-improvement in LBP in the short-moderate term (OR 3.45, 95% CI: 2.54 to 4.69; four studies providing unadjusted effect sizes). We found no association between baseline sleep with future disability and overall LBP improvement in the short-moderate term. Therefore, sleep may be a prognostic factor for pain intensity and recovery from LBP. All findings were supported by low to very low-quality evidence. Better-conducted studies are needed to strengthen our certainty about the evidence.

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.

Clinical validation of grouping conservative treatments in neck pain for use in a network meta-analysis: a Delphi consensus study

BACKGROUND

A network meta-analysis aims to help clinicians make clinical decisions on the most effective treatment for a certain condition. Neck pain is multifactorial, with various classification systems and treatment options. Classifying patients and grouping interventions in clinically relevant treatment nodes for a NMA is essential, but this process is poorly defined.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim is to obtain consensus among experts on neck pain classifications and the grouping of interventions into nodes for a future network meta-analysis.

DESIGN

A Delphi consensus study involving neck pain experts worldwide.

METHODS

We invited authors of neck pain clinical practice guidelines published from 2014 onwards. The Delphi baseline questionnaire was developed based on the findings of a scoping review, including four items on classifications and 19 nodes. Participants were asked to record their level of agreement on a seven-point Likert scale or using Yes/No/Not sure answer options for the various statements. We used descriptive analysis to summarise the responses on each statement with content analysis of the free-text comments.

RESULTS

In total, 18/80 experts (22.5%) agreed to participate in one or more Delphi rounds. We needed three rounds to reach consensus for two classification of neck pain: one based on aetiology and one on duration. In addition, we also reached consensus on the grouping of interventions, including a definition of each node, with the number of nodes reduced to 17.

CONCLUSION

With this consensus we clinically validated two neck pain classifications and grouped conservative treatments into 17 well-defined and clinically relevant nodes.

Botulinum toxin and conservative treatment strategies in people with cervical dystonia: an online survey

Isolated cervical dystonia is a focal, idiopathic dystonia affecting the neck muscles. Treatment usually consists of botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) injections into the dystonic muscles. Our aim is to investigate the use of BoNT treatment and conservative treatments by people living with cervical dystonia. An online survey in English was conducted between June and August 2022. Participants were eligible to participate if they were living with cervical dystonia, were over 18 years old and could read and understand English. The survey consisted of demographic questions, characteristics of dystonia, questions relating to BoNT use and the perceived utility of conservative treatments. The data were analysed descriptively, and open-ended questions were grouped into similar topics represented by direct quotes. We received 128 responses from people with cervical dystonia, with an average age of 59 years and 77% women. Most participants (52%) described their cervical dystonia as mild to moderate with an average pain score of 5/10. Eighty-two (64%) participants were having regular BoNT injections, with overall positive perceived effects. Common activities reported to improve the symptoms were the use of heat packs, massage, relaxation, physiotherapy and participation in general exercise. Common coping strategies reported were getting sufficient rest, having the support of friends and family, and remaining engaged in enjoyable hobbies. We found that most participants received regular BoNT injections and that heat packs, exercise, massage, physiotherapy and relaxation were mostly perceived as effective in reducing the symptoms of cervical dystonia.

Test procedures and positive diagnostic criteria of the upper limb tension tests differ: a systematic review of the DiTA database

BACKGROUND

The validity of the ULTT is unclear, due to heterogeneity of test procedures and variability in the definition of a positive test OBJECTIVE: To evaluate test procedures and positive diagnostic criteria for the upper limb tension test (ULTT) in diagnostic test accuracy studies.

METHODS

A systematic review of diagnostic accuracy studies was performed. We conducted a search of the DiTA (Diagnostic Test Accuracy) database and selected primary studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of the ULTT. We assessed risk of bias, performed data extraction on study characteristics, test procedures, and positive diagnostic criteria, and performed a descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

We included nine studies (681 participants), four diagnosing people with cervical radiculopathy (CR), four diagnosing people with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), and one included both CR and CTS. The risk of bias varied between 2 and 6 out of 6 positive items. Eight studies reported on the ULTT1 (median nerve). Overall, all studies clearly described their test procedures and positive diagnostic criteria although the order of movements and the diagnostic criteria between studies varied. We suggest a more standardised test procedure for the ULTT1 to consist of: 1) stabilising the shoulder in abduction, 2) extending the wrist/fingers, 3) supinating the forearm, 4) externally rotating the shoulder, 5) extending the elbow, and finally 6) performed structural differentiation by side bending (lateral flexion) of the neck. This proposed test procedure should reproduce the symptoms and enables the clinician to evaluate whether symptoms increase/decrease when stressing or relaxing the nerves.

CONCLUSION

Based on our findings we proposed a more standardised test procedure for the ULTT1 with accompanying positive diagnostic criteria to facilitate homogeneity in future diagnostic accuracy studies of the ULTT.

Red flags to screen for vertebral fracture in people presenting with low back pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain is a common presentation across different healthcare settings. Clinicians need to confidently be able to screen and identify people presenting with low back pain with a high suspicion of serious or specific pathology (e.g. vertebral fracture). Patients identified with an increased likelihood of having a serious pathology will likely require additional investigations and specific treatment. Guidelines recommend a thorough history and clinical assessment to screen for serious pathology as a cause of low back pain. However, the diagnostic accuracy of recommended red flags (e.g. older age, trauma, corticosteroid use) remains unclear, particularly those used to screen for vertebral fracture.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of red flags used to screen for vertebral fracture in people presenting with low back pain. Where possible, we reported results of red flags separately for different types of vertebral fracture (i.e. acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture, vertebral traumatic fracture, vertebral stress fracture, unspecified vertebral fracture).

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 26 July 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered primary diagnostic studies if they compared results of history taking or physical examination (or both) findings (index test) with a reference standard test (e.g. X-ray, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), single-photon emission computerised tomography (SPECT)) for the identification of vertebral fracture in people presenting with low back pain. We included index tests that were presented individually or as part of a combination of tests.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data for diagnostic two-by-two tables from the publications or reconstructed them using information from relevant parameters to calculate sensitivity, specificity, and positive (+LR) and negative (-LR) likelihood ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We extracted aspects of study design, characteristics of the population, index test, reference standard, and type of vertebral fracture. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity of studies and index tests, therefore the analysis was descriptive. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and LRs for each test and used these as an indication of clinical usefulness. Two review authors independently conducted risk of bias and applicability assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool.

MAIN RESULTS

This review is an update of a previous Cochrane Review of red flags to screen for vertebral fracture in people with low back pain. We included 14 studies in this review, six based in primary care, five in secondary care, and three in tertiary care. Four studies reported on 'osteoporotic vertebral fractures', two studies reported on 'vertebral compression fracture', one study reported on 'osteoporotic and traumatic vertebral fracture', two studies reported on 'vertebral stress fracture', and five studies reported on 'unspecified vertebral fracture'. Risk of bias was only rated as low in one study for the domains reference standard and flow and timing. The domain patient selection had three studies and the domain index test had six studies rated at low risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity of the data. Results from single studies suggest only a small number of the red flags investigated may be informative. In the primary healthcare setting, results from single studies suggest 'trauma' demonstrated informative +LRs (range: 1.93 to 12.85) for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' and 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (+LR: 6.42, 95% CI 2.94 to 14.02). Results from single studies suggest 'older age' demonstrated informative +LRs for studies in primary care for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (older age greater than 70 years: 11.19, 95% CI 5.33 to 23.51). Results from single studies suggest 'corticosteroid use' may be an informative red flag in primary care for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (+LR range: 3.97, 95% CI 0.20 to 79.15 to 48.50, 95% CI 11.48 to 204.98) and 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (+LR: 2.46, 95% CI 1.13 to 5.34); however, diagnostic values varied and CIs were imprecise. Results from a single study suggest red flags as part of a combination of index tests such as 'older age and female gender' in primary care demonstrated informative +LRs for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (16.17, 95% CI 4.47 to 58.43). In the secondary healthcare setting, results from a single study suggest 'trauma' demonstrated informative +LRs for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (+LR: 2.18, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.54) and 'older age' demonstrated informative +LRs for 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (older age greater than 75 years: 2.51, 95% CI 1.48 to 4.27). Results from a single study suggest red flags as part of a combination of index tests such as 'older age and trauma' in secondary care demonstrated informative +LRs for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' (+LR: 4.35, 95% CI 2.92 to 6.48). Results from a single study suggest when '4 of 5 tests' were positive in secondary care, they demonstrated informative +LRs for 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' (+LR: 9.62, 95% CI 5.88 to 15.73). In the tertiary care setting, results from a single study suggest 'presence of contusion/abrasion' was informative for 'vertebral compression fracture' (+LR: 31.09, 95% CI 18.25 to 52.96).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that only a few red flags are potentially useful in guiding clinical decisions to further investigate people suspected to have a vertebral fracture. Most red flags were not useful as screening tools to identify vertebral fracture in people with low back pain. In primary care, 'older age' was informative for 'unspecified vertebral fracture', and 'trauma' and 'corticosteroid use' were both informative for 'unspecified vertebral fracture' and 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture'. In secondary care, 'older age' was informative for 'osteoporotic vertebral fracture' and 'trauma' was informative for 'unspecified vertebral fracture'. In tertiary care, 'presence of contusion/abrasion' was informative for 'vertebral compression fracture'. Combinations of red flags were also informative and may be more useful than individual tests alone. Unfortunately, the challenge to provide clear guidance on which red flags should be used routinely in clinical practice remains. Further research with primary studies is needed to improve and consolidate our current recommendations for screening for vertebral fractures to guide clinical care.

Treatment classifications and interventions for neck pain: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Our aim is to provide an overview of how neck pain is classified in the literature, define and group conservative interventions into 'nodes', and develop draft networks of interventions in preparation for a network meta-analysis (NMA).

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTINGS

We performed a scoping review. For feasibility reasons, we searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) via neck pain clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) published from 2014. We used standardized data extraction forms to extract data about classification of neck pain and interventions evaluated in the included RCTs. We calculated frequencies of neck pain classifications and grouped interventions into nodes based on the definitions used in Cochrane reviews. Draft network graphs comparing interventions were constructed using the online Shiny R application CINEMA.

RESULTS

We included 242 RCTs from seven CPGs, evaluating 28,581 patients. We found three different classification systems of which The Neck Pain Task Force classification was used most often. We defined and grouped all interventions into 19 discrete potential nodes.

CONCLUSION

We found a wide variation in neck pain classifications and conservative interventions. Grouping the interventions was challenging and needs further evaluation before conducting a final NMA.

Can patients and clinicians find conservative management protocols of anterior cruciate ligament injuries online? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically search the internet for conservative rehabilitation protocols for people with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury and critically appraise the websites and exercise protocols.

DESIGN

Systematic review of online rehabilitation protocols.

SEARCH

We searched four online search-engines (Google, Yahoo, Bing, DuckDuckGo).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Rehabilitation protocols on active, English language websites aimed at conservative (non-surgical) management of an ACL injury.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We extracted descriptive information and assessed quality of the websites using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria, the Health on the Net Code (HONcode) certificate, and the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease (FKRE). We assessed completeness of exercise protocol reporting using the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT). We performed a descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

We found 14 websites that met our selection criteria. The protocols varied between 10 and 26 weeks duration, nine were from the United States, five targeted patients, and 13 used multiple phases with a variety of different criteria for progression. Three protocols scored good quality with the JAMA, two were HonCode certified, and ten had good readability according to the FKRE. Completeness of exercise protocol reporting in all but one protocol was poor according to the CERT.

CONCLUSION

Few rehabilitation protocols for conservative management of ACL injuries were available online. Most of the websites showed good readability, but poor quality and credibility with inadequate description of exercise protocols.

Effect of exercise therapy in patients with hip osteoarthritis: A systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis

Objective

To evaluate the existing evidence on the effect of exercise therapy in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA) compared to no treatment and explore whether a further trial will change the current evidence.

Design

Systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis using randomized controlled trials (RCT) to determine the effect on pain and function post-treatment, and at 6-9 months after treatment. Standardized mean difference (SMD) ​≤ ​-0.37 was considered clinically worthwhile. Extended funnel plots were used to simulate the impact of a new trial on the pooled effect size of pain and function.

Results

18 RCTs were included. Post-treatment we found a beneficial effect of exercise therapy on pain (SMD -0.38, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.55 to -0.22) and function (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.11). A beneficial effect of exercise therapy on pain (SMD -0.23, 95% CI: 0.41 to -0.05) and function (SMD -0.29, 95% CI: 0.45 to -0.12) was found 6-9 months after treatment. Most effect estimates were small, and it is unclear whether these are clinically meaningful. Extended funnel plots and a simulation of a new trial showed that only a new trial with a larger effect than the current pooled effect or a trial including 74,843 participants would change the pooled effect estimate from an unclear to a clearly clinically worthwhile effect.

Conclusions

We found a beneficial effect of exercise therapy on pain and function in hip OA. It is unlikely a new trial added to current evidence will change the conclusion.

Identifying common core outcome domains from core outcome sets of musculoskeletal conditions: protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Core outcome sets (COSs) aim to reduce outcome heterogeneity in clinical practice and research by suggesting a minimum number of agreed-upon outcomes in clinical trials. Most COSs in the musculoskeletal field are developed for specific conditions. We propose that there are likely to be common core domains within existing musculoskeletal COSs that may be used as a starting point in the development of future COSs. We aim to identify common core domains from existing COSs and to facilitate the development of new COSs for musculoskeletal conditions. As a secondary aim, we will assess the development quality of these COSs.

METHODS

A systematic review including musculoskeletal COSs. We will search Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Methodology Register and International Consortium for Health Outcome Measurement (ICHOM). Studies will be included if related to the development of a COS in adults with musculoskeletal conditions and for any type of intervention. Quality will be assessed using the Core Outcome Set-Standards for Development (COS-STAD) recommendations. Data extracted will include scope of the COS, health condition, interventions and outcome domains. Primary outcomes will be all core domains recommended within each COS. We define a common core outcome domain as one present in at least 67% of all COSs. All findings will be summarized and presented using descriptive statistics.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review of COSs will describe the core domains recommended within each musculoskeletal COS. Common domains found may be used in the initial stages of development of future musculoskeletal COSs.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021239141.

Classification criteria for cervical radiculopathy: An international e-Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Establishing a set of uniform classification criteria (CC) for cervical radiculopathy (CR) is required to aid future recruitment of homogenous populations to clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES

To establish expert informed consensus on CC for CR.

DESIGN

A pre-defined four round e-Delphi study in accordance with the guidance on Conducting and Reporting Delphi Studies.

METHODS

Individuals with a background in physiotherapy who had authored two or more peer-reviewed publications on CR were invited to participate. The initial round asked opinions on CC for CR. Content analysis was performed on round one output and a list of discrete items were generated forming the round two survey. In rounds two to four, participants were asked to rate the level of importance of each item on a six-point Likert scale. Data were analysed descriptively using median, interquartile range and percentage agreement. Items reaching pre-defined consensus criteria were carried forward to the next round. Items remaining after the fourth round constituted expert consensus on CC for CR.

RESULTS

Twelve participants participated with one drop out. The final round identified one inclusion CC and 12 exclusion CC. The inclusion CC that remained achieved 82% agreement and was a cluster criterion consisting of radicular pain with arm pain worse than neck pain; paraesthesia or numbness and/or weakness and/or altered reflex; MRI confirmed nerve root compression compatible with clinical findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The CC identified can be used to inform eligibility criteria for future CR trials although caution should be practiced as consensus on measurement tools requires further investigation.

The barriers and facilitators to satisfaction with botulinum neurotoxin treatment in people with cervical dystonia: a systematic review

Background

Cervical dystonia (CD) is an isolated, focal, idiopathic dystonia affecting the neck and upper back. CD is usually treated by botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) injections into the dystonic muscles; however, about 20% of people will discontinue BoNT therapy. This systematic review aimed to determine the barriers to satisfaction and facilitators that could improve satisfaction with BoNT therapy for people with CD.

Methods

A database search for journal articles investigating satisfaction with BoNT treatment in CD identified seven qualitative studies and one randomised controlled trial. Results were grouped into “direct” and “indirect” barriers and facilitators.

Results

The most reported direct barrier to satisfaction with BoNT was treatment non-response, reported by up to 66% of participants. Other direct barriers included negative side effects, early wearing-off of treatment effect and inexperience of the treating physician. Indirect barriers included limited accessibility to treatment (including cost) and personal choice. Direct facilitators of satisfaction with BoNT included relief of symptoms and flexible re-treatment intervals. Indirect facilitators included easy accessibility to treatment.

Conclusions

Despite BoNT having a discontinuation rate of only 20%, it appears a much greater proportion of people with CD are dissatisfied with this treatment. As BoNT is currently the main treatment offered to people with CD, efforts to improve treatment response rates, reduce side effects and make treatment more flexible and readily available should be adopted to improve the quality of life for people with CD.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10072-022-06114-8.

The Working Alliance Inventory's Measurement Properties: A Systematic Review

Measurement properties of the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI) and its various translations and adaptations for specific target groups have been investigated for over 30 years. No systematic review analyzing studies on measurement properties of the WAI has been conducted to date. COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurements INstruments (COSMIN) were developed for conducting high-quality systematic reviews on measurement properties in a transparent and standardized way. Aim of this study was to systematically review studies on measurement properties of the WAI, and its adapted versions, within psychotherapy, and other healthcare contexts using COSMIN criteria. PsycINFO, Medline, and EMBASE were searched (1989–2021). In all phases of the review procedure, study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, rating of the quality of measurement properties, and rating of the quality of evidence for measurement properties, disagreement between reviewers was resolved by discussion. Results on validity, internal structure, reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness were analyzed. In total 66 studies were included. In most studies, evidence for measurement properties was according to COSMIN criteria, insufficient, lacking, or conflicting. Content validity was rated insufficient because neither patients nor healthcare professionals were involved in the development and validation process. Hence evidence for content validity of the WAI is unknown. Conflicting evidence was found for structural validity. Evidence for internal consistency could not be established. Limited evidence was found for inter-rater reliability and convergent validity. Conflicting evidence was also found for test-retest reliability and divergent validity. COSMIN criteria exposed persistent problems in validation studies of the WAI. These findings may indicate that measurement properties of the WAI are not up to current standards, or that COSMIN criteria may be less appropriate for assessing measurement properties of the WAI, or it could indicate both. The results of this systematic review suggest that WAI outcomes should be interpreted with caution and further research is needed regarding the content validity and hypotheses development. For the future, the theoretical framework underlying the measurement of the working alliance needs to be studied in psychotherapy and other health contexts, and tested in methodologically sound studies.

Gait assessment tools for degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a common progressive neurological disorder which may affect one's activities of daily living or even result in paraplegia/tetraplegia if left untreated. Currently, there is lack of consensus of the gait assessment tools for DCM. This systematic review aims to (I) provide an appraisal of the psychometric properties of the available gait assessment tools for DCM, (II) to assess their methodological quality according to The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement COSMIN risk of bias checklist and (III) to assess each measurement property result against externally validated criteria.

METHODS

Six electronic full-text databases [PubMed (via NLM^® database], Medline (via OvidSP), CINAHL (via Ebsco), EMBASE (via Ovid), PsycINFO (via CSA) and Web of Science (via Thomson Reuters)] were systematically searched from inception to June 2020. The methodological quality of each study was analysed using the COSMIN risk of bias checklist. The measurement property result and methodological quality of each study were evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were included from 3,339 citations retrieved. Twelve assessment tools for assessing gait in DCM were identified. According to COSMIN criteria, only five studies (25%) included in this review were found to have "very good" methodological quality. For construct validity, five tools had "sufficient" quality. For reliability, two assessment tools [the Total modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score (Italian Translation) (mJOA-ITTotal) and the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (Italian Translation) Motor dysfunction of the Lower Extremity (mJOA-ITMDLE)] were rated as "sufficient" for interobserver reliability while six assessment tools (the 10 second step test (10 sec ST), 30 minute walk test (30MWT), foot tapping test, mJOA-ITTotal, mJOA-ITMDLE and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire) were rated as "sufficient" for test-retest reliability. The JOA (6 scores) received a "sufficient" rating for internal consistency. No assessment was available for responsiveness, as only the effect size was available.

DISCUSSION

Based upon current evidence, the mJOA in combination with an objective functional test (i.e., 30MWT) is recommended for clinicians assessing gait in DCM, although this may change with an increase in the number of studies completed. Given the importance of assessment tools possessing adequate measurement properties, a focus on studies in this area is warranted.

Effectiveness of brief patient information materials for promoting correct beliefs about imaging and inevitable consequences of low back pain: A randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate what format for providing patient information (i.e. written summary, infographic or video animation) is most effective for promoting correct beliefs about imaging and inevitable consequences of low back pain (LBP).

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial.

SETTING/PATIENTS

One hundred and fifty-nine patients with non-specific LBP were recruited from outpatient physiotherapy clinics.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomised to receive patient information in one of three formats: video animation, infographic or written summary. Patients were allowed to read or watch the materials for up to 20 min.

MEASUREMENTS

Outcome were assessed before and immediately after the intervention. The primary outcome was the Back Beliefs Questionnaire. The secondary outcome was beliefs about imaging for LBP assessed by two questions.

RESULTS

All 159 patients completed the study. Our findings revealed no difference between groups for the Back Beliefs Questionnaire. Correct beliefs about imaging were more likely with the infographic than the video animation (Question 1- Odds Ratio [OR] = 3.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7, 8.7; Question 2- OR = 6.8, 95%CI: 2.7, 17.2) and more likely with the written summary than the video animation (Question 1- OR = 3.3, 95%CI: 1.5, 7.4; Question 2- OR = 3.7, 95%CI: 1.6, 8.5). No difference between infographic and written summary formats were reported for the questions assessing LBP imaging beliefs.

CONCLUSION

The three materials were equally effective in improving patient's general beliefs about LBP care. However, the traditional written summary or infographic formats were more effective than the video animation format for improving beliefs about imaging for LBP.

A cross-sectional study of walking, balance and upper limb assessment scales in people with cervical dystonia

Cervical dystonia (CD) is a neurological movement disorder causing the neck to move involuntarily away from the neutral position. CD is a network disorder, involving multiple brain areas and, therefore, may impair movement in parts of the body other than the neck. This study used clinical assessments to investigate walking, balance and upper limb function (UL) in people with CD; the reliability of scoring these assessments and examined for relationship between CD severity, usual exercise and clinical assessments. We conducted a prospective observational cohort study of participants with isolated, focal, idiopathic CD. Participants were assessed by experienced physiotherapists and completed three questionnaires and eight clinical assessments of fear of falling, balance confidence, walking, balance, UL function and usual exercise. Results were compared to published data from healthy adults and other neurological populations. Twenty-two people with mild to moderate CD participated. Fear of falling, gross UL function and usual exercise were worse in people with CD compared with healthy adults, while walking, balance and distal UL function were similar to healthy populations. All assessments were reliably performed by physiotherapists, and we found no correlations between the severity of dystonia or usual exercise and performance on the physical assessments. Routine performance of clinical assessment of walking and balance are likely not required in people with mild to moderate CD; however, fear of falling and gross upper limb function should be assessed to determine any problems which may be amenable to therapy.

External validation of prognostic models for recovery in patients with neck pain

Background

Neck pain is one of the leading causes of disability in most countries and it is likely to increase further. Numerous prognostic models for people with neck pain have been developed, few have been validated. In a recent systematic review, external validation of three promising models was advised before they can be used in clinical practice.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to externally validate three promising models that predict neck pain recovery in primary care.

Methods

This validation cohort consisted of 1311 patients with neck pain of any duration who were prospectively recruited and treated by 345 manual therapists in the Netherlands. Outcome measures were disability (Neck Disability Index) and recovery (Global Perceived Effect Scale) post-treatment and at 1-year follow-up. The assessed models were an Australian Whiplash-Associated Disorders (WAD) model (Amodel), a multicenter WAD model (Mmodel), and a Dutch non-specific neck pain model (Dmodel). Models’ discrimination and calibration were evaluated.

Results

The Dmodel and Amodel discriminative performance (AUC < 0.70) and calibration measures (slope largely different from 1) were poor. The Mmodel could not be evaluated since several variables nor their proxies were available.

Conclusions

External validation of promising prognostic models for neck pain recovery was not successful and their clinical use cannot be recommended. We advise clinicians to underpin their current clinical reasoning process with evidence-based individual prognostic factors for recovery. Further research on finding new prognostic factors and developing and validating models with up-to-date methodology is needed for recovery in patients with neck pain in primary care.

Lack of Consensus Across Clinical Guidelines Regarding the Role of Psychosocial Factors Within Low Back Pain Care: A Systematic Review

It is widely accepted that psychosocial prognostic factors should be addressed by clinicians in their assessment and management of patient suffering from low back pain (LBP). On the other hand, an overview is missing how these factors are addressed in clinical LBP guidelines. Therefore, our objective was to summarize and compare recommendations regarding the assessment and management of psychosocial prognostic factors for LBP chronicity, as reported in clinical LBP guidelines. We performed a systematic search of clinical LBP guidelines (PROSPERO registration number 154730). This search consisted of a combination of previously published systematic review articles and a new systematic search in medical or guideline-related databases. From the included guidelines, we extracted recommendations regarding the assessment and management of LBP which addressed psychosocial prognostic factors (ie, psychological factors ["yellow flags"], perceptions about the relationship between work and health, ["blue flags"], system or contextual obstacles ["black flags") and psychiatric symptoms ["orange flags"]). In addition, we evaluated the level or quality of evidence of these recommendations. In total, we included 15 guidelines. Psychosocial prognostic factors were addressed in 13 of 15 guidelines regarding their assessment and in 14 of 15 guidelines regarding their management. Recommendations addressing psychosocial factors almost exclusively concerned "yellow" or "black flags," and varied widely across guidelines. The supporting evidence was generally of very low quality. We conclude that in general, clinical LBP guidelines do not provide clinicians with clear instructions about how to incorporate psychosocial factors in LBP care and should be optimized in this respect. More specifically, clinical guidelines vary widely in whether and how they address psychosocial factors, and recommendations regarding these factors generally require better evidence support. This emphasizes a need for a stronger evidence-base underlying the role of psychosocial risk factors within LBP care, and a need for uniformity in methodology and terminology across guidelines. PERSPECTIVE: This systematic review summarized clinical guidelines on low back pain (LBP) on how they addressed the identification and management of psychosocial factors. This review revealed a large amount of variety across guidelines in whether and how psychosocial factors were addressed. Moreover, recommendations generally lacked details and were based on low quality evidence.

Externally validated model predicting gait independence after stroke showed fair performance and improved after updating

OBJECTIVE

To externally validate recent prognostic models that predict independent gait following stroke.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A systematic search identified recent models (<10 years) that predicted independent gait in adult stroke patients, using easily obtainable predictors. Predictors from the original models were assigned proxies when required, and model performance was evaluated in the validation cohort (n = 957). Models were updated to determine if performance could be improved.

RESULTS

Three prognostic models met our criteria, all with high Risk of Bias. Validation data was only available for the Australian model. This model used National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and age to predict independent gait, using Motor Assessment Scale (MAS) walking item. For validation, Scandinavian Stroke Scale (SSS) was a proxy for NIHSS, and Functional Independence Measure (FIM) locomotion item was a proxy for MAS. The Area Under the Curve was 0.77 (0.74-0.80) and had good calibration in the validation dataset. Adjustment of the intercept and regression coefficients slightly improved discrimination. By adding paretic leg strength, the model further improved (AUC 0.82).

CONCLUSION

External validation of the Australian model with proxies showed fair discrimination and good calibration. Updating the model by adding paretic leg strength further improved model performance.

Think twice before starting a new trial; what is the impact of recommendations to stop doing new trials?

OBJECTIVES

In evidence-based medicine, we base our conclusions on the effectiveness of interventions on the results of high-quality meta-analysis. If a new randomized controlled trial (RCT) is unlikely to change the pooled effect estimate, conducting the new trial is a waste of resources. We evaluated whether recommendations not to conduct further RCTs reduced the number of trials registered for two scenarios.

METHODS

Analysis of registered trials on the World Health Organisation (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We regarded trial protocols relevant if they evaluated the effectiveness of (1) exercise for chronic low back pain (LBP) and (2) cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for chronic pain. We calculated absolute and relative numbers and change of registered trials in a pre-set time window before and after publication of the recommendations, both published in 2012.

RESULTS

We found 1,574 trials registered in the WHO trial registry for exercise in LBP (459 before 2012; 1,115 after) and 5,037 trials on chronic pain (1,564 before 2012; 3,473 after). Before 2012, 13 trials on exercise for LBP (out of 459) fit the selection criteria, compared to 42 trials (out of 1,115) after, which represents a relative increase of 33%. Twelve trials (out of 1,564) regarding CBT for chronic pain, fit the selection criteria before 2012 and 18 trials (out of 3,473) after, representing a relative decrease of 32%. We found that visibility, media exposure and strength of the recommendation were related to a decrease in registered trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations not to conduct further RCTs might reduce the number of trials registered if these recommendations are strongly worded and combined with social media attention.

Risk factors for overuse injuries in short- and long-distance running: A systematic review

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to review information about risk factors for lower extremity running injuries in both short-distance (mean running distance ≤20 km/week and ≤10 km/session) and long-distance runners (mean running distance >20 km/week and >10 km/session).

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for articles published up to February 2019. Prospective cohort studies using multivariable analysis for the assessment of individual risk factors or risk models for the occurrence of lower extremity running injuries were included. Two reviewers independently selected studies for eligibility and assessed risk of bias with the Quality in Prognostic Studies Tool. The GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of the evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies were included: 17 studies focused on short-distance runners, 11 studies focused on long-distance runners, and 1 study focused on both types of runners. A previous running-related injury was the strongest risk factor for an injury for long-distance runners, with moderate-quality evidence. Previous injuries not attributed to running was the strongest risk factor for an injury for short-distance runners, with high-quality evidence. Higher body mass index, higher age, sex (male), having no previous running experience, and lower running volume were strong risk factors, with moderate quality evidence, for short-distance runners. Low-quality evidence was found for all risk models as predictors of running-related injuries among short- and long-distance runners.

CONCLUSION

Several risk factors for lower extremity injuries have been identified among short- and long-distance runners, but the quality of evidence for these risk factors for running-related injuries is limited. Running injuries seem to have a multifactorial origin both in short- and long-distance runners.

Recovery expectations of neck pain patients do not predict treatments outcome in manual therapy

Patient recovery expectations can predict treatment outcome. Little is known about the association of patient recovery expectations on treatment outcome in patients with neck pain consulting a manual therapist. This study evaluates the predictive value of recovery expectations in neck pain patients consulting manual therapists in the Netherlands. The primary outcome measure 'recovery' is defined as 'reduction in pain and perceived improvement'. A prospective cohort study a total of 1195 neck pain patients. Patients completed the Patient Expectancies List (PEL) at baseline (3 item questionnaire, score range from 3 to 12), functional status (NDI), the Global Perceived Effect (GPE) for recovery (7-points Likert scale) post treatment and pain scores (NRS) at baseline and post treatment. The relationship between recovery expectancy and recovery (dichotomized GPE scores) was assessed by logistic regression analysis. Patients generally reported high recovery expectations on all three questions of the PEL (mean sumscores ranging from 11.3 to 11.6). When adjusted for covariates the PEL sum-score did not predict recovery (explained variance was 0.10 for the total PEL). Separately, the first question of the PEL showed predictive potential (OR 3.7; 95%CI 0.19-73.74) for recovery, but failed to reach statistical significance. In this study patient recovery expectations did not predict treatment outcome. Variables predicting recovery were recurrence and duration of pain. The precise relationship between patient recovery expectations and outcome is complex and still inconclusive. Research on patient expectancy would benefit from more consistent use of theoretical expectancy and outcome models.

Differences in Patient Characteristics, Number of Treatments, and Recovery Rates Between Referred and Self-referred Patients With Nonspecific Neck Pain in Manual Therapy: A Secondary Analysis

OBJECTIVE

In various countries, patients can visit a physiotherapist via self-referral. The aims of this study were to evaluate whether there are differences between individuals with nonspecific neck pain who consult a manual therapist via self-referral and those who do so via referral by a physician concerning patient characteristics, number of treatments, and recovery; and whether (self-)referral is associated with recovery.

METHODS

This study is part of a prospective cohort study with posttreatment and 12-month follow-up in a Dutch manual-therapy setting. Adult patients with nonspecific neck pain were eligible for participation. Baseline measurements included demographic data and data concerning neck pain. At follow-up, number of treatments, recovery, and satisfaction were assessed. To evaluate differences between the groups, we used the χ² test and the independent t test. A logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between referral status and recovery.

RESULTS

In total, 272 manual therapists participated and 1311 patients were included. Of 831 patients whose referral data are available, about half patients consulted a manual therapist by self-referral. The mean number of treatments was 5.4, which did not differ between the 2 groups. We found no differences between the groups concerning age, sex, pain intensity at baseline, or recovery rate. Patients in the self-referral group experienced acute neck pain more frequently, had recurrent complaints more often, and reported less disability compared to the referred group. Referral status was not associated with recovery.

CONCLUSION

We found several small differences between self-referred and referred patients.

The Effect of a Personalized Newsletter to Physical Therapists on Patient Recruitment: A Cluster Randomized Trial in Primary Physiotherapy Care

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of a personalized newsletter compared with a standard newsletter on patient recruitment in physiotherapy research.

METHODS

We performed a cluster-randomized trial including 120 physiotherapists who recruited patients for a prospective cohort and were randomly assigned to either receiving personalized feedback in a newsletter (intervention group) or a standard newsletter (control group). We calculated the difference in the number of patients included in the study corrected for inclusion time between both groups.

RESULTS

The physiotherapists in the control group (n = 59) included 110 patients (35.4% of the total number of patients included) compared with an inclusion of 200 patients (64.6% of the total number of patients included) by the physiotherapists in the intervention group (n = 61), a difference of 90 patients in favor of the intervention group. However, when corrected for inclusion time and a cluster effect, we found no statistically significant difference between both groups. In addition, therapists who did not include a single patient (inactive therapists) were evenly divided between the 2 groups (n = 29 [49%] in the control group; n = 30 [49%] in the intervention group).

CONCLUSIONS

A personalized newsletter does not significantly increase the number of recruited patients by physiotherapists. However, therapists receiving personalized feedback recruited nearly double the number of patients compared with the ones receiving standard feedback.

Cost-Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Denervation for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: The MINT Randomized Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency denervation when added to a standardized exercise program for patients with chronic low back pain.

METHODS

An economic evaluation was conducted alongside 3 pragmatic multicenter, nonblinded randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in The Netherlands with a follow up of 52 weeks. Eligible participants were included between January 1, 2013, and October 24, 2014, and had chronic low back pain; a positive diagnostic block at the facet joints (n = 251), sacroiliac (SI) joints (n = 228), or a combination of facet joints, SI joints, and intervertebral discs (n = 202); and were unresponsive to initial conservative care. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and societal costs were measured using self-reported questionnaires. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Bootstrapping was used to estimate statistical uncertainty.

RESULTS

After 52 weeks, no difference in costs between groups was found in the facet joint or combination RCT. The total costs were significantly higher for the intervention group in the SI joint RCT. The maximum probability of radiofrequency denervation being cost-effective when added to a standardized exercise program ranged from 0.10 in the facet joint RCT to 0.17 in the SI joint RCT irrespective of the ceiling ratio, and 0.65 at a ceiling ratio of €30 000 per QALY in the combination RCT.

CONCLUSIONS

Although equivocal among patients with symptoms in a combination of the facet joints, SI joints, and intervertebral discs, evidence suggests that radiofrequency denervation combined with a standardized exercise program cannot be considered cost-effective from a societal perspective for patients with chronic low back pain originating from either facet or SI joints in a Dutch healthcare setting.

Randomized controlled trials reflected clinical practice when comparing the course of low back pain symptoms in similar populations

OBJECTIVE

This study compares participants in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (the Minimal Invasive Treatment [MinT] trials) to participants in a related observational study with regard to their low back pain (LBP) symptom course.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Eligible patients were diagnosed with chronic LBP originating from the facet joints (N = 615) or sacroiliac (SI) joints (N = 533) and were treated with radiofrequency denervation and an exercise program. Randomized patients were compared to patients in the related observational study who fulfilled all RCT eligibility criteria (observational group 1) and to patients who did not fulfill at least one of the RCT eligibility criteria (observational group 2). Outcomes were pain intensity, treatment success, and functional status over a 3-month period. Longitudinal mixed-model analyses and linear regression models were applied to analyze the differences in outcomes between the RCT and observational study groups.

RESULTS

No differences in symptom course were found between patients in the RCTs and patients in observational group 1. Patients with facet joint pain in observational group 2 had overall less treatment success (odds ratios [OR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.90), and less improvement in physical functioning (mean difference [MD], 5.82; 95% CI, 2.54-9.11) compared to the RCT patients. Patients with SI joint pain in observational group 2 had higher pain scores (MD, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.09-0.72), less treatment success (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54-0.96), and less improvement in physical functioning (MD, 7.16; 95% CI, 3.84-10.47) compared to the RCT patients.

CONCLUSION

This supports the generalizability of results from the MinT RCTs as this study suggests that these RCTs reflect clinical practice when comparing similar populations. To what extent this holds true for all RCTs in LBP should be further explored.

Agreement between physical therapists and radiologists of stratifying patients with shoulder pain into new treatment related categories using ultrasound; an exploratory study

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic overview of the literature and an agreement study.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to explore the inter-professional agreement of diagnostic musculoskeletal ultrasound (DMUS) between physical therapists (PT) and radiologists, using a new classification strategy based upon the therapeutic consequences in patients with shoulder pain.

BACKGROUND

DMUS is frequently used by PTs, although the agreement regarding traditional diagnostic labels between PTs and radiologists is only fair. Nevertheless, DMUS could be useful when used as a stratifying-tool.

METHODS

First, a systematic overview of current evidence was performed to assess which traditional diagnostic labels could be recoded into new treatment related categories (referral to secondary care, corticosteroid injections, physical therapy, watchful waiting). Next, kappa values were calculated for these categories between PTs and radiologists.

RESULTS

Only three categories were extracted, as none of the traditional diagnostic labels were classified into the 'corticosteroid injection' category. Overall, we found moderate agreement to stratify patients into treatment related categories and substantial agreement for the category 'referral to secondary care'. Both categories 'watchful waiting' and 'indication for physical therapy' showed moderate agreement between the two professions.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that the agreement between radiologists and PTs is moderate to substantial when labelling is based on treatment consequences. DMUS might be able to help the PT to guide treatment, especially for the category 'referral to secondary care' as this showed the highest agreement. However, as this is just an explorative study, more research is needed, to validate and assess the consequences of this stratification classification for clinical care.

Patients' experience of shoulder disorders: a systematic review of qualitative studies for the OMERACT Shoulder Core Domain Set

OBJECTIVES

To describe the experiences (including symptoms and perceived impacts on daily living) of people with a shoulder disorder.

METHODS

Systematic review of qualitative studies. We searched for eligible qualitative studies indexed in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, CINAHL (EBSCO), SportDiscus (EBSCO) and Ovid PsycINFO up until November 2017. Two authors independently screened studies for inclusion, appraised their methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist, used thematic synthesis methods to generate themes describing the experiences reported by participants and assessed the confidence in the findings using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual) approach.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by eight studies, which included 133 participants (49 females and 84 males) with either rotator cuff disease, adhesive capsulitis, proximal humeral fracture, shoulder instability or unspecified shoulder pain. We generated seven themes to describe what people in the included studies reported experiencing: pain; physical function/activity limitations; participation restriction; sleep disruption; cognitive dysfunction; emotional distress; and other pathophysiological manifestations (other than pain). There were interactions between the themes, with particular experiences impacting on others (e.g. pain leading to reduced activities and sleep disruption). Following grading of the evidence, we considered it likely that most of the review findings were a reasonable representation of the experiences of people with shoulder disorders.

CONCLUSION

Patients with shoulder disorders contend with considerable disruption to their life. The experiences described should be considered by researchers seeking to select the most appropriate outcomes to measure in clinical trials and other research studies in people with shoulder disorders.

The OMERACT Core Domain Set for Clinical Trials of Shoulder Disorders

OBJECTIVE

To reach consensus on the core domains to be included in a core domain set for clinical trials of shoulder disorders using the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.1 Core Domain Set process.

METHODS

At OMERACT 2018, the OMERACT Shoulder Working Group conducted a workshop that presented the OMERACT 2016 preliminary core domain set and its rationale based upon a systematic review of domains measured in shoulder trials and international Delphi sessions involving patients, clinicians, and researchers, as well as a new systematic review of qualitative studies on the experiences of people with shoulder disorders. After discussions in breakout groups, the OMERACT core domain set for clinical trials of shoulder disorders was presented for endorsement by OMERACT 2018 participants.

RESULTS

The qualitative review (n = 8) identified all domains included in the preliminary core set. An additional domain, cognitive dysfunction, was also identified, but confidence that this represents a core domain was very low. The core domain set that was endorsed by the OMERACT participants, with 71% agreement, includes 4 "mandatory" trial domains: pain, function, patient global - shoulder, and adverse events including death; and 4 "important but optional" domains: participation (recreation/work), sleep, emotional well-being, and condition-specific pathophysiological manifestations. Cognitive dysfunction was voted out of the core domain set.

CONCLUSION

OMERACT 2018 delegates endorsed a core domain set for clinical trials of shoulder disorders. The next step includes identification of a core outcome measurement set that passes the OMERACT 2.1 Filter for measuring each domain.

Diagnostic accuracy of diagnostic imaging for lumbar disc herniation in adults with low back pain or sciatica is unknown; a systematic review

Main text

We aim to summarize the available evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of imaging (index test) compared to surgery (reference test) for identifying lumbar disc herniation (LDH) in adult patients.For this systematic review we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL (June 2017) for studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of imaging for LDH in adult patients with low back pain and surgery as the reference standard. Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity using bivariate analysis, generated linked ROC plots in case of direct comparison of diagnostic imaging tests and assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE-approach.We found 14 studies, all but one done before 1995, including 940 patients. Nine studies investigated Computed Tomography (CT), eight myelography and six Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). The prior probability of LDH varied from 48.6 to 98.7%. The summary estimates for MRI and myelography were comparable with CT (sensitivity: 81.3% (95%CI 72.3-87.7%) and specificity: 77.1% (95%CI 61.9-87.5%)). The quality of evidence was moderate to very low.

Conclusions

The diagnostic accuracy of CT, myelography and MRI of today is unknown, as we found no studies evaluating today's more advanced imaging techniques. Concerning the older techniques we found moderate diagnostic accuracy for all CT, myelography and MRI, indicating a large proportion of false positives and negatives.

Risk models for lower extremity injuries among short- and long distance runners: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Running injuries are very common. Risk factors for running injuries are not consistently described across studies and do not differentiate between runners of long- and short distances within one cohort.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to determine risk factors for running injuries in recreational long- and short distance runners separately.

DESIGN

A prospective cohort study.

METHODS

Recreational runners from four different running events are invited to participate. They filled in a baseline questionnaire assessing possible risk factors about 4 weeks before the run and one a week after the run assessing running injuries. Using logistic regression we developed an overall risk model and separate risk models based on the running distance.

RESULTS

In total 3768 runners participated in this study. The overall risk model contained 4 risk factors: previous injuries (OR 3.7) and running distance during the event (OR 1.3) increased the risk of a running injury whereas older age (OR 0.99) and more training kilometers per week (OR 0.99) showed a decrease. Models between short- and long distance runners did not differ significantly. Previous injuries increased the risk of a running injury in all models, while more training kilometers per week decreased this risk.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that risk factors for running injuries were not related to running distances. Previous injury is a generic risk factor for running injuries, as is weekly training distance. Prevention of running injuries is important and a higher weekly training volume seems to prevent injuries to a certain extent.

Clinical Practice Guideline for Physical Therapy Assessment and Treatment in Patients With Nonspecific Neck Pain

The Royal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy (KNGF) issued a clinical practice guideline for physical therapists that addresses the assessment and treatment of patients with nonspecific neck pain, including cervical radiculopathy, in Dutch primary care. Recommendations were based on a review of published systematic reviews.During the intake, the patient is screened for serious pathologies and corresponding patterns. Patients with cervical radiculopathy can be included or excluded through corresponding signs and symptoms and possibly diagnostic tests (Spurling test, traction/distraction test, and Upper Limb Tension Test). History taking is done to gather information about patients' limitations, course of pain, and prognostic factors (eg, coping style) and answers to health-related questions.In case of a normal recovery (treatment profile A), management should be hands-off, and patients should receive advice from the physical therapist and possibly some simple exercises to supplement "acting as usual."In case of a delayed/deviant recovery (treatment profile B), the physical therapist is advised to use, in addition to the recommendations for treatment profile A, forms of mobilization and/or manipulation in combination with exercise therapy. Other interventions may also be considered. The physical therapist is advised not to use dry needling, low-level laser, electrotherapy, ultrasound, traction, and/or a cervical collar.In case of a delayed/deviant recovery with clear and/or dominant psychosocial prognostic factors (treatment profile C), these factors should first be addressed by the physical therapist, when possible, or the patient should be referred to a specialist, when necessary.In case of neck pain grade III (treatment profile D), the therapy resembles that for profile B, but the use of a cervical collar for pain reduction may be considered. The advice is to use it sparingly: only for a short period per day and only for a few weeks.

Outcome Reporting in Randomized Trials for Shoulder Disorders: Literature Review to Inform the Development of a Core Outcome Set

OBJECTIVE

To explore the outcome domains and measurement instruments reported across randomized trials of any interventions for various shoulder disorders.

METHODS

We searched for shoulder trials included in Cochrane reviews published up to Issue 10, 2015, or indexed in PubMed between 2006 and 2015. Trials were eligible for inclusion if they focused on any intervention for rotator cuff disease, adhesive capsulitis, shoulder instability, glenohumeral or acromioclavicular osteoarthritis, shoulder dislocation, proximal humeral or humeral head fractures, or unspecified shoulder pain. Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted information on the domains and measurement instruments reported, with consensus discussion among all authors where required.

RESULTS

We included 409 trials, published between 1954 and 2015. Across the trials, we identified 319 different instruments that were classified into 32 domains. Most trials reported a measure of pain (90%), range of motion (78%), and physical function (71%). The recording of adverse events was reported in only 31% of the trials. Muscle strength was reported in 44% of the trials and imaging outcomes in 21%. Other patient-reported outcome measures, such as global assessment of treatment success, health-related quality of life, work ability, and psychological functioning, were each reported in ≤15% of the trials. Most of the domains were reported at similar frequencies across different shoulder disorders.

CONCLUSION

The domains and measurement instruments reported were widely diverse. Our results provide a foundation for the development of a core outcome set for use in future trials across all shoulder disorders.

Value of physical tests in diagnosing cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

In clinical practice, the diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy is based on information from the patient's history, physical examination, and diagnostic imaging. Various physical tests may be performed, but their diagnostic accuracy is unknown.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to summarize and update the evidence on diagnostic performance of tests carried out during a physical examination for the diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy.

STUDY DESIGN

A review of the accuracy of diagnostic tests was carried out.

STUDY SAMPLE

The study sample comprised diagnostic studies comparing results of tests performed during a physical examination in diagnosing cervical radiculopathy with a reference standard of imaging or surgical findings.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios are presented, together with pooled results for sensitivity and specificity.

METHODS

A literature search up to March 2016 was performed in CENTRAL, PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2.

RESULTS

Five diagnostic accuracy studies were identified. Only Spurling's test was evaluated in more than one study, showing high specificity ranging from 0.89 to 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59-1.00); sensitivity varied from 0.38 to 0.97 (95% CI: 0.21-0.99). No studies were found that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of widely used neurological tests such as key muscle strength, tendon reflexes, and sensory impairments.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence for accuracy of physical examination tests for the diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy. When consistent with patient history, clinicians may use a combination of Spurling's, axial traction, and an Arm Squeeze test to increase the likelihood of a cervical radiculopathy, whereas a combined results of four negative neurodynamics tests and an Arm Squeeze test could be used to rule out the disorder.