1
|
Ferraro MC, O'Connell NE, Sommer C, Goebel A, Bultitude JH, Cashin AG, Moseley GL, McAuley JH. Complex regional pain syndrome: advances in epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Lancet Neurol 2024; 23:522-533. [PMID: 38631768 DOI: 10.1016/s1474-4422(24)00076-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2023] [Revised: 02/07/2024] [Accepted: 02/12/2024] [Indexed: 04/19/2024]
Abstract
Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a rare pain disorder that usually occurs in a limb after trauma. The features of this disorder include severe pain and sensory, autonomic, motor, and trophic abnormalities. Research from the past decade has offered new insights into CRPS epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Early identification of individuals at high risk of CRPS is improving, with several risk factors established and some others identified in prospective studies during the past 5 years. Better understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms of CRPS has led to its classification as a chronic primary pain disorder, and subtypes of CRPS have been updated. Procedures for diagnosis have also been clarified. Although effective treatment of CRPS remains a challenge, evidence-based integrated management approaches provide new opportunities to improve patient care. Further advances in diagnosis and treatment of CRPS will require coordinated, international multicentre initiatives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael C Ferraro
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia; School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Health and Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
| | - Claudia Sommer
- University Hospital Würzburg, Department of Neurology, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Andreas Goebel
- Pain Research Institute, Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, and Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Janet H Bultitude
- Centre for Pain Research, Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK
| | - Aidan G Cashin
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia; School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - G Lorimer Moseley
- IMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| | - James H McAuley
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia; School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wilkinson J, Heal C, Antoniou GA, Flemyng E, Avenell A, Barbour V, Bordewijk EM, Brown NJL, Clarke M, Dumville J, Grohmann S, Gurrin LC, Hayden JA, Hunter KE, Lam E, Lasserson T, Li T, Lensen S, Liu J, Lundh A, Meyerowitz-Katz G, Mol BW, O'Connell NE, Parker L, Redman B, Seidler AL, Sheldrick K, Sydenham E, Dahly DL, van Wely M, Bero L, Kirkham JJ. A survey of experts to identify methods to detect problematic studies: Stage 1 of the INSPECT-SR Project. medRxiv 2024:2024.03.18.24304479. [PMID: 38585914 PMCID: PMC10996715 DOI: 10.1101/2024.03.18.24304479] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/09/2024]
Abstract
Background Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) inform healthcare decisions. Unfortunately, some published RCTs contain false data, and some appear to have been entirely fabricated. Systematic reviews are performed to identify and synthesise all RCTs which have been conducted on a given topic. This means that any of these 'problematic studies' are likely to be included, but there are no agreed methods for identifying them. The INSPECT-SR project is developing a tool to identify problematic RCTs in systematic reviews of healthcare-related interventions. The tool will guide the user through a series of 'checks' to determine a study's authenticity. The first objective in the development process is to assemble a comprehensive list of checks to consider for inclusion. Methods We assembled an initial list of checks for assessing the authenticity of research studies, with no restriction to RCTs, and categorised these into five domains: Inspecting results in the paper; Inspecting the research team; Inspecting conduct, governance, and transparency; Inspecting text and publication details; Inspecting the individual participant data. We implemented this list as an online survey, and invited people with expertise and experience of assessing potentially problematic studies to participate through professional networks and online forums. Participants were invited to provide feedback on the checks on the list, and were asked to describe any additional checks they knew of, which were not featured in the list. Results Extensive feedback on an initial list of 102 checks was provided by 71 participants based in 16 countries across five continents. Fourteen new checks were proposed across the five domains, and suggestions were made to reword checks on the initial list. An updated list of checks was constructed, comprising 116 checks. Many participants expressed a lack of familiarity with statistical checks, and emphasized the importance of feasibility of the tool. Conclusions A comprehensive list of trustworthiness checks has been produced. The checks will be evaluated to determine which should be included in the INSPECT-SR tool.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jack Wilkinson
- Centre for Biostatistics, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Calvin Heal
- Centre for Biostatistics, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - George A Antoniou
- Manchester Vascular Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
- Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Ella Flemyng
- Evidence Production and Methods Directorate, Cochrane Central Executive, London, UK
| | - Alison Avenell
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | | | - Esmee M Bordewijk
- Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Netherlands
| | | | - Mike Clarke
- Northern Ireland Methodology Hub, Queen's University Belfast, UK
| | - Jo Dumville
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery & Social Work, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Steph Grohmann
- Evidence Production and Methods Directorate, Cochrane Central Executive, London, UK
| | - Lyle C Gurrin
- School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia
| | - Jill A Hayden
- Department of Community Health & Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Canada
| | - Kylie E Hunter
- NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Australia
| | - Emily Lam
- Independent lay member, unaffiliated, UK
| | - Toby Lasserson
- Evidence Production and Methods Directorate, Cochrane Central Executive, London, UK
| | - Tianjing Li
- Department of Ophthalmology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| | - Sarah Lensen
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Newborth Health, Royal Women's Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Jianping Liu
- Director, Centre for Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China
| | - Andreas Lundh
- Cochrane Denmark & Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
- Department of Respiratory Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Denmark
| | | | - Ben W Mol
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse, Brunel University London, UK
| | - Lisa Parker
- Charles Perkins Centre, Faculty Medicine & Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | | | | | - Kyle Sheldrick
- Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - Darren L Dahly
- HRB Clinical Research Facility, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
| | - Madelon van Wely
- Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Netherlands
| | - Lisa Bero
- University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Colorado, USA
| | - Jamie J Kirkham
- Centre for Biostatistics, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wilkinson J, Heal C, Antoniou GA, Flemyng E, Alfirevic Z, Avenell A, Barbour G, Brown NJL, Carlisle J, Clarke M, Dicker P, Dumville JC, Grey A, Grohmann S, Gurrin L, Hayden JA, Heathers J, Hunter KE, Lasserson T, Lam E, Lensen S, Li T, Li W, Loder E, Lundh A, Meyerowitz-Katz G, Mol BW, O'Connell NE, Parker L, Redman BK, Seidler L, Sheldrick KA, Sydenham E, Torgerson D, van Wely M, Wang R, Bero L, Kirkham JJ. Protocol for the development of a tool (INSPECT-SR) to identify problematic randomised controlled trials in systematic reviews of health interventions. BMJ Open 2024; 14:e084164. [PMID: 38471680 PMCID: PMC10936473 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084164] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2024] [Accepted: 01/30/2024] [Indexed: 03/14/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) inform healthcare decisions. It is now apparent that some published RCTs contain false data and some appear to have been entirely fabricated. Systematic reviews are performed to identify and synthesise all RCTs that have been conducted on a given topic. While it is usual to assess methodological features of the RCTs in the process of undertaking a systematic review, it is not usual to consider whether the RCTs contain false data. Studies containing false data therefore go unnoticed and contribute to systematic review conclusions. The INveStigating ProblEmatic Clinical Trials in Systematic Reviews (INSPECT-SR) project will develop a tool to assess the trustworthiness of RCTs in systematic reviews of healthcare-related interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS The INSPECT-SR tool will be developed using expert consensus in combination with empirical evidence, over five stages: (1) a survey of experts to assemble a comprehensive list of checks for detecting problematic RCTs, (2) an evaluation of the feasibility and impact of applying the checks to systematic reviews, (3) a Delphi survey to determine which of the checks are supported by expert consensus, culminating in, (4) a consensus meeting to select checks to be included in a draft tool and to determine its format and (5) prospective testing of the draft tool in the production of new health systematic reviews, to allow refinement based on user feedback. We anticipate that the INSPECT-SR tool will help researchers to identify problematic studies and will help patients by protecting them from the influence of false data on their healthcare. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The University of Manchester ethics decision tool was used, and this returned the result that ethical approval was not required for this project (30 September 2022), which incorporates secondary research and surveys of professionals about subjects relating to their expertise. Informed consent will be obtained from all survey participants. All results will be published as open-access articles. The final tool will be made freely available.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jack Wilkinson
- Centre for Biostatistics, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Calvin Heal
- Centre for Biostatistics, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - George A Antoniou
- Manchester Vascular Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
- Division of Cardiovascular Sciences, School of Medical Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, Manchester, UK
| | - Ella Flemyng
- Evidence Production and Methods Directorate, Cochrane, London, UK
| | - Zarko Alfirevic
- Department of Women's and Children's Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Alison Avenell
- Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Ginny Barbour
- Medical Journal of Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - John Carlisle
- Anaesthesia and Critical Care, Torbay Hospital, Torquay, UK
| | - Mike Clarke
- Northern Ireland Methodology Hub, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Patrick Dicker
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Jo C Dumville
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Andrew Grey
- Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Steph Grohmann
- Evidence Production and Methods Directorate, Cochrane, London, UK
| | - Lyle Gurrin
- School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jill Alison Hayden
- Community Health & Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
- Department of Community Health & Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | | | - Kylie Elizabeth Hunter
- Evidence Integration, NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Toby Lasserson
- Evidence Production and Methods Directorate, Cochrane, London, UK
| | - Emily Lam
- Independent Lay Member, Cheshire, UK
| | - Sarah Lensen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Royal Women's Hospital, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Tianjing Li
- Department of Ophthalmology, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado, USA
| | - Wentao Li
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Elizabeth Loder
- BMJ Publishing, London, UK
- Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Andreas Lundh
- Centre of Evidence-Based Medicine Odense and Cochrane Denmark, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Respiratory Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Copenhagen University Hospital-Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Kobenhavn, Denmark
| | - Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz
- School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Ben W Mol
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Clinical Science, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
- Centre for Health and Wellbeing across the Lifecourse, Dept of Health Sciences, Brunel University, London, UK
| | - Lisa Parker
- School of Pharmacy, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Barbara K Redman
- Division of Medical Ethics, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA
| | - Lene Seidler
- Evidence Integration, NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Kyle A Sheldrick
- Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Emma Sydenham
- Cochrane Central Production Service, Cochrane, London, UK
| | - David Torgerson
- York Trials Unit, Dept of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK
| | - Madelon van Wely
- Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Satellite and Cochrane Sexually Transmitted Infection Group, Cochrane, Duivendrecht, The Netherlands
- Reproduction and Development Research Institute, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rui Wang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Lisa Bero
- Center for Bioethics and Humanities, University of Colorado-Anschutz Medical Campus, Denver, Colorado, USA
| | - Jamie J Kirkham
- Centre for Biostatistics, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Mansfield L, Daykin N, O'Connell NE, Bailey D, Forde L, Smith R, Gifford J, Ashdown‐Franks G. A mixed methods systematic review on the effects of arts interventions for children and young people at-risk of offending, or who have offended on behavioural, psychosocial, cognitive and offending outcomes: A systematic review. Campbell Syst Rev 2024; 20:e1377. [PMID: 38188229 PMCID: PMC10765125 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1377] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/09/2024]
Abstract
Background Young people who enter the justice system experience complex health and social needs, and offending behaviour is increasingly recognised as a public health problem. Arts interventions can be used with the aim of preventing or reducing offending or reoffending. Objectives 1. To evaluate evidence on the effectiveness and impact of arts interventions on keeping children and young people safe from involvement in violence and crime. 2. To explore factors impacting the implementation of arts interventions, and barriers and facilitators to participation and achievement of intended outcomes. 3. To develop a logic model of the processes by which arts interventions might work in preventing offending behaviours. Search Methods We searched AMED, Academic Search Complete; APA PsycInfo; CINAHL Plus; ERIC; SocIndex; SportDiscus, Medline, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus, PTSDPubs and Performing Arts Periodicals Database, Sage, the US National Criminal Justice Reference Service, the Global Policing and British Library EThOS databases, and the National Police Library from inception to January 2023 without language restrictions. Selection Criteria We included randomised and non-randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental study designs. We included qualitative studies conducted alongside intervention trials investigating experiences and perceptions of participants, and offering insight into the barriers and facilitators to delivering and receiving arts interventions. We included qualitative and mixed methods studies focused on delivery of arts interventions. We included studies from any global setting. We included studies with CYP (8-25 years) who were identified as at-risk of offending behaviour (secondary populations) or already in the criminal justice system (tertiary populations). We included studies of interventions involving arts participation as an intervention on its own or alongside other interventions. Primary outcomes were: (i) offending behaviour and (ii) anti-pro-social behaviours. Secondary outcomes were: participation/attendance at arts interventions, educational attainment, school attendance and engagement and exclusions, workplace engagement, wellbeing, costs and associated economic outcomes and adverse events. Data Collection and Analysis We included 43 studies (3 quantitative, 38 qualitative and 2 mixed methods). We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Campbell Collaboration. We used GRADE and GRADE CERQual to assess the certainty of and confidence in the evidence for quantitative and qualitative data respectively. Main Results We found insufficient evidence from quantitative studies to support or refute the effectiveness of arts interventions for CYP at-risk of or who have offended for any outcome. Qualitative evidence suggested that arts interventions may lead to positive emotions, the development of a sense of self, successful engagement in creative practices, and development of positive personal relationships. Arts interventions may need accessible and flexible delivery and are likely to be engaging if they have support from staff, family and community members, are delivered by professional artists, involve culturally relevant activity, a youth focus, regularity and a sustainable strategy. We found limited evidence that a lack of advocacy, low funding, insufficient wider support from key personnel in adjacent services could act as barriers to success. Methodological limitations resulted in a judgement of very low confidence in these findings. Authors' Conclusions We found insufficient evidence from quantitative studies to support or refute the effectiveness of arts interventions for CYP at-risk of offending or who have offended for any outcome. We report very low confidence about the evidence for understanding the processes influencing the successful design and delivery of arts interventions in this population of CYP and their impact on behavioural, psychosocial, cognitive and offending outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Neil E. O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Health and Wellbeing Across the LifecourseBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| | | | - Louise Forde
- Brunel Law SchoolBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| | - Robyn Smith
- Life SciencesBrunel University LondonLondonUK
| | - Jake Gifford
- Department of Life SciencesBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ferraro MC, Moore RA, de C Williams AC, Fisher E, Stewart G, Ferguson MC, Eccleston C, O'Connell NE. Characteristics of retracted publications related to pain research: a systematic review. Pain 2023; 164:2397-2404. [PMID: 37310441 DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002947] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2023] [Accepted: 04/17/2023] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
ABSTRACT Retraction is a mechanism for correcting the scientific record and alerts readers when a study contains unreliable or flawed data. Such data may arise from error or research misconduct. Studies examining the landscape of retracted publications provide insight into the extent of unreliable data and its effect on a medical discipline. We aimed to explore the extent and characteristics of retracted publications in pain research. We searched the EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Retraction Watch databases to December 31, 2022. We included retracted articles that (1) investigated mechanisms of painful conditions, (2) tested treatments that aimed to reduce pain, or (3) measured pain as an outcome. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the included data. We included 389 pain articles published between 1993 and 2022 and retracted between 1996 and 2022. There was a significant upward trend in the number of retracted pain articles over time. Sixty-six percent of articles were retracted for reasons relating to misconduct. The median (interquartile range) time from article publication to retraction was 2 years (0.7-4.3). The time to retraction differed by reason for retraction, with data problems, comprising data falsification, duplication, and plagiarism, resulting in the longest interval (3 [1.2-5.2] years). Further investigations of retracted pain articles, including exploration of their fate postretraction, are necessary to determine the impact of unreliable data on pain research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael C Ferraro
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | | | - Amanda C de C Williams
- Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Emma Fisher
- Centre for Pain Research, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom
- Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Review Groups, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Gavin Stewart
- School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle, United Kingdom
| | | | - Christopher Eccleston
- Centre for Pain Research, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom
- Department of Health and Clinical Psychology, the University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
- Department of Psychology, The University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Nascimento Leite M, Kamper SJ, O'Connell NE, Michaleff ZA, Fisher E, Viana Silva P, Williams CM, Yamato TP. Physical activity and education about physical activity for chronic musculoskeletal pain in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 7:CD013527. [PMID: 37439598 PMCID: PMC10339856 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013527.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic pain is a major health and socioeconomic burden, which is prevalent in children and adolescents. Among the most widely used interventions in children and adolescents are physical activity (including exercises) and education about physical activity. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effectiveness of physical activity, education about physical activity, or both, compared with usual care (including waiting-list, and minimal interventions, such as advice, relaxation classes, or social group meetings) or active medical care in children and adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PEDro, and LILACS from the date of their inception to October 2022. We also searched the reference lists of eligible papers, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared physical activity or education about physical activity, or both, with usual care (including waiting-list and minimal interventions) or active medical care, in children and adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently determined the eligibility of the included studies. Our primary outcomes were pain intensity, disability, and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were depression, anxiety, fear avoidance, quality of life, physical activity level, and caregiver distress. We extracted data at postintervention assessment, and long-term follow-up. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias for each study, using the RoB 1. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We reported continuous outcomes as mean differences, and determined clinically important differences from the literature, or 10% of the scale. MAIN RESULTS We included four studies (243 participants with juvenile idiopathic arthritis). We judged all included studies to be at unclear risk of selection bias, performance bias, and detection bias, and at high risk of attrition bias. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for each outcome to very low due to serious or very serious study limitations, inconsistency, and imprecision. Physical activity compared with usual care Physical activity may slightly reduce pain intensity (0 to 100 scale; 0 = no pain) compared with usual care at postintervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.82 to -0.08; 2 studies, 118 participants; recalculated as a mean difference (MD) -12.19, 95% CI -21.99 to -2.38; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence). Physical activity may slightly improve disability (0 to 3 scale; 0 = no disability) compared with usual care at postintervention assessment (MD -0.37, 95% CI -0.56 to -0.19; I² = 0%; 3 studies, 170 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We found no clear evidence of a difference in quality of life (QoL; 0 to 100 scale; lower scores = better QoL) between physical activity and usual care at postintervention assessment (SMD -0.46, 95% CI -1.27 to 0.35; 4 studies, 201 participants; very low-certainty evidence; recalculated as MD -6.30, 95% CI -18.23 to 5.64; I² = 91%). None of the included studies measured adverse events, depression, or anxiety for this comparison. Physical activity compared with active medical care We found no studies that could be analysed in this comparison. Education about physical activity compared with usual care or active medical care We found no studies that could be analysed in this comparison. Physical activity and education about physical activity compared with usual care or active medical care We found no studies that could be analysed in this comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We are unable to confidently state whether interventions based on physical activity and education about physical activity are more effective than usual care for children and adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain. We found very low-certainty evidence that physical activity may reduce pain intensity and improve disability postintervention compared with usual care, for children and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis. We did not find any studies reporting educational interventions; it remains unknown how these interventions influence the outcomes in children and adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Treatment decisions should consider the current best evidence, the professional's experience, and the young person's preferences. Further randomised controlled trials in other common chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions, with high methodological quality, large sample size, and long-term follow-up are urgently needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mariana Nascimento Leite
- Masters and Doctoral Programs in Physical Therapy, Universidade Cidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil
| | - Steven J Kamper
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Health and Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
| | - Zoe A Michaleff
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Emma Fisher
- Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Group, Pain Research Unit, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK
- Centre for Pain Research, University of Bath, Bath, UK
| | | | | | - Tiê P Yamato
- Masters and Doctoral Programs in Physical Therapy, Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Ferraro MC, Cashin AG, Wand BM, Smart KM, Berryman C, Marston L, Moseley GL, McAuley JH, O'Connell NE. Interventions for treating pain and disability in adults with complex regional pain syndrome- an overview of systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 6:CD009416. [PMID: 37306570 PMCID: PMC10259367 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd009416.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a chronic pain condition that usually occurs in a limb following trauma or surgery. It is characterised by persisting pain that is disproportionate in magnitude or duration to the typical course of pain after similar injury. There is currently no consensus regarding the optimal management of CRPS, although a broad range of interventions have been described and are commonly used. This is the first update of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2013. OBJECTIVES To summarise the evidence from Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews of the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of any intervention used to reduce pain, disability, or both, in adults with CRPS. METHODS We identified Cochrane reviews and non-Cochrane reviews through a systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL, PEDro, LILACS and Epistemonikos from inception to October 2022, with no language restrictions. We included systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials that included adults (≥18 years) diagnosed with CRPS, using any diagnostic criteria. Two overview authors independently assessed eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the reviews and certainty of the evidence using the AMSTAR 2 and GRADE tools respectively. We extracted data for the primary outcomes pain, disability and adverse events, and the secondary outcomes quality of life, emotional well-being, and participants' ratings of satisfaction or improvement with treatment. MAIN RESULTS: We included six Cochrane and 13 non-Cochrane systematic reviews in the previous version of this overview and five Cochrane and 12 non-Cochrane reviews in the current version. Using the AMSTAR 2 tool, we judged Cochrane reviews to have higher methodological quality than non-Cochrane reviews. The studies in the included reviews were typically small and mostly at high risk of bias or of low methodological quality. We found no high-certainty evidence for any comparison. There was low-certainty evidence that bisphosphonates may reduce pain intensity post-intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) -2.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.8 to -3.4, P = 0.001; I2 = 81%; 4 trials, n = 181) and moderate-certainty evidence that they are probably associated with increased adverse events of any nature (risk ratio (RR) 2.10, 95% CI 1.27 to 3.47; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.6, 95% CI 2.4 to 168.0; 4 trials, n = 181). There was moderate-certainty evidence that lidocaine local anaesthetic sympathetic blockade probably does not reduce pain intensity compared with placebo, and low-certainty evidence that it may not reduce pain intensity compared with ultrasound of the stellate ganglion. No effect size was reported for either comparison. There was low-certainty evidence that topical dimethyl sulfoxide may not reduce pain intensity compared with oral N-acetylcysteine, but no effect size was reported. There was low-certainty evidence that continuous bupivacaine brachial plexus block may reduce pain intensity compared with continuous bupivacaine stellate ganglion block, but no effect size was reported. For a wide range of other commonly used interventions, the certainty in the evidence was very low and provides insufficient evidence to either support or refute their use. Comparisons with low- and very low-certainty evidence should be treated with substantial caution. We did not identify any RCT evidence for routinely used pharmacological interventions for CRPS such as tricyclic antidepressants or opioids. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Despite a considerable increase in included evidence compared with the previous version of this overview, we identified no high-certainty evidence for the effectiveness of any therapy for CRPS. Until larger, high-quality trials are undertaken, formulating an evidence-based approach to managing CRPS will remain difficult. Current non-Cochrane systematic reviews of interventions for CRPS are of low methodological quality and should not be relied upon to provide an accurate and comprehensive summary of the evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael C Ferraro
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Aidan G Cashin
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Benedict M Wand
- The School of Health Sciences and Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Australia
| | - Keith M Smart
- UCD School of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sports Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
- Physiotherapy Department, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Carolyn Berryman
- IIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
- School of Biomedicine, The University of Adelaide, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Louise Marston
- Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - G Lorimer Moseley
- IIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - James H McAuley
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Health and Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Cashin AG, Wand BM, O'Connell NE, Lee H, Rizzo RR, Bagg MK, O'Hagan E, Maher CG, Furlan AD, van Tulder MW, McAuley JH. Pharmacological treatments for low back pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 4:CD013815. [PMID: 37014979 PMCID: PMC10072849 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013815.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pharmacological interventions are the most used treatment for low back pain (LBP). Use of evidence from systematic reviews of the effects of pharmacological interventions for LBP published in the Cochrane Library, is limited by lack of a comprehensive overview. OBJECTIVES To summarise the evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of systemic pharmacological interventions for adults with non-specific LBP. METHODS The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was searched from inception to 3 June 2021, to identify reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated systemic pharmacological interventions for adults with non-specific LBP. Two authors independently assessed eligibility, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the reviews and certainty of the evidence using the AMSTAR 2 and GRADE tools. The review focused on placebo comparisons and the main outcomes were pain intensity, function, and safety. MAIN RESULTS Seven Cochrane Reviews that included 103 studies (22,238 participants) were included. There is high confidence in the findings of five reviews, moderate confidence in one, and low confidence in the findings of another. The reviews reported data on six medicines or medicine classes: paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), muscle relaxants, benzodiazepines, opioids, and antidepressants. Three reviews included participants with acute or sub-acute LBP and five reviews included participants with chronic LBP. Acute LBP Paracetamol There was high-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference between paracetamol and placebo for reducing pain intensity (MD 0.49 on a 0 to 100 scale (higher scores indicate worse pain), 95% CI -1.99 to 2.97), reducing disability (MD 0.05 on a 0 to 24 scale (higher scores indicate worse disability), 95% CI -0.50 to 0.60), and increasing the risk of adverse events (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.33). NSAIDs There was moderate-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring NSAIDs compared to placebo at reducing pain intensity (MD -7.29 on a 0 to 100 scale (higher scores indicate worse pain), 95% CI -10.98 to -3.61), high-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference for reducing disability (MD -2.02 on a 0-24 scale (higher scores indicate worse disability), 95% CI -2.89 to -1.15), and very low-certainty evidence for no evidence of an increased risk of adverse events (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0. 63 to 1.18). Muscle relaxants and benzodiazepines There was moderate-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring muscle relaxants compared to placebo for a higher chance of pain relief (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.76), and higher chance of improving physical function (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.77), and increased risk of adverse events (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1. 14 to 1.98). Opioids None of the included Cochrane Reviews aimed to identify evidence for acute LBP. Antidepressants No evidence was identified by the included reviews for acute LBP. Chronic LBP Paracetamol No evidence was identified by the included reviews for chronic LBP. NSAIDs There was low-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring NSAIDs compared to placebo for reducing pain intensity (MD -6.97 on a 0 to 100 scale (higher scores indicate worse pain), 95% CI -10.74 to -3.19), reducing disability (MD -0.85 on a 0-24 scale (higher scores indicate worse disability), 95% CI -1.30 to -0.40), and no evidence of an increased risk of adverse events (RR 1.04, 95% CI -0.92 to 1.17), all at intermediate-term follow-up (> 3 months and ≤ 12 months postintervention). Muscle relaxants and benzodiazepines There was low-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring benzodiazepines compared to placebo for a higher chance of pain relief (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.93), and low-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference between muscle relaxants and placebo in the risk of adverse events (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.57). Opioids There was high-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring tapentadol compared to placebo at reducing pain intensity (MD -8.00 on a 0 to 100 scale (higher scores indicate worse pain), 95% CI -1.22 to -0.38), moderate-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring strong opioids for reducing pain intensity (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.33), low-certainty evidence for a medium between-group difference favouring tramadol for reducing pain intensity (SMD -0.55, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.44) and very low-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring buprenorphine for reducing pain intensity (SMD -0.41, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.26). There was moderate-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring strong opioids compared to placebo for reducing disability (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.15), moderate-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring tramadol for reducing disability (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.07), and low-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference favouring buprenorphine for reducing disability (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.25). There was low-certainty evidence for a small between-group difference for an increased risk of adverse events for opioids (all types) compared to placebo; nausea (RD 0.10, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.14), headaches (RD 0.03, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.05), constipation (RD 0.07, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.11), and dizziness (RD 0.08, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.11). Antidepressants There was low-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference for antidepressants (all types) compared to placebo for reducing pain intensity (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.17) and reducing disability (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.29). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found no high- or moderate-certainty evidence that any investigated pharmacological intervention provided a large or medium effect on pain intensity for acute or chronic LBP compared to placebo. For acute LBP, we found moderate-certainty evidence that NSAIDs and muscle relaxants may provide a small effect on pain, and high-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference between paracetamol and placebo. For safety, we found very low- and high-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference with NSAIDs and paracetamol compared to placebo for the risk of adverse events, and moderate-certainty evidence that muscle relaxants may increase the risk of adverse events. For chronic LBP, we found low-certainty evidence that NSAIDs and very low- to high-certainty evidence that opioids may provide a small effect on pain. For safety, we found low-certainty evidence for no evidence of difference between NSAIDs and placebo for the risk of adverse events, and low-certainty evidence that opioids may increase the risk of adverse events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aidan G Cashin
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine & Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Benedict M Wand
- School of Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Health and Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
| | - Hopin Lee
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia
| | - Rodrigo Rn Rizzo
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine & Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Matthew K Bagg
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
- New College Village, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Edel O'Hagan
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Christopher G Maher
- Sydney Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, The University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia
| | | | - Maurits W van Tulder
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - James H McAuley
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine & Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Wewege MA, Bagg MK, Jones MD, Ferraro MC, Cashin AG, Rizzo RR, Leake HB, Hagstrom AD, Sharma S, McLachlan AJ, Maher CG, Day R, Wand BM, O'Connell NE, Nikolakopolou A, Schabrun S, Gustin SM, McAuley JH. Comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for adults with acute non-specific low back pain: systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ 2023; 380:e072962. [PMID: 36948512 PMCID: PMC10540836 DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2022-072962] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/21/2023] [Indexed: 03/24/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for acute non-specific low back pain. DESIGN Systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES Medline, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinicialtrialsregister.eu, and World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from database inception to 20 February 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION Randomised controlled trials of analgesic medicines (eg, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol, opioids, anti-convulsant drugs, skeletal muscle relaxants, or corticosteroids) compared with another analgesic medicine, placebo, or no treatment. Adults (≥18 years) who reported acute non-specific low back pain (for less than six weeks). DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Primary outcomes were low back pain intensity (0-100 scale) at end of treatment and safety (number of participants who reported any adverse event during treatment). Secondary outcomes were low back specific function, serious adverse events, and discontinuation from treatment. Two reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. A random effects network meta-analysis was done and confidence was evaluated by the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis method. RESULTS 98 randomised controlled trials (15 134 participants, 49% women) included 69 different medicines or combinations. Low or very low confidence was noted in evidence for reduced pain intensity after treatment with tolperisone (mean difference -26.1 (95% confidence intervals -34.0 to -18.2)), aceclofenac plus tizanidine (-26.1 (-38.5 to -13.6)), pregabalin (-24.7 (-34.6 to -14.7)), and 14 other medicines compared with placebo. Low or very low confidence was noted for no difference between the effects of several of these medicines. Increased adverse events had moderate to very low confidence with tramadol (risk ratio 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.5 to 4.5)), paracetamol plus sustained release tramadol (2.4 (1.5 to 3.8)), baclofen (2.3 (1.5 to 3.4)), and paracetamol plus tramadol (2.1 (1.3 to 3.4)) compared with placebo. These medicines could increase the risk of adverse events compared with other medicines with moderate to low confidence. Moderate to low confidence was also noted for secondary outcomes and secondary analysis of medicine classes. CONCLUSIONS The comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for acute non-specific low back pain are uncertain. Until higher quality randomised controlled trials of head-to-head comparisons are published, clinicians and patients are recommended to take a cautious approach to manage acute non-specific low back pain with analgesic medicines. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42019145257.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael A Wewege
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Matthew K Bagg
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia
- Perron Institute for Neurological and Translational Science, Perth, WA, Australia
| | - Matthew D Jones
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Michael C Ferraro
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Aidan G Cashin
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Rodrigo Rn Rizzo
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Hayley B Leake
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- IIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| | - Amanda D Hagstrom
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Saurab Sharma
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Andrew J McLachlan
- Sydney Pharmacy School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Gadigal Country, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Christopher G Maher
- Sydney Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney, Gadigal Country, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Richard Day
- Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- St Vincent's Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Benedict M Wand
- Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Midwifery and Health Sciences, University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, WA, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Health and Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
| | - Adriani Nikolakopolou
- Institute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Faculty of Medicine and Medical Centre, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Siobhan Schabrun
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- School of Physical Therapy, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada
- The Gray Centre for Mobility and Activity, Parkwood Institute, London, ON, Canada
| | - Sylvia M Gustin
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- NeuroRecovery Research Hub, School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - James H McAuley
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Williams ACDC, Hearn L, Moore RA, Stewart G, Fisher E, Eccleston C, O'Connell NE. Effective quality control in the medical literature: investigation and retraction vs inaction. J Clin Epidemiol 2023; 157:156-157. [PMID: 36863688 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.02.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2023] [Accepted: 02/22/2023] [Indexed: 03/04/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda C de C Williams
- Research Department of Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
| | - Leslie Hearn
- Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Review Group, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Gavin Stewart
- School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle, UK
| | | | | | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Health and Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Mansfield L, Daykin N, O'Connell NE, Bailey D, Forde L, Smith R, Gifford J. PROTOCOL: A mixed methods systematic review on the effects of arts interventions for at-risk and offending children and young people on behavioural, psychosocial, cognitive and offending outcomes. Campbell Syst Rev 2023; 19:e1298. [PMID: 36911860 PMCID: PMC9831279 DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1298] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The proposed systematic review question is: What is the effectiveness of arts interventions for at-risk and offending children and young people (8-25 years)? There are three objectives: (1) To evaluate evidence on the effectiveness and impact of arts interventions on keeping children safe from involvement in violence and crime; (2) To synthesise evidence on factors impacting the implementation of arts interventions, and barriers and facilitators to participation and achievement of intended outcomes; (3) To develop a theory-of-change approach to ensure the development of an evidence-led framework of the processes by which arts interventions might work in preventing offending behaviours.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Neil E. O'Connell
- Department of Life SciencesBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Health and Wellbeing Across the LifecourseBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| | - Daniel Bailey
- Department of Life SciencesBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| | - Louise Forde
- Brunel Law SchoolBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| | - Robyn Smith
- Department of Life SciencesBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| | - Jake Gifford
- Department of Life SciencesBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a painful and disabling condition that usually manifests in response to trauma or surgery and is associated with significant pain and disability. CRPS can be classified into two types: type I (CRPS I) in which a specific nerve lesion has not been identified and type II (CRPS II) where there is an identifiable nerve lesion. Guidelines recommend the inclusion of a variety of physiotherapy interventions as part of the multimodal treatment of people with CRPS. This is the first update of the review originally published in Issue 2, 2016. OBJECTIVES To determine the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions for treating pain and disability associated with CRPS types I and II in adults. SEARCH METHODS For this update we searched CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, PEDro, Web of Science, DARE and Health Technology Assessments from February 2015 to July 2021 without language restrictions, we searched the reference lists of included studies and we contacted an expert in the field. We also searched additional online sources for unpublished trials and trials in progress. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of physiotherapy interventions compared with placebo, no treatment, another intervention or usual care, or other physiotherapy interventions in adults with CRPS I and II. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. Secondary outcomes were composite scores for CRPS symptoms, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), patient global impression of change (PGIC) scales and adverse effects. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently screened database searches for eligibility, extracted data, evaluated risk of bias and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE system. MAIN RESULTS We included 16 new trials (600 participants) along with the 18 trials from the original review totalling 34 RCTs (1339 participants). Thirty-three trials included participants with CRPS I and one trial included participants with CRPS II. Included trials compared a diverse range of interventions including physical rehabilitation, electrotherapy modalities, cortically directed rehabilitation, electroacupuncture and exposure-based approaches. Most interventions were tested in small, single trials. Most were at high risk of bias overall (27 trials) and the remainder were at 'unclear' risk of bias (seven trials). For all comparisons and outcomes where we found evidence, we graded the certainty of the evidence as very low, downgraded due to serious study limitations, imprecision and inconsistency. Included trials rarely reported adverse effects. Physiotherapy compared with minimal care for adults with CRPS I One trial (135 participants) of multimodal physiotherapy, for which pain data were unavailable, found no between-group differences in pain intensity at 12-month follow-up. Multimodal physiotherapy demonstrated a small between-group improvement in disability at 12 months follow-up compared to an attention control (Impairment Level Sum score, 5 to 50 scale; mean difference (MD) -3.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.13 to -0.27) (very low-certainty evidence). Equivalent data for pain were not available. Details regarding adverse events were not reported. Physiotherapy compared with minimal care for adults with CRPS II We did not find any trials of physiotherapy compared with minimal care for adults with CRPS II. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of physiotherapy interventions on pain and disability in CRPS. This conclusion is similar to our 2016 review. Large-scale, high-quality RCTs with longer-term follow-up are required to test the effectiveness of physiotherapy-based interventions for treating pain and disability in adults with CRPS I and II.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keith M Smart
- UCD School of Public Health, Physiotherapy and Sports Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
- Physiotherapy Department, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Michael C Ferraro
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Benedict M Wand
- School of Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Health and Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Ferraro MC, Gibson W, Rice ASC, Vase L, Coyle D, O'Connell NE. Spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain. Lancet Neurol 2022; 21:405. [DOI: 10.1016/s1474-4422(22)00096-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2021] [Accepted: 03/04/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
14
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Implanted spinal neuromodulation (SNMD) techniques are used in the treatment of refractory chronic pain. They involve the implantation of electrodes around the spinal cord (spinal cord stimulation (SCS)) or dorsal root ganglion (dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS)), and a pulse generator unit under the skin. Electrical stimulation is then used with the aim of reducing pain intensity. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the efficacy, effectiveness, adverse events, and cost-effectiveness of implanted spinal neuromodulation interventions for people with chronic pain. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, Web of Science (ISI), Health Technology Assessments, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry from inception to September 2021 without language restrictions, searched the reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SNMD interventions with placebo (sham) stimulation, no treatment or usual care; or comparing SNMD interventions + another treatment versus that treatment alone. We included participants ≥ 18 years old with non-cancer and non-ischaemic pain of longer than three months duration. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were disability, analgesic medication use, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and health economic outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently screened database searches to determine inclusion, extracted data and evaluated risk of bias for prespecified results using the Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Outcomes were evaluated at short- (≤ one month), medium- four to eight months) and long-term (≥12 months). Where possible we conducted meta-analyses. We used the GRADE system to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS We included 15 unique published studies that randomised 908 participants, and 20 unique ongoing studies. All studies evaluated SCS. We found no eligible published studies of DRGS and no studies comparing SCS with no treatment or usual care. We rated all results evaluated as being at high risk of bias overall. For all comparisons and outcomes where we found evidence, we graded the certainty of the evidence as low or very low, downgraded due to limitations of studies, imprecision and in some cases, inconsistency. Active stimulation versus placebo SCS versus placebo (sham) Results were only available at short-term follow-up for this comparison. Pain intensity Six studies (N = 164) demonstrated a small effect in favour of SCS at short-term follow-up (0 to 100 scale, higher scores = worse pain, mean difference (MD) -8.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) -15.67 to -1.78, very low certainty). The point estimate falls below our predetermined threshold for a clinically important effect (≥10 points). No studies reported the proportion of participants experiencing 30% or 50% pain relief for this comparison. Adverse events (AEs) The quality and inconsistency of adverse event reporting in these studies precluded formal analysis. Active stimulation + other intervention versus other intervention alone SCS + other intervention versus other intervention alone (open-label studies) Pain intensity Mean difference Three studies (N = 303) demonstrated a potentially clinically important mean difference in favour of SCS of -37.41 at short term (95% CI -46.39 to -28.42, very low certainty), and medium-term follow-up (5 studies, 635 participants, MD -31.22 95% CI -47.34 to -15.10 low-certainty), and no clear evidence for an effect of SCS at long-term follow-up (1 study, 44 participants, MD -7 (95% CI -24.76 to 10.76, very low-certainty). Proportion of participants reporting ≥50% pain relief We found an effect in favour of SCS at short-term (2 studies, N = 249, RR 15.90, 95% CI 6.70 to 37.74, I2 0% ; risk difference (RD) 0.65 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.74, very low certainty), medium term (5 studies, N = 597, RR 7.08, 95 %CI 3.40 to 14.71, I2 = 43%; RD 0.43, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.73, low-certainty evidence), and long term (1 study, N = 87, RR 15.15, 95% CI 2.11 to 108.91 ; RD 0.35, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.49, very low certainty) follow-up. Adverse events (AEs) Device related No studies specifically reported device-related adverse events at short-term follow-up. At medium-term follow-up, the incidence of lead failure/displacement (3 studies N = 330) ranged from 0.9 to 14% (RD 0.04, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.11, I2 64%, very low certainty). The incidence of infection (4 studies, N = 548) ranged from 3 to 7% (RD 0.04, 95%CI 0.01, 0.07, I2 0%, very low certainty). The incidence of reoperation/reimplantation (4 studies, N =5 48) ranged from 2% to 31% (RD 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.21, I2 86%, very low certainty). One study (N = 44) reported a 55% incidence of lead failure/displacement (RD 0.55, 95% CI 0.35, 0 to 75, very low certainty), and a 94% incidence of reoperation/reimplantation (RD 0.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.07, very low certainty) at five-year follow-up. No studies provided data on infection rates at long-term follow-up. We found reports of some serious adverse events as a result of the intervention. These included autonomic neuropathy, prolonged hospitalisation, prolonged monoparesis, pulmonary oedema, wound infection, device extrusion and one death resulting from subdural haematoma. Other No studies reported the incidence of other adverse events at short-term follow-up. We found no clear evidence of a difference in otherAEs at medium-term (2 studies, N = 278, RD -0.05, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.06, I2 0%) or long term (1 study, N = 100, RD -0.17, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.02) follow-up. Very limited evidence suggested that SCS increases healthcare costs. It was not clear whether SCS was cost-effective. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found very low-certainty evidence that SCS may not provide clinically important benefits on pain intensity compared to placebo stimulation. We found low- to very low-certainty evidence that SNMD interventions may provide clinically important benefits for pain intensity when added to conventional medical management or physical therapy. SCS is associated with complications including infection, electrode lead failure/migration and a need for reoperation/re-implantation. The level of certainty regarding the size of those risks is very low. SNMD may lead to serious adverse events, including death. We found no evidence to support or refute the use of DRGS for chronic pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Health and Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
| | - Michael C Ferraro
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - William Gibson
- School of Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Australia
| | - Andrew Sc Rice
- Pain Research, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Lene Vase
- Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Doug Coyle
- Epidemiology and Community Medicine, Ottawa Health Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
- Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Department of Clinical Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Cashin AG, Rizzo RRN, Wand BM, O'Connell NE, Lee H, Bagg MK, O'Hagan E, Maher CG, Furlan AD, van Tulder MW, McAuley JH. Non-pharmacological and non-surgical treatments for low back pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews. Hippokratia 2021. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd014691] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Aidan G Cashin
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine; The University of New South Wales; Sydney Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT; Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney Australia
| | - Rodrigo RN Rizzo
- Centre for Pain IMPACT; Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health; The University of New South Wales; Sydney Australia
| | - Benedict M Wand
- School of Physiotherapy; The University of Notre Dame Australia; Fremantle Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Health Sciences, Centre for Health and Wellbeing Across the Lifecourse; Brunel University London; Uxbridge UK
| | - Hopin Lee
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS); University of Oxford; Oxford UK
- School of Medicine and Public Health; The University of Newcastle; Newcastle Australia
| | - Matthew K Bagg
- Centre for Pain IMPACT; Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney Australia
| | - Edel O'Hagan
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine; The University of New South Wales; Sydney Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT; Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney Australia
| | - Christopher G Maher
- Sydney School of Public Health; The University of Sydney; Sydney Australia
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health; The University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District; Sydney Australia
| | | | - Maurits W van Tulder
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences; VU University Amsterdam; Amsterdam Netherlands
| | - James H McAuley
- Centre for Pain IMPACT; Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney Australia
- School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health; The University of New South Wales; Sydney Australia
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Cashin AG, Wand BM, O'Connell NE, Lee H, Bagg MK, O'Hagan E, Maher CG, Furlan AD, van Tulder MW, McAuley JH. Pharmacological treatments for low back pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews. Hippokratia 2020. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013815] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Aidan G Cashin
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine; The University of New South Wales; Sydney Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT; Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney Australia
| | - Benedict M Wand
- School of Physiotherapy; The University of Notre Dame Australia; Fremantle Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Department of Clinical Sciences; Brunel University London; Uxbridge UK
| | - Hopin Lee
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS); University of Oxford; Oxford UK
- School of Medicine and Public Health; University of Newcastle; Newcastle Australia
| | - Matthew K Bagg
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine; The University of New South Wales; Sydney Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT; Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney Australia
- New College Village; University of New South Wales; Sydney Australia
| | - Edel O'Hagan
- Prince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine; The University of New South Wales; Sydney Australia
- Centre for Pain IMPACT; Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney Australia
| | - Christopher G Maher
- Sydney School of Public Health; The University of Sydney; Sydney Australia
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health; The University of Sydney and Sydney Local Health District; Sydney Australia
| | | | - Maurits W van Tulder
- Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences; VU University Amsterdam; Amsterdam Netherlands
| | - James H McAuley
- Centre for Pain IMPACT; Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney Australia
- School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine; University of New South Wales; Sydney Australia
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Affiliation(s)
- Neil E O'Connell
- Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Department of Clinical Sciences; Brunel University London; Uxbridge UK
| | - William Gibson
- School of Physiotherapy; The University of Notre Dame Australia; Fremantle Australia
| | - Andrew SC Rice
- Pain Research, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine; Imperial College London; London UK
| | - Lene Vase
- Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences; Aarhus University; Aarhus Denmark
| | - Doug Coyle
- Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Department of Clinical Sciences; Brunel University London; Uxbridge UK
- Epidemiology and Community Medicine; Ottawa Health Research Institute; Ottawa Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Bagg MK, Lo S, Cashin AG, Herbert RD, O'Connell NE, Lee H, Hübscher M, Wand BM, O'Hagan E, Rizzo RRN, Moseley GL, Stanton TR, Maher CG, Goodall S, Saing S, McAuley JH. The RESOLVE Trial for people with chronic low back pain: statistical analysis plan. Braz J Phys Ther 2020; 25:103-111. [PMID: 32811786 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2020.06.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2020] [Revised: 05/12/2020] [Accepted: 06/03/2020] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Statistical analysis plans describe the planned data management and analysis for clinical trials. This supports transparent reporting and interpretation of clinical trial results. This paper reports the statistical analysis plan for the RESOLVE clinical trial. The RESOLVE trial assigned participants with chronic low back pain to graded sensory-motor precision training or sham-control. RESULTS We report the planned data management and analysis for the primary and secondary outcomes. The primary outcome is pain intensity at 18-weeks post randomization. We will use mixed-effects models to analyze the primary and secondary outcomes by intention-to-treat. We will report adverse effects in full. We also describe analyses if there is non-adherence to the interventions, data management procedures, and our planned reporting of results. CONCLUSION This statistical analysis plan will minimize the potential for bias in the analysis and reporting of results from the RESOLVE trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION ACTRN12615000610538 (https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=368619).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew K Bagg
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Prince of Wales Hospital Campus, Sydney, Australia; New College Village, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
| | - Serigne Lo
- Melanoma Institute Australia, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Aidan G Cashin
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Prince of Wales Hospital Campus, Sydney, Australia
| | - Rob D Herbert
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Health and Life Sciences, Brunel University London, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
| | - Hopin Lee
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Windmill Road, Headington, United Kingdom; School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, University Drive, Newcastle, Australia
| | - Markus Hübscher
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
| | - Benedict M Wand
- School of Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia Fremantle, Perth, Australia
| | - Edel O'Hagan
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Prince of Wales Hospital Campus, Sydney, Australia
| | - Rodrigo R N Rizzo
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; School of Medical Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - G Lorimer Moseley
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; IIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, City East Campus, Australia
| | - Tasha R Stanton
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; IIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, City East Campus, Australia
| | - Christopher G Maher
- Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Stephen Goodall
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Sopany Saing
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - James H McAuley
- Centre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; School of Medical Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Travers MJ, O'Connell NE, Tugwell P, Eccleston C, Gibson W. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic pain: the opportunity to begin again. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 4:ED000139. [PMID: 32323312 PMCID: PMC10408285 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.ed000139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|
20
|
McCabe S, McHugh N, O'Connell NE, Prendiville R. Evaluation of production efficiencies at pasture of lactating suckler cows of diverse genetic merit and replacement strategy. Animal 2020; 14:1768-1776. [PMID: 32223778 DOI: 10.1017/s1751731120000415] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
Feed costs account for the largest proportion of direct cost within suckler beef production systems. By identifying the cow type with enhanced capability of converting grazed herbage to beef output across lactations, suckler cow systems would become more efficient and sustainable. The objective of this study was to estimate grass DM intake (GDMI) and production efficiency among lactating suckler cows of diverse genetic merit for the national Irish maternal index (Replacement Index) which includes cow efficiency components such as milk yield and feed intake. Data from 131 cows of diverse genetic merit within the Replacement Index, across two different replacement strategies (suckler or dairy sourced), were available over two grazing seasons. Milk yield, GDMI, cow live weight (BW) and body condition score (BCS) were recorded during early, mid and late-lactation, with subsequent measures of production efficiency extrapolated. Genetic merit had no significant effect on any variables investigated, with the exception of low genetic merit (LOW) cows being 22 kg heavier in BW than high genetic merit (HIGH) cows (P < 0.05). Beef cows were 55 kg heavier in BW (P < 0.001), had a 0.31 greater BCS (P < 0.05) and 0.30 Unité Fourragère Lait (UFL) greater energy requirement for maintenance compared to dairy sourced beef × dairy crossbred (BDX) cows (P < 0.001). The BDX had 0.8 kg greater GDMI, produced 1.8 kg more milk (P < 0.001), had a 0.8 UFL greater energy requirement for lactation and produced weanlings that were 17 kg heavier in BW than beef cows (P < 0.05). Subsequent efficiency variables of milk per 100 kg BW (P < 0.001), milk per kg GDMI (P < 0.001) and GDMI per 100 kg BW (P < 0.001) were more favourable for BDX. The correlations examined showed GDMI had moderate positive correlations (P < 0.001) with intake per 100 kg BW, net energy intake per kg milk yield, RFI and intake per 100 kg calf weaning weight but was weakly negatively correlated to milk yield per kg GDMI (P < 0.001). No difference was observed across genetic merit for beef cows for any of the traits investigated. Results from the current study showed that, while contrasting replacement strategies had an effect on GDMI and production efficiency, no main effect was observed on cows diverse in genetic merit for Replacement Index. Nonetheless, utilising genetic indexes in the suckler herd is an important resource for selecting breeding females for the national herd and phenotypic performance generated from this study can be included in future genetic evaluations to improve reliability of genetic values.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S McCabe
- Livestock Systems Research Department, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Grange, Dunsany, County MeathC15PW93, Ireland
- Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queens University Belfast, BelfastBT9 7BL, Ireland
| | - N McHugh
- Livestock Systems Department, Teagasc Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County CorkP61C996, Ireland
| | - N E O'Connell
- Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queens University Belfast, BelfastBT9 7BL, Ireland
| | - R Prendiville
- Livestock Systems Research Department, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Grange, Dunsany, County MeathC15PW93, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Abstract
Importance Cerebral palsy (CP) is considered a pediatric condition despite most individuals with CP living into adulthood. Thus, there is a lack of evidence in adults with CP, which includes a paucity of research examining mental health in this population. Objectives To determine the risk of depression and anxiety in adults with CP compared with an age-, sex-, and practice-matched reference group of adults without CP, using primary care data. Design, Setting, and Participants Retrospective longitudinal cohort study set in UK primary care. Data were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression analyses adjusted for chronic conditions and visits to their physician. The study period ran from January 1987 to November 2015. Data of entry into the study ranged from January 1987 to September 2015. Data for 1705 adults 18 years or older with CP and 5115 matched adults without CP were extracted. Cerebral palsy was identified using diagnostic codes, and each person with CP was compared with 3 age-, sex-, and practice-matched controls. Exposures Diagnosis of CP, with a second analysis accounting for comorbidity of intellectual disability (ID). Main Outcomes and Measures Time to diagnosis for depression or anxiety following the date of entry into the study in adults with CP (with and without ID) compared with matched controls. Results The mean (SD) age of the 1705 patients with CP and the 5115 adults without CP was 33.3 (15.5) years, and 798 participants (46.8%) were women. Individuals with CP had an increased adjusted hazard of depression (hazard ratio [HR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.09-1.51) and anxiety (HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.21-1.63) compared with the matched reference group. When we accounted for ID comorbidity, there were 363 adults with CP who also had ID (mean [SD] age, 32.1 [13.2] years; 159 women [47.6%]) and 1342 adults with CP who did not have ID (mean [SD] age, 33.6 [16.1] years; 639 women [43.8%]). Only those individuals with CP and no comorbid ID had a higher risk of incident depression (HR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.20-1.72) and anxiety (HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.28-1.87) than their matched controls. Conclusions and Relevance Adults with CP have an increased risk of depression or anxiety. In particular, these results indicate that this association is driven largely by those individuals with CP with no co-occurring ID. Future work is needed in community-based samples to fully elucidate the causal mechanisms driving these associations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kimberley J Smith
- Department of Psychological Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom.,Ageing Studies Research Group, Institute for Environment and Societies, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, Middlesex, United Kingdom
| | - Mark D Peterson
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
| | - Christina Victor
- Ageing Studies Research Group, Institute for Environment and Societies, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, Middlesex, United Kingdom.,Department of Clinical Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
| | - Silvia Liverani
- School of Mathematical Sciences, Queen Mary's University London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Nana Anokye
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
| | - Jennifer M Ryan
- Ageing Studies Research Group, Institute for Environment and Societies, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, Middlesex, United Kingdom.,Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Yamato TP, Kamper SJ, O'Connell NE, Michaleff ZA, Fisher E, Viana Silva P, Williams CM. Physical activity and education about physical activity for chronic musculoskeletal pain in children and adolescents. Hippokratia 2020. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013527] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Tiê P Yamato
- Universidade Cidade de São Paulo; Masters and Doctoral Programs in Physical Therapy; Sao Paulo Brazil
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney; Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, School of Public Health; Sydney Australia
| | - Steven J Kamper
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney; Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, School of Public Health; Sydney Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Brunel University London; Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Department of Clinical Sciences; Kingston Lane Uxbridge Middlesex UK UB8 3PH
| | - Zoe A Michaleff
- The University of Sydney; Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health; Level 10, King George V Building RPA. 83-117 Missenden Road University of Sydney Sydney NSW Australia 2050
| | - Emma Fisher
- Pain Research Unit, Churchill Hospital; Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Group; Oxford UK
| | - Priscilla Viana Silva
- University of Newcastle; School of Medicine and Public Health; Longworth Ave, Callaghan Callaghan NSW Australia 2308
| | - Christopher M Williams
- University of Newcastle; School of Medicine and Public Health; Longworth Ave, Callaghan Callaghan NSW Australia 2308
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
MacRae CS, Roche AJ, Sinnett TJ, O'Connell NE. What is the evidence for efficacy, effectiveness and safety of surgical interventions for plantar fasciopathy? Protocol for a systematic review. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e031407. [PMID: 31628127 PMCID: PMC6803112 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031407] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Plantar fasciopathy (PF) is a degenerative condition of the plantar fascia, secondary to repetitive overloading. For the majority, PF is self-limiting with greater than 80% of those affected gaining complete resolution within 1 year. However, persistent symptoms develop in approximately 10% of cases. Clinical practice guidelines for first-line treatment of PF recommend conservative management. For people with persistent symptoms that have not resolved following a trial of 6-12 months of conservative management, surgery may be offered. However, to date there are no systematic reviews of the effectiveness of the various surgical procedures for PF. We aim to systematically review quantitative studies assessing the effectiveness of surgical interventions in the management of PF. METHODS AND ANALYSIS We will search for all published and unpublished randomised clinical trials evaluating surgical interventions in the management of PF. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE (OVID), Web of Science (ISI) and Google Scholar will be searched without restrictions on date or language of publication. Inclusion criteria will include people over 18 years, diagnosed by clinical examination with PF, or with an alternative diagnostic label (eg, plantar fasciitis, plantar heel pain, plantar fasciosis). The primary outcomes are changes in pain severity/intensity for first-step pain, and incidence and nature of adverse events. Secondary outcomes include foot and ankle-related disability/function, health-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness, changes in other reported measures of pain (eg, overall pain) and medication use. Outcomes will be assessed (1) short term (≤3 months after intervention), (2) medium term (>3 months to ≤6 months after intervention) or (3) long term (>6 months to ≤2 years after treatment). All data extraction will be performed by at least two independent reviewers on the basis of a priori developed extraction form. Where adequate data are found meta-analysis will be used to combine the results of studies for all core comparisons and outcomes using random effects models. Overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This systematic review does not require ethical approval as primary data will not be collected. The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at appropriate conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42019133563.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Siân MacRae
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
- Therapy Services, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Andrew J Roche
- Foot and Ankle Unit, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Tim J Sinnett
- Foot and Ankle Unit, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Ryan JM, Peterson MD, Matthews A, Ryan N, Smith KJ, O'Connell NE, Liverani S, Anokye N, Victor C, Allen E. Noncommunicable disease among adults with cerebral palsy: A matched cohort study. Neurology 2019; 93:e1385-e1396. [PMID: 31462583 PMCID: PMC6814410 DOI: 10.1212/wnl.0000000000008199] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/25/2019] [Accepted: 05/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare the incidence of noncommunicable diseases between adults with and without cerebral palsy (CP). METHODS A cohort study was conducted using primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Cox models, stratified by matched set and adjusted for potential confounders, were fitted to compare the risk of any noncommunicable disease, cancer, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and respiratory disease between adults with and without CP. RESULTS The analysis included 1,705 adults with CP and 5,115 age-, sex-, and general practice-matched adults without CP. There was evidence from adjusted analyses that adults with CP had 75% increased risk of developing any noncommunicable disease compared to adults without CP (hazard ratio [HR] 1.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-1.94). Specifically, they had increased risk of cardiovascular disease (HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.48-2.11) and respiratory disease (HR 2.61, 95% CI 2.14-3.19). There was no evidence of increased risk of cancer or type 2 diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSIONS Adults with CP had increased risk of noncommunicable disease, specifically cardiovascular and respiratory disease. These findings highlight the need for clinical vigilance regarding identification of noncommunicable disease in people with CP and further research into the etiology and management of noncommunicable disease in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer M Ryan
- From the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine (J.M.R.), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin; Institute of Environment, Health and Societies (J.M.R., N.E.O., N.A., C.V.), Brunel University London, UK; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (M.D.P.), University of Michigan-Medicine, Ann Arbor; Departments of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology (A.M.) and Medical Statistics (E.A.), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Department of Cardiology (N.R.), Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, UK; Department of Interventional Cardiology (N.R.), Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Department of Psychological Sciences (K.J.S.), Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford; and School of Mathematical Sciences (S.L.), Queen Mary University of London, UK.
| | - Mark D Peterson
- From the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine (J.M.R.), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin; Institute of Environment, Health and Societies (J.M.R., N.E.O., N.A., C.V.), Brunel University London, UK; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (M.D.P.), University of Michigan-Medicine, Ann Arbor; Departments of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology (A.M.) and Medical Statistics (E.A.), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Department of Cardiology (N.R.), Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, UK; Department of Interventional Cardiology (N.R.), Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Department of Psychological Sciences (K.J.S.), Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford; and School of Mathematical Sciences (S.L.), Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Anthony Matthews
- From the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine (J.M.R.), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin; Institute of Environment, Health and Societies (J.M.R., N.E.O., N.A., C.V.), Brunel University London, UK; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (M.D.P.), University of Michigan-Medicine, Ann Arbor; Departments of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology (A.M.) and Medical Statistics (E.A.), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Department of Cardiology (N.R.), Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, UK; Department of Interventional Cardiology (N.R.), Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Department of Psychological Sciences (K.J.S.), Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford; and School of Mathematical Sciences (S.L.), Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Nicola Ryan
- From the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine (J.M.R.), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin; Institute of Environment, Health and Societies (J.M.R., N.E.O., N.A., C.V.), Brunel University London, UK; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (M.D.P.), University of Michigan-Medicine, Ann Arbor; Departments of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology (A.M.) and Medical Statistics (E.A.), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Department of Cardiology (N.R.), Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, UK; Department of Interventional Cardiology (N.R.), Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Department of Psychological Sciences (K.J.S.), Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford; and School of Mathematical Sciences (S.L.), Queen Mary University of London, UK.
| | - Kimberley J Smith
- From the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine (J.M.R.), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin; Institute of Environment, Health and Societies (J.M.R., N.E.O., N.A., C.V.), Brunel University London, UK; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (M.D.P.), University of Michigan-Medicine, Ann Arbor; Departments of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology (A.M.) and Medical Statistics (E.A.), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Department of Cardiology (N.R.), Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, UK; Department of Interventional Cardiology (N.R.), Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Department of Psychological Sciences (K.J.S.), Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford; and School of Mathematical Sciences (S.L.), Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- From the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine (J.M.R.), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin; Institute of Environment, Health and Societies (J.M.R., N.E.O., N.A., C.V.), Brunel University London, UK; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (M.D.P.), University of Michigan-Medicine, Ann Arbor; Departments of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology (A.M.) and Medical Statistics (E.A.), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Department of Cardiology (N.R.), Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, UK; Department of Interventional Cardiology (N.R.), Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Department of Psychological Sciences (K.J.S.), Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford; and School of Mathematical Sciences (S.L.), Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Silvia Liverani
- From the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine (J.M.R.), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin; Institute of Environment, Health and Societies (J.M.R., N.E.O., N.A., C.V.), Brunel University London, UK; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (M.D.P.), University of Michigan-Medicine, Ann Arbor; Departments of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology (A.M.) and Medical Statistics (E.A.), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Department of Cardiology (N.R.), Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, UK; Department of Interventional Cardiology (N.R.), Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Department of Psychological Sciences (K.J.S.), Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford; and School of Mathematical Sciences (S.L.), Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Nana Anokye
- From the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine (J.M.R.), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin; Institute of Environment, Health and Societies (J.M.R., N.E.O., N.A., C.V.), Brunel University London, UK; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (M.D.P.), University of Michigan-Medicine, Ann Arbor; Departments of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology (A.M.) and Medical Statistics (E.A.), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Department of Cardiology (N.R.), Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, UK; Department of Interventional Cardiology (N.R.), Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Department of Psychological Sciences (K.J.S.), Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford; and School of Mathematical Sciences (S.L.), Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Christina Victor
- From the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine (J.M.R.), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin; Institute of Environment, Health and Societies (J.M.R., N.E.O., N.A., C.V.), Brunel University London, UK; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (M.D.P.), University of Michigan-Medicine, Ann Arbor; Departments of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology (A.M.) and Medical Statistics (E.A.), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Department of Cardiology (N.R.), Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, UK; Department of Interventional Cardiology (N.R.), Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Department of Psychological Sciences (K.J.S.), Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford; and School of Mathematical Sciences (S.L.), Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Elizabeth Allen
- From the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine (J.M.R.), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin; Institute of Environment, Health and Societies (J.M.R., N.E.O., N.A., C.V.), Brunel University London, UK; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (M.D.P.), University of Michigan-Medicine, Ann Arbor; Departments of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology (A.M.) and Medical Statistics (E.A.), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Department of Cardiology (N.R.), Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, UK; Department of Interventional Cardiology (N.R.), Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Department of Psychological Sciences (K.J.S.), Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford; and School of Mathematical Sciences (S.L.), Queen Mary University of London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
O'Connell NE, Smith KJ, Peterson MD, Ryan N, Liverani S, Anokye N, Victor C, Ryan JM. Incidence of osteoarthritis, osteoporosis and inflammatory musculoskeletal diseases in adults with cerebral palsy: A population-based cohort study. Bone 2019; 125:30-35. [PMID: 31075418 DOI: 10.1016/j.bone.2019.05.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2019] [Revised: 04/29/2019] [Accepted: 05/07/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND People with cerebral palsy (CP) may be at increased risk of musculoskeletal conditions due to various factors including malnutrition and abnormal levels of skeletal loading. This study aimed to compare the incidence of osteoporosis, osteoarthritis and inflammatory musculoskeletal diseases between adults with and without CP. METHODS A population based cohort study was conducted using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink collected between 1987 and 2015. Adults with CP were matched to adults without CP for age, sex and general practice. Cox models, stratified by matched set and adjusted for potential confounders, were fitted to compare the risk of osteoporosis, osteoarthritis and inflammatory musculoskeletal diseases. RESULTS 1705 adults with CP were matched to 5115 adults without CP. Adults with CP had an increased risk of osteoporosis in unadjusted (Hazard Ratio (HR) 3.67, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 2.32 to 5.80, p < 0.001) and adjusted (HR 6.19, 95% CI 3.37 to 11.39, p < 0.001) analyses. No evidence of increased risk of inflammatory musculoskeletal diseases was observed in unadjusted or adjusted analyses. For osteoarthritis no evidence of increased risk was seen in the unadjusted analysis, but evidence of an increased risk was seen when the analysis was adjusted for alcohol consumption, smoking status, and mean yearly general practice (GP) visits (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.02, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS After accounting for potential confounding variables, we found that CP is associated with increased risk of osteoporosis and osteoarthritis. These findings provide the strongest epidemiological evidence to date for increased risk of osteoporosis and osteoarthritis in people with CP, and highlight need for clinical awareness of such conditions in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil E O'Connell
- Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University London, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, United Kingdom.
| | - Kimberley J Smith
- Department of Psychological Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, United Kingdom
| | - Mark D Peterson
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Michigan Medicine, USA
| | - Nicola Ryan
- Department of Cardiology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, United Kingdom; Department of Interventional Cardiology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Spain
| | - Silvia Liverani
- School of Mathematical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, United Kingdom
| | - Nana Anokye
- Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University London, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, United Kingdom
| | - Christina Victor
- Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University London, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, United Kingdom
| | - Jennifer M Ryan
- Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University London, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, United Kingdom; Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic pain, considered to be pain lasting more than three months, is a common and often difficult to treat condition that can significantly impact upon function and quality of life. Treatment typically includes pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is an adjunct non-pharmacological treatment commonly recommended by clinicians and often used by people with pain. OBJECTIVES To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of TENS to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine).To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the safety of TENS when used to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine).To identify possible sources of inconsistency in the approaches taken to evaluating the evidence related to TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) in the Cochrane Library with a view to recommending strategies to improve consistency in methodology and reporting.To highlight areas of remaining uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) with a view to recommending strategies to reduce any uncertainty. METHODS Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), in the Cochrane Library, across all years up to Issue 11 of 12, 2018.Selection of reviewsTwo authors independently screened the results of the electronic search by title and abstract against inclusion/exclusion criteria. We included all Cochrane Reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of TENS in people with chronic pain. We included reviews if they investigated the following: TENS versus sham; TENS versus usual care or no treatment/waiting list control; TENS plus active intervention versus active intervention alone; comparisons between different types of TENS; or TENS delivered using different stimulation parameters.Data extraction and analysisTwo authors independently extracted relevant data, assessed review quality using the AMSTAR checklist and applied GRADE judgements where required to individual reviews. Our primary outcomes included pain intensity and nature/incidence of adverse effects; our secondary outcomes included disability, health-related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change. MAIN RESULTS We included nine reviews investigating TENS use in people with defined chronic pain or in people with chronic conditions associated with ongoing pain. One review investigating TENS for phantom or stump-associated pain in people following amputation did not have any included studies. We therefore extracted data from eight reviews which represented 51 TENS-related RCTs representing 2895 TENS-comparison participants entered into the studies.The included reviews followed consistent methods and achieved overall high scores on the AMSTAR checklist. The evidence reported within each review was consistently rated as very low quality. Using review authors' assessment of risk of bias, there were significant methodological limitations in included studies; and for all reviews, sample sizes were consistently small (the majority of studies included fewer than 50 participants per group).Six of the eight reviews presented a narrative synthesis of included studies. Two reviews reported a pooled analysis.Primary and secondary outcomes One review reported a beneficial effect of TENS versus sham therapy at reducing pain intensity on a 0 to 10 scale (MD -1.58, 95% CI -2.08 to -1.09, P < 0.001, I² = 29%, P = 0.22, 5 studies, 207 participants). However the quality of the evidence was very low due to significant methodological limitations and imprecision. A second review investigating pain intensity performed a pooled analysis by combining studies that compared TENS to sham with studies that compared TENS to no intervention (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.34, P = 0.001, I² = 83%, P < 0.001). This pooled analysis was judged as offering very low quality evidence due to significant methodological limitations, large between-trial heterogeneity and imprecision. We considered the approach of combining sham and no intervention data to be problematic since we would predict these different comparisons may be estimating different true effects. All remaining reviews also reported pain intensity as an outcome measure; however the data were presented in narrative review form only.Due to methodological limitation and lack of useable data, we were unable to offer any meaningful report on the remaining primary outcome regarding nature/incidence of adverse effects, nor for the remaining secondary outcomes: disability, health-related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change for any comparisons.We found the included reviews had a number of inconsistencies when evaluating the evidence from TENS studies. Approaches to assessing risk of bias around the participant, personnel and outcome-assessor blinding were perhaps the most obvious area of difference across included reviews. We also found wide variability in terms of primary and secondary outcome measures, and inclusion/exclusion criteria for studies varied with respect to including studies which assessed immediate effects of single interventions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found the methodological quality of the reviews was good, but quality of the evidence within them was very low. We were therefore unable to conclude with any confidence that, in people with chronic pain, TENS is harmful, or beneficial for pain control, disability, health-related quality of life, use of pain relieving medicines, or global impression of change. We make recommendations with respect to future TENS study designs which may meaningfully reduce the uncertainty relating to the effectiveness of this treatment in people with chronic pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William Gibson
- The University of Notre Dame AustraliaSchool of Physiotherapy19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225)FremantleWestern AustraliaAustralia6959
| | - Benedict M Wand
- The University of Notre Dame AustraliaSchool of Physiotherapy19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225)FremantleWestern AustraliaAustralia6959
| | - Catherine Meads
- Anglia Ruskin UniversityFaculty of Health, Social Care and EducationEast Road CampusYoung Street SiteCambridgeUKCB1 1PT
| | - Mark J Catley
- University of South AustraliaSchool of Health SciencesGPO Box 2471AdelaideSouth AustraliaAustralia5001
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Brunel University LondonHealth Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Department of Clinical SciencesKingston LaneUxbridgeMiddlesexUKUB8 3PH
| | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic pain, considered to be pain lasting more than three months, is a common and often difficult to treat condition that can significantly impact upon function and quality of life. Treatment typically includes pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is an adjunct non-pharmacological treatment commonly recommended by clinicians and often used by people with pain. OBJECTIVES To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of TENS to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine).To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the safety of TENS when used to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine).To identify possible sources of inconsistency in the approaches taken to evaluating the evidence related to TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) in the Cochrane Library with a view to recommending strategies to improve consistency in methodology and reporting.To highlight areas of remaining uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) with a view to recommending strategies to reduce any uncertainty. METHODS Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), in the Cochrane Library, across all years up to Issue 11 of 12, 2018.Selection of reviewsTwo authors independently screened the results of the electronic search by title and abstract against inclusion/exclusion criteria. We included all Cochrane Reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of TENS in people with chronic pain. We included reviews if they investigated the following: TENS versus sham; TENS versus usual care or no treatment/waiting list control; TENS plus active intervention versus active intervention alone; comparisons between different types of TENS; or TENS delivered using different stimulation parameters.Data extraction and analysisTwo authors independently extracted relevant data, assessed review quality using the AMSTAR checklist and applied GRADE judgements where required to individual reviews. Our primary outcomes included pain intensity and nature/incidence of adverse effects; our secondary outcomes included disability, health-related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change. MAIN RESULTS We included nine reviews investigating TENS use in people with defined chronic pain or in people with chronic conditions associated with ongoing pain. One review investigating TENS for phantom or stump-associated pain in people following amputation did not have any included studies. We therefore extracted data from eight reviews which represented 51 TENS-related RCTs representing 2895 TENS-comparison participants entered into the studies.The included reviews followed consistent methods and achieved overall high scores on the AMSTAR checklist. The evidence reported within each review was consistently rated as very low quality. Using review authors' assessment of risk of bias, there were significant methodological limitations in included studies; and for all reviews, sample sizes were consistently small (the majority of studies included fewer than 50 participants per group).Six of the eight reviews presented a narrative synthesis of included studies. Two reviews reported a pooled analysis.Primary and secondary outcomes One review reported a beneficial effect of TENS versus sham therapy at reducing pain intensity on a 0 to 10 scale (MD -1.58, 95% CI -2.08 to -1.09, P < 0.001, I² = 29%, P = 0.22, 5 studies, 207 participants). However the quality of the evidence was very low due to significant methodological limitations and imprecision. A second review investigating pain intensity performed a pooled analysis by combining studies that compared TENS to sham with studies that compared TENS to no intervention (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.34, P = 0.001, I² = 83%, P < 0.001). This pooled analysis was judged as offering very low quality evidence due to significant methodological limitations, large between-trial heterogeneity and imprecision. We considered the approach of combining sham and no intervention data to be problematic since we would predict these different comparisons may be estimating different true effects. All remaining reviews also reported pain intensity as an outcome measure; however the data were presented in narrative review form only.Due to methodological limitation and lack of useable data, we were unable to offer any meaningful report on the remaining primary outcome regarding nature/incidence of adverse effects, nor for the remaining secondary outcomes: disability, health-related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change for any comparisons.We found the included reviews had a number of inconsistencies when evaluating the evidence from TENS studies. Approaches to assessing risk of bias around the participant, personnel and outcome-assessor blinding were perhaps the most obvious area of difference across included reviews. We also found wide variability in terms of primary and secondary outcome measures, and inclusion/exclusion criteria for studies varied with respect to including studies which assessed immediate effects of single interventions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We found the methodological quality of the reviews was good, but quality of the evidence within them was very low. We were therefore unable to conclude with any confidence that, in people with chronic pain, TENS is harmful, or beneficial for pain control, disability, health-related quality of life, use of pain relieving medicines, or global impression of change. We make recommendations with respect to future TENS study designs which may meaningfully reduce the uncertainty relating to the effectiveness of this treatment in people with chronic pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William Gibson
- The University of Notre Dame AustraliaSchool of Physiotherapy19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225)FremantleAustralia6959
| | - Benedict M Wand
- The University of Notre Dame AustraliaSchool of Physiotherapy19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225)FremantleAustralia6959
| | - Catherine Meads
- Anglia Ruskin UniversityFaculty of Health, Social Care and EducationEast Road CampusYoung Street SiteCambridgeUKCB1 1PT
| | - Mark J Catley
- University of South AustraliaSchool of Health SciencesGPO Box 2471AdelaideAustralia5001
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Brunel University LondonHealth Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Department of Clinical SciencesKingston LaneUxbridgeUKUB8 3PH
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
O'Keeffe M, Maher CG, Stanton TR, O'Connell NE, Deshpande S, Gross DP, O'Sullivan K. Mass media campaigns are needed to counter misconceptions about back pain and promote higher value care. Br J Sports Med 2018; 53:1261-1262. [PMID: 30377173 DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-099691] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/16/2018] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Mary O'Keeffe
- School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.,Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Chris G Maher
- School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.,Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Tasha R Stanton
- School of Health Sciences & PainAdelaide Consortium, The University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.,Neuroscience Research Australia, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Health Economics Research Group, Department of Clinical Sciences, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK
| | - Sameer Deshpande
- Department of Marketing, Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Douglas P Gross
- Department of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Kieran O'Sullivan
- Sports Spine Centre, Aspetar Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Hospital, Doha, Qatar.,School of Allied Health, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Metzler-Zebeli BU, Magowan E, Hollmann M, Ball MEE, Molnár A, Witter K, Ertl R, Hawken RJ, Lawlor PG, O'Connell NE, Aschenbach J, Zebeli Q. Differences in intestinal size, structure, and function contributing to feed efficiency in broiler chickens reared at geographically distant locations. Poult Sci 2018; 97:578-591. [PMID: 29253222 DOI: 10.3382/ps/pex332] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2017] [Accepted: 10/10/2017] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
The contribution of the intestinal tract to differences in residual feed intake (RFI) has been inconclusively studied in chickens so far. It is also not clear if RFI-related differences in intestinal function are similar in chickens raised in different environments. The objective was to investigate differences in nutrient retention, visceral organ size, intestinal morphology, jejunal permeability and expression of genes related to barrier function, and innate immune response in chickens of diverging RFI raised at 2 locations (L1: Austria; L2: UK). The experimental protocol was similar, and the same dietary formulation was fed at the 2 locations. Individual BW and feed intake (FI) of chickens (Cobb 500FF) were recorded from d 7 of life. At 5 wk of life, chickens (L1, n = 157; L2 = 192) were ranked according to their RFI, and low, medium, and high RFI chickens were selected (n = 9/RFI group, sex, and location). RFI values were similar between locations within the same RFI group and increased by 446 and 464 g from low to high RFI in females and males, respectively. Location, but not RFI rank, affected growth, nutrient retention, size of the intestine, and jejunal disaccharidase activity. Chickens from L2 had lower total body weight gain and mucosal enzyme activity but higher nutrient retention and longer intestines than chickens at L1. Parameters determined only at L1 showed increased crypt depth in the duodenum and jejunum and enhanced paracellular permeability in low vs. high RFI females. Jejunal expression of IL1B was lower in low vs. high RFI females at L2, whereas that of TLR4 at L1 and MCT1 at both locations was higher in low vs. high RFI males. Correlation analysis between intestinal parameters and feed efficiency metrics indicated that feed conversion ratio was more correlated to intestinal size and function than was RFI. In conclusion, the rearing environment greatly affected intestinal size and function, thereby contributing to the variation in chicken RFI observed across locations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B U Metzler-Zebeli
- University Clinic for Swine, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria
| | - E Magowan
- Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Agriculture Branch, Hillsborough, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom
| | - M Hollmann
- Institute of Animal Nutrition and Functional Plant Compounds, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria
| | - M E E Ball
- Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Agriculture Branch, Hillsborough, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom
| | - A Molnár
- Institute of Animal Nutrition and Functional Plant Compounds, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria
| | - K Witter
- Institute of Anatomy, Histology and Embryology, Department of Pathology, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria
| | - R Ertl
- VetCore facility for Research, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - P G Lawlor
- Teagasc, Pig Development Department, Animal & Grassland Research & Innovation Center, Moorepark, Fermoy, Ireland
| | - N E O'Connell
- Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - J Aschenbach
- Institute of Veterinary Physiology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Q Zebeli
- Institute of Animal Nutrition and Functional Plant Compounds, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Bagg MK, McLachlan AJ, Maher CG, Kamper SJ, Williams CM, Henschke N, Wand BM, Moseley GL, Hübscher M, O'Connell NE, van Tulder MW, Nikolakopoulou A, McAuley JH. Paracetamol, NSAIDS and opioid analgesics for chronic low back pain: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013045] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew K Bagg
- Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney NSW Australia
- University of New South Wales; Prince of Wales Clinical School; Sydney NSW Australia
- University of New South Wales; New College Village; Sydney NSW Australia
| | - Andrew J McLachlan
- University of Sydney; Faculty of Pharmacy; A15 - Pharmacy Room N405 Sydney NSW Australia 2006
- Concord Repatriation General Hospital; Centre for Education and Research on Ageing; Sydney NSW Australia
| | - Christopher G Maher
- University of Sydney; Sydney School of Public Health; Level 10 North, King George V Building, Missenden Road, Camperdown Sydney NSW Australia 2050
| | - Steven J Kamper
- University of Sydney; Sydney School of Public Health; Level 10 North, King George V Building, Missenden Road, Camperdown Sydney NSW Australia 2050
| | - Christopher M Williams
- University of Newcastle; School of Medicine and Public Health; Longworth Ave Callaghan New South Wales (NSW) Australia 2308
- Hunter Medical Research Institute; New Lambton NSW Australia 2305
| | | | - Benedict M Wand
- The University of Notre Dame Australia Fremantle; School of Physiotherapy; 19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225) Perth West Australia Australia 6959
| | - G L Moseley
- Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney NSW Australia
- University of South Australia; Sansom Institute for Health Research; Adelaide Australia
| | | | - Neil E O'Connell
- Brunel University London; Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Department of Clinical Sciences; Kingston Lane Uxbridge Middlesex UK UB8 3PH
| | - Maurits W van Tulder
- Vrije Universiteit; Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science and Amsterdam Movement Science institute; Amsterdam Netherlands
| | - Adriani Nikolakopoulou
- University of Bern; Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM); Bern Switzerland
| | - James H McAuley
- Neuroscience Research Australia; Sydney NSW Australia
- University of New South Wales; School of Medical Sciences; Sydney NSW Australia
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2010, Issue 9, and last updated in 2014, Issue 4. Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques aim to induce an electrical stimulation of the brain in an attempt to reduce chronic pain by directly altering brain activity. They include repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) and reduced impedance non-invasive cortical electrostimulation (RINCE). OBJECTIVES To evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive cortical stimulation techniques in the treatment of chronic pain. SEARCH METHODS For this update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS and clinical trials registers from July 2013 to October 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised and quasi-randomised studies of rTMS, CES, tDCS, RINCE and tRNS if they employed a sham stimulation control group, recruited patients over the age of 18 years with pain of three months' duration or more, and measured pain as an outcome. Outcomes of interest were pain intensity measured using visual analogue scales or numerical rating scales, disability, quality of life and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted and verified data. Where possible we entered data into meta-analyses, excluding studies judged as high risk of bias. We used the GRADE system to assess the quality of evidence for core comparisons, and created three 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS We included an additional 38 trials (involving 1225 randomised participants) in this update, making a total of 94 trials in the review (involving 2983 randomised participants). This update included a total of 42 rTMS studies, 11 CES, 36 tDCS, two RINCE and two tRNS. One study evaluated both rTMS and tDCS. We judged only four studies as low risk of bias across all key criteria. Using the GRADE criteria we judged the quality of evidence for each outcome, and for all comparisons as low or very low; in large part this was due to issues of blinding and of precision.rTMSMeta-analysis of rTMS studies versus sham for pain intensity at short-term follow-up (0 to < 1 week postintervention), (27 studies, involving 655 participants), demonstrated a small effect with heterogeneity (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.29 to -0.16, low-quality evidence). This equates to a 7% (95% CI 5% to 9%) reduction in pain, or a 0.40 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.32) point reduction on a 0 to 10 pain intensity scale, which does not meet the minimum clinically important difference threshold of 15% or greater. Pre-specified subgroup analyses did not find a difference between low-frequency stimulation (low-quality evidence) and rTMS applied to the prefrontal cortex compared to sham for reducing pain intensity at short-term follow-up (very low-quality evidence). High-frequency stimulation of the motor cortex in single-dose studies was associated with a small short-term reduction in pain intensity at short-term follow-up (low-quality evidence, pooled n = 249, SMD -0.38 95% CI -0.49 to -0.27). This equates to a 12% (95% CI 9% to 16%) reduction in pain, or a 0.77 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.99) point change on a 0 to 10 pain intensity scale, which does not achieve the minimum clinically important difference threshold of 15% or greater. The results from multiple-dose studies were heterogeneous and there was no evidence of an effect in this subgroup (very low-quality evidence). We did not find evidence that rTMS improved disability. Meta-analysis of studies of rTMS versus sham for quality of life (measured using the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) at short-term follow-up demonstrated a positive effect (MD -10.80 95% CI -15.04 to -6.55, low-quality evidence).CESFor CES (five studies, 270 participants) we found no evidence of a difference between active stimulation and sham (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.01, low-quality evidence) for pain intensity. We found no evidence relating to the effectiveness of CES on disability. One study (36 participants) of CES versus sham for quality of life (measured using the FIQ) at short-term follow-up demonstrated a positive effect (MD -25.05 95% CI -37.82 to -12.28, very low-quality evidence).tDCSAnalysis of tDCS studies (27 studies, 747 participants) showed heterogeneity and a difference between active and sham stimulation (SMD -0.43 95% CI -0.63 to -0.22, very low-quality evidence) for pain intensity. This equates to a reduction of 0.82 (95% CI 0.42 to 1.2) points, or a percentage change of 17% (95% CI 9% to 25%) of the control group outcome. This point estimate meets our threshold for a minimum clinically important difference, though the lower confidence interval is substantially below that threshold. We found evidence of small study bias in the tDCS analyses. We did not find evidence that tDCS improved disability. Meta-analysis of studies of tDCS versus sham for quality of life (measured using different scales across studies) at short-term follow-up demonstrated a positive effect (SMD 0.66 95% CI 0.21 to 1.11, low-quality evidence).Adverse eventsAll forms of non-invasive brain stimulation and sham stimulation appear to be frequently associated with minor or transient side effects and there were two reported incidences of seizure, both related to the active rTMS intervention in the included studies. However many studies did not adequately report adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is very low-quality evidence that single doses of high-frequency rTMS of the motor cortex and tDCS may have short-term effects on chronic pain and quality of life but multiple sources of bias exist that may have influenced the observed effects. We did not find evidence that low-frequency rTMS, rTMS applied to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and CES are effective for reducing pain intensity in chronic pain. The broad conclusions of this review have not changed substantially for this update. There remains a need for substantially larger, rigorously designed studies, particularly of longer courses of stimulation. Future evidence may substantially impact upon the presented results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil E O'Connell
- Brunel University LondonHealth Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Department of Clinical SciencesKingston LaneUxbridgeMiddlesexUKUB8 3PH
| | - Louise Marston
- University College LondonResearch Department of Primary Care & Population HealthRoyal Free Campus, Rowland HillLondonUKNW3 2PF
| | - Sally Spencer
- Edge Hill UniversityPostgraduate Medical InstituteSt Helens RoadOrmskirkLancashireUKL39 4QP
| | - Lorraine H DeSouza
- Brunel University LondonDepartment of Clinical Sciences/Health Ageing Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and SocietiesKingston LaneUxbridgeMiddlesexUKUB8 3PH
| | - Benedict M Wand
- The University of Notre Dame Australia FremantleSchool of Physiotherapy19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225)PerthWest AustraliaAustralia6959
| | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
Chang WJ, O'Connell NE, Beckenkamp PR, Alhassani G, Liston MB, Schabrun SM. Altered Primary Motor Cortex Structure, Organization, and Function in Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Journal of Pain 2018; 19:341-359. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2017.10.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2017] [Revised: 10/15/2017] [Accepted: 10/19/2017] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
|
33
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2010, Issue 9, and last updated in 2014, Issue 4. Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques aim to induce an electrical stimulation of the brain in an attempt to reduce chronic pain by directly altering brain activity. They include repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), transcranial random noise stimulation (tRNS) and reduced impedance non-invasive cortical electrostimulation (RINCE). OBJECTIVES To evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive cortical stimulation techniques in the treatment of chronic pain. SEARCH METHODS For this update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS and clinical trials registers from July 2013 to October 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised and quasi-randomised studies of rTMS, CES, tDCS, RINCE and tRNS if they employed a sham stimulation control group, recruited patients over the age of 18 years with pain of three months' duration or more, and measured pain as an outcome. Outcomes of interest were pain intensity measured using visual analogue scales or numerical rating scales, disability, quality of life and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted and verified data. Where possible we entered data into meta-analyses, excluding studies judged as high risk of bias. We used the GRADE system to assess the quality of evidence for core comparisons, and created three 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS We included an additional 38 trials (involving 1225 randomised participants) in this update, making a total of 94 trials in the review (involving 2983 randomised participants). This update included a total of 42 rTMS studies, 11 CES, 36 tDCS, two RINCE and two tRNS. One study evaluated both rTMS and tDCS. We judged only four studies as low risk of bias across all key criteria. Using the GRADE criteria we judged the quality of evidence for each outcome, and for all comparisons as low or very low; in large part this was due to issues of blinding and of precision.rTMSMeta-analysis of rTMS studies versus sham for pain intensity at short-term follow-up (0 to < 1 week postintervention), (27 studies, involving 655 participants), demonstrated a small effect with heterogeneity (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.29 to -0.16, low-quality evidence). This equates to a 7% (95% CI 5% to 9%) reduction in pain, or a 0.40 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.32) point reduction on a 0 to 10 pain intensity scale, which does not meet the minimum clinically important difference threshold of 15% or greater. Pre-specified subgroup analyses did not find a difference between low-frequency stimulation (low-quality evidence) and rTMS applied to the prefrontal cortex compared to sham for reducing pain intensity at short-term follow-up (very low-quality evidence). High-frequency stimulation of the motor cortex in single-dose studies was associated with a small short-term reduction in pain intensity at short-term follow-up (low-quality evidence, pooled n = 249, SMD -0.38 95% CI -0.49 to -0.27). This equates to a 12% (95% CI 9% to 16%) reduction in pain, or a 0.77 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.99) point change on a 0 to 10 pain intensity scale, which does not achieve the minimum clinically important difference threshold of 15% or greater. The results from multiple-dose studies were heterogeneous and there was no evidence of an effect in this subgroup (very low-quality evidence). We did not find evidence that rTMS improved disability. Meta-analysis of studies of rTMS versus sham for quality of life (measured using the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) at short-term follow-up demonstrated a positive effect (MD -10.80 95% CI -15.04 to -6.55, low-quality evidence).CESFor CES (five studies, 270 participants) we found no evidence of a difference between active stimulation and sham (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.01, low-quality evidence) for pain intensity. We found no evidence relating to the effectiveness of CES on disability. One study (36 participants) of CES versus sham for quality of life (measured using the FIQ) at short-term follow-up demonstrated a positive effect (MD -25.05 95% CI -37.82 to -12.28, very low-quality evidence).tDCSAnalysis of tDCS studies (27 studies, 747 participants) showed heterogeneity and a difference between active and sham stimulation (SMD -0.43 95% CI -0.63 to -0.22, very low-quality evidence) for pain intensity. This equates to a reduction of 0.82 (95% CI 0.42 to 1.2) points, or a percentage change of 17% (95% CI 9% to 25%) of the control group outcome. This point estimate meets our threshold for a minimum clinically important difference, though the lower confidence interval is substantially below that threshold. We found evidence of small study bias in the tDCS analyses. We did not find evidence that tDCS improved disability. Meta-analysis of studies of tDCS versus sham for quality of life (measured using different scales across studies) at short-term follow-up demonstrated a positive effect (SMD 0.66 95% CI 0.21 to 1.11, low-quality evidence).Adverse eventsAll forms of non-invasive brain stimulation and sham stimulation appear to be frequently associated with minor or transient side effects and there were two reported incidences of seizure, both related to the active rTMS intervention in the included studies. However many studies did not adequately report adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is very low-quality evidence that single doses of high-frequency rTMS of the motor cortex and tDCS may have short-term effects on chronic pain and quality of life but multiple sources of bias exist that may have influenced the observed effects. We did not find evidence that low-frequency rTMS, rTMS applied to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and CES are effective for reducing pain intensity in chronic pain. The broad conclusions of this review have not changed substantially for this update. There remains a need for substantially larger, rigorously designed studies, particularly of longer courses of stimulation. Future evidence may substantially impact upon the presented results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil E O'Connell
- Brunel UniversityDepartment of Clinical Sciences/Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and SocietiesKingston LaneUxbridgeUKUB8 3PH
| | - Louise Marston
- University College LondonResearch Department of Primary Care & Population HealthRoyal Free Campus, Rowland HillLondonUKNW3 2PF
| | - Sally Spencer
- Edge Hill UniversityPostgraduate Medical InstituteSt Helens RoadOrmskirkUKL39 4QP
| | - Lorraine H DeSouza
- Brunel University LondonDepartment of Clinical Sciences/Health Ageing Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and SocietiesKingston LaneUxbridgeUKUB8 3PH
| | - Benedict M Wand
- The University of Notre Dame AustraliaSchool of Physiotherapy19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225)FremantleAustralia6959
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Gittings PM, Grisbrook TL, Edgar DW, Wood FM, Wand BM, O'Connell NE. Resistance training for rehabilitation after burn injury: A systematic literature review & meta-analysis. Burns 2017; 44:731-751. [PMID: 29017743 DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2017.08.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2017] [Revised: 07/14/2017] [Accepted: 08/11/2017] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM Resistance training is beneficial for rehabilitation in many clinical conditions, though this has not been systematically reviewed in burns. The objective was to determine the effectiveness of resistance training on muscle strength, lean mass, function, quality of life and pain, in children and adults after burn injury. METHODS Medline & EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL and CENTRAL were searched from inception to October 2016. Studies were identified that implemented resistance training in rehabilitation. Data were combined and included in meta-analyses for muscle strength and lean mass. Otherwise, narrative analysis was completed. The quality of evidence for each outcome was summarised and rated using the GRADE framework. RESULTS Eleven studies matched our inclusion criteria. Primary analysis did not demonstrate significant improvements for increasing muscle strength (SMD 0.74, 95% CI -0.02 to 1.50, p=0.06). Sensitivity analysis to correct an apparent anomaly in published data suggested a positive effect (SMD 0.37, 95% CI 0.08-0.65, p=0.01). Psychological quality of life demonstrated benefit from training (MD=25.3, 95% CI 3.94-49.7). All studies were rated as having high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence was rated as low or very low. CONCLUSION Further research with robust methodology is recommended to assess the potential benefit suggested in this review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul M Gittings
- State Adult Burn Service, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia; Fiona Wood Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia; School of Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia.
| | - Tiffany L Grisbrook
- Fiona Wood Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia; School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science, Curtin University, Bentley, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Dale W Edgar
- State Adult Burn Service, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia; Fiona Wood Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia; Burn Injury Research Node, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Fiona M Wood
- State Adult Burn Service, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia; Fiona Wood Foundation, Perth, Western Australia, Australia; School of Medicine and Pharmacology, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Benedict M Wand
- School of Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Department of Clinical Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neuropathic pain, which is due to nerve disease or damage, represents a significant burden on people and society. It can be particularly unpleasant and achieving adequate symptom control can be difficult. Non-pharmacological methods of treatment are often employed by people with neuropathic pain and may include transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS). This review supersedes one Cochrane Review 'Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic pain' (Nnoaham 2014) and one withdrawn protocol 'Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for neuropathic pain in adults' (Claydon 2014). This review replaces the original protocol for neuropathic pain that was withdrawn. OBJECTIVES To determine the analgesic effectiveness of TENS versus placebo (sham) TENS, TENS versus usual care, TENS versus no treatment and TENS in addition to usual care versus usual care alone in the management of neuropathic pain in adults. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, PEDro, LILACS (up to September 2016) and various clinical trials registries. We also searched bibliographies of included studies for further relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials where TENS was evaluated in the treatment of central or peripheral neuropathic pain. We included studies if they investigated the following: TENS versus placebo (sham) TENS, TENS versus usual care, TENS versus no treatment and TENS in addition to usual care versus usual care alone in the management of neuropathic pain in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently screened all database search results and identified papers requiring full-text assessment. Subsequently, two review authors independently applied inclusion/exclusion criteria to these studies. The same review authors then independently extracted data, assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane standard tool and rated the quality of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS We included 15 studies with 724 participants. We found a range of treatment protocols in terms of duration of care, TENS application times and intensity of application. Briefly, duration of care ranged from four days through to three months. Similarly, we found variation of TENS application times; from 15 minutes up to hourly sessions applied four times daily. We typically found intensity of TENS set to comfortable perceptible tingling with very few studies titrating the dose to maintain this perception. Of the comparisons, we had planned to explore, we were only able to undertake a quantitative synthesis for TENS versus sham TENS. Insufficient data and large diversity in the control conditions prevented us from undertaking a quantitative synthesis for the remaining comparisons.For TENS compared to sham TENS, five studies were suitable for pooled analysis. We described the remainder of the studies in narrative form. Overall, we judged 11 studies at high risk of bias, and four at unclear risk. Due to the small number of eligible studies, the high levels of risk of bias across the studies and small sample sizes, we rated the quality of the evidence as very low for the pooled analysis and very low individual GRADE rating of outcomes from single studies. For the individual studies discussed in narrative form, the methodological limitations, quality of reporting and heterogeneous nature of interventions compared did not allow for reliable overall estimates of the effect of TENS.Five studies (across various neuropathic conditions) were suitable for pooled analysis of TENS versus sham TENS investigating change in pain intensity using a visual analogue scale. We found a mean postintervention difference in effect size favouring TENS of -1.58 (95% confidence interval (CI) -2.08 to -1.09, P < 0.00001, n = 207, six comparisons from five studies) (very low quality evidence). There was no significant heterogeneity in this analysis. While this exceeded our prespecified minimally important difference for pain outcomes, we assessed the quality of evidence as very low meaning we have very little confidence in this effect estimate and the true effect is likely to be substantially different from that reported in this review. Only one study of these five investigated health related quality of life as an outcome meaning we were unable to report on this outcome in this comparison. Similarly, we were unable to report on global impression of change or changes in analgesic use in this pooled analysis.Ten small studies compared TENS to some form of usual care. However, there was great diversity in what constituted usual care, precluding pooling of data. Most of these studies found either no difference in pain outcomes between TENS versus other active treatments or favoured the comparator intervention (very low quality evidence). We were unable to report on other primary and secondary outcomes in these single trials (health-related quality of life, global impression of change and changes in analgesic use).Of the 15 included studies, three reported adverse events which were minor and limited to 'skin irritation' at or around the site of electrode placement (very low quality evidence). Three studies reported no adverse events while the remainder did not report any detail with regard adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS In this review, we reported on the comparison between TENS and sham TENS. The quality of the evidence was very low meaning we were unable to confidently state whether TENS is effective for pain control in people with neuropathic pain. The very low quality of evidence means we have very limited confidence in the effect estimate reported; the true effect is likely to be substantially different. We make recommendations with respect to future TENS study designs which may meaningfully reduce the uncertainty relating to the effectiveness of this treatment modality.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William Gibson
- School of Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia, 19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225), Fremantle, Western Australia, Australia, 6959
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
36
|
Metzler-Zebeli BU, Magowan E, Hollmann M, Ball MEE, Molnár A, Lawlor PG, Hawken RJ, O'Connell NE, Zebeli Q. Assessing serum metabolite profiles as predictors for feed efficiency in broiler chickens reared at geographically distant locations. Br Poult Sci 2017; 58:729-738. [PMID: 28805076 DOI: 10.1080/00071668.2017.1362688] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
1. The objective of this study was to investigate differences in growth performance, serum intermediary metabolites, acute-phase proteins and white blood cells in low, medium and high-residual feed intake (RFI) chickens. It was also assessed if the environment affects the feed efficiency (FE) and FE-related performance and serum profiles of chickens. 2. Individual body weight (BW) and feed intake (FI) were recorded from d 7 of life. At 5 weeks of age, female and male broiler chickens (Cobb 500) were selected according to their RFI (L1: Austria; L2: UK; n = 9/RFI group, sex and locatity -45on) and blood samples were collected. 3. Chickens at L1 had similar FI but a 15% higher BW gain compared to chickens at L2. The RFI values of female chickens were -231, 8 and 215 g and those of male chickens -197, 0 and 267 g for low, medium and high RFI, respectively. 4. Location affected serum glucose, urea, cholesterol, non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA) and ovotransferrin in females, and serum glucose and triglycerides in male chickens. Serum uric acid and NEFA linearly increased from low to high RFI in females, whereas in males, cholesterol showed the same linear response from low to high RFI. Serum alpha-1-acid glycoprotein and blood heterophil-to-lymphocyte ratio linearly increased by 35% and 68%, respectively, from low to high RFI but only in male chickens at L1. 5. Regression analysis showed significant positive relationships between RFI and serum uric acid (R2 = 0.49) and cholesterol (R2 = 0.13). 6. It was concluded that RFI-related variation in serum metabolites of chickens was largely similar for the two environments and that serum metabolite patterns could be used to predict RFI in chickens.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B U Metzler-Zebeli
- a University Clinic for Swine, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health , University of Veterinary Medicine , Vienna , Austria
| | - E Magowan
- b Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute , Agriculture Branch , Hillsborough , Northern Ireland , UK
| | - M Hollmann
- c Institute of Animal Nutrition and Functional Plant Compounds, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health , University of Veterinary Medicine , Vienna , Austria
| | - M E E Ball
- b Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute , Agriculture Branch , Hillsborough , Northern Ireland , UK
| | - A Molnár
- b Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute , Agriculture Branch , Hillsborough , Northern Ireland , UK
| | - P G Lawlor
- d Teagasc Pig Development Department , Animal & Grassland Research & Innovation Centre , Fermoy , Ireland
| | - R J Hawken
- e Cobb-Vantress Inc. , Siloam Springs , AR , USA
| | - N E O'Connell
- f Institute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences , Queen's University Belfast , Belfast , UK
| | - Q Zebeli
- b Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute , Agriculture Branch , Hillsborough , Northern Ireland , UK
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
O'Connell NE, Kamper SJ, Stevens ML, Li Q. Twin Peaks? No Evidence of Bimodal Distribution of Outcomes in Clinical Trials of Nonsurgical Interventions for Spinal Pain: An Exploratory Analysis. The Journal of Pain 2017; 18:964-972. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2017.03.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2016] [Revised: 03/02/2017] [Accepted: 03/13/2017] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
|
38
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cerebral palsy (CP) is a neurodevelopmental disorder resulting from an injury to the developing brain. It is the most common form of childhood disability with prevalence rates of between 1.5 and 3.8 per 1000 births reported worldwide. The primary impairments associated with CP include reduced muscle strength and reduced cardiorespiratory fitness, resulting in difficulties performing activities such as dressing, walking and negotiating stairs.Exercise is defined as a planned, structured and repetitive activity that aims to improve fitness, and it is a commonly used intervention for people with CP. Aerobic and resistance training may improve activity (i.e. the ability to execute a task) and participation (i.e. involvement in a life situation) through their impact on the primary impairments of CP. However, to date, there has been no comprehensive review of exercise interventions for people with CP. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of exercise interventions in people with CP, primarily in terms of activity, participation and quality of life. Secondary outcomes assessed body functions and body structures. Comparators of interest were no treatment, usual care or an alternative type of exercise intervention. SEARCH METHODS In June 2016 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, nine other databases and four trials registers. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of children, adolescents and adults with CP. We included studies of aerobic exercise, resistance training, and 'mixed training' (a combination of at least two of aerobic exercise, resistance training and anaerobic training). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts and potentially relevant full-text reports for eligibility; extracted all relevant data and conducted 'Risk of bias' and GRADE assessments. MAIN RESULTS We included 29 trials (926 participants); 27 included children and adolescents up to the age of 19 years, three included adolescents and young adults (10 to 22 years), and one included adults over 20 years. Males constituted 53% of the sample. Five trials were conducted in the USA; four in Australia; two in Egypt, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, the Netherlands, and the UK; three in Greece; and one apiece in India, Italy, Norway, and South Africa.Twenty-six trials included people with spastic CP only; three trials included children and adolescents with spastic and other types of CP. Twenty-one trials included people who were able to walk with or without assistive devices, four trials also included people who used wheeled mobility devices in most settings, and one trial included people who used wheeled mobility devices only. Three trials did not report the functional ability of participants. Only two trials reported participants' manual ability. Eight studies compared aerobic exercise to usual care, while 15 compared resistance training and 4 compared mixed training to usual care or no treatment. Two trials compared aerobic exercise to resistance training. We judged all trials to be at high risk of bias overall.We found low-quality evidence that aerobic exercise improves gross motor function in the short term (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 1.04, N = 65, 3 studies) and intermediate term (mean difference (MD) 12.96%, 95% CI 0.52% to 25.40%, N = 12, 1 study). Aerobic exercise does not improve gait speed in the short term (MD 0.09 m/s, 95% CI -0.11 m/s to 0.28 m/s, N = 82, 4 studies, very low-quality evidence) or intermediate term (MD -0.17 m/s, 95% CI -0.59 m/s to 0.24 m/s, N = 12, 1 study, low-quality evidence). No trial assessed participation or quality of life following aerobic exercise.We found low-quality evidence that resistance training does not improve gross motor function (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.43, N = 164, 7 studies), gait speed (MD 0.03 m/s, 95% CI -0.02 m/s to 0.07 m/s, N = 185, 8 studies), participation (SMD 0.34, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.70, N = 127, 2 studies) or parent-reported quality of life (MD 12.70, 95% CI -5.63 to 31.03, n = 12, 1 study) in the short term. There is also low-quality evidence that resistance training does not improve gait speed (MD -0.03 m/s, 95% CI -0.17 m/s to 0.11 m/s, N = 84, 3 studies), gross motor function (SMD 0.13, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.55, N = 85, 3 studies) or participation (MD 0.37, 95% CI -6.61 to 7.35, N = 36, 1 study) in the intermediate term.We found low-quality evidence that mixed training does not improve gross motor function (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.33, N = 163, 4 studies) or gait speed (MD 0.10 m/s, -0.07 m/s to 0.27 m/s, N = 58, 1 study) but does improve participation (MD 0.40, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.67, N = 65, 1 study) in the short-term.There is no difference between resistance training and aerobic exercise in terms of the effect on gross motor function in the short term (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.50 to 0.55, N = 56, 2 studies, low-quality evidence).Thirteen trials did not report adverse events, seven reported no adverse events, and nine reported non-serious adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The quality of evidence for all conclusions is low to very low. As included trials have small sample sizes, heterogeneity may be underestimated, resulting in considerable uncertainty relating to effect estimates. For children with CP, there is evidence that aerobic exercise may result in a small improvement in gross motor function, though it does not improve gait speed. There is evidence that resistance training does not improve gait speed, gross motor function, participation or quality of life among children with CP.Based on the evidence available, exercise appears to be safe for people with CP; only 55% of trials, however, reported adverse events or stated that they monitored adverse events. There is a need for large, high-quality, well-reported RCTs that assess the effectiveness of exercise in terms of activity and participation, before drawing any firm conclusions on the effectiveness of exercise for people with CP. Research is also required to determine if current exercise guidelines for the general population are effective and feasible for people with CP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer M Ryan
- Brunel University LondonInstitute of Environment, Health and SocietiesKingston LaneUxbridgeMiddlesexUKUB8 3PH
| | | | - Stephen G Noorduyn
- McMaster UniversityCanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research1280 Main Street West, Rm. 2C1McMaster UniversityHamiltonONCanadaL8S 4L8
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Brunel UniversityDepartment of Clinical Sciences/Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and SocietiesKingston LaneUxbridgeMiddlesexUKUB8 3PH
| | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
O'Connell NE, Cook CE, Wand BM, Ward SP. Clinical guidelines for low back pain: A critical review of consensus and inconsistencies across three major guidelines. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2017; 30:968-980. [PMID: 29103554 DOI: 10.1016/j.berh.2017.05.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 110] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2017] [Revised: 03/07/2017] [Accepted: 04/23/2017] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
Given the scale and cost of the low back pain problem, it is imperative that healthcare professionals involved in the care of people with low back pain have access to up-to-date, evidence-based information to assist them in treatment decision-making. Clinical guidelines exist to promote the consistent best practice, to reduce unwarranted variation and to reduce the use of low-value interventions in patient care. Recent decades have witnessed the publication of a number of such guidelines. In this narrative review, we consider three selected international interdisciplinary guidelines for the management of low back pain. Guideline development methods, consistent recommendations and inconsistencies between these guidelines are critically discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil E O'Connell
- Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Department of Clinical Sciences, Brunel University London, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, United Kingdom.
| | - Chad E Cook
- Department of Orthopaedics, Duke University, 2200 W. Main St. Ste B230, Durham, NC 27705, USA
| | - Benedict M Wand
- School of Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Australia
| | - Stephen P Ward
- Department of Pain Medicine, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Eastern Rd, Brighton, BN2 5BE, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Zhao YG, O'Connell NE, Yan T. Prediction of enteric methane emissions from sheep offered fresh perennial ryegrass () using data measured in indirect open-circuit respiration chambers. J Anim Sci 2017; 94:2425-35. [PMID: 27285918 DOI: 10.2527/jas.2016-0334] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Development of effective methane (CH) mitigation strategies for grazing sheep requires accurate prediction tools. The present study aimed to identify key parameters influencing enteric CH emissions and develop prediction equations for enteric CH emissions from sheep offered fresh grass. The data used were collected from 82 sheep offered fresh perennial ryegrass () as sole diets in 6 metabolism experiments (data from non-grass-only diets were not used). Sheep were from breeds of Highlander, Texel, Scottish Blackface, and Swaledale at the age of 5 to 18 mo and weighing from 24.5 to 62.7 kg. Grass was harvested daily from 6 swards on contrasting harvest dates (May to December). Before the commencement of each study, the experimental sward was harvested at a residual height of 4 cm and allowed to grow for 2 to 4 wk. The feeding trials commenced when the grass sward was suitable to zero grazing (average grass height = 15 cm), thus offering grass of a quality similar to what grazing animals would receive under routine grazing management. Sheep were housed in individual pens for 14 d and then moved to individual calorimeter chambers for 4 d. Feed intake, fecal and urine outputs, and CH emissions were measured during the final 4 d. Data were analyzed using the REML procedure to develop prediction equations for CH emissions. Linear and multiple prediction equations were developed using BW, DMI, GE intake (GEI), and grass chemical concentrations (DM, OM, water-soluble carbohydrates [WSC], NDF, ADF, nitrogen [N], GE, DE, and ME) as explanatory variables. The mean CH production was 21.1 g/kg DMI or 0.062 MJ/MJ GEI. Dry matter intake and GEI were much more accurate predictors for CH emissions than BW ( < 0.001, = 0.86 and = 0.87 vs. = 0.09, respectively). Adding grass DE and ME concentrations and grass nutrient concentrations (e.g., OM, N, GE, NDF, and WSC) to the relationships between DMI or GEI and CH emissions improved prediction accuracy with values increased to 0.93. Models based on farm-level data, for example, BW and grass nutrient (i.e., DM, GE, OM, and N) concentrations, were also developed and performed satisfactorily ( < 0.001, = 0.63). These models can contribute to improve prediction accuracy for enteric CH emissions from sheep grazing on ryegrass pasture.
Collapse
|
41
|
Little MW, O'Connell NE, Welsh MD, Mulligan FJ, Ferris CP. Concentrate supplementation of a diet based on medium-quality grass silage for 4 weeks prepartum: Effects on cow performance, health, metabolic status, and immune function. J Dairy Sci 2017; 100:4457-4474. [PMID: 28342599 DOI: 10.3168/jds.2016-11806] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2016] [Accepted: 12/13/2016] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Because negative energy balance (EB) contributes to transition-period immune dysfunction in dairy cows, dietary management strategies should aim to minimize negative EB during this time. Prepartum diets that oversupply energy may exacerbate negative EB in early lactation, with detrimental effects on immune function. However, with lower body condition score (BCS) cows, it has been shown that offering concentrates in addition to a grass silage-based diet when confined during an 8-wk dry period resulted in increased neutrophil function in early lactation. The aim of this study was to examine if similar benefits occur when concentrate feeding was restricted to a 4-wk period prepartum. Twenty-six multiparous and 22 primiparous Holstein-Friesian cows were offered ad libitum access to medium-quality grass silage until 28 d before their predicted calving dates (actual mean of 32 d prepartum; standard deviation = 6.4). At this time multiparous cows had a mean BCS of 2.9 (standard deviation = 0.12) and primiparous cows a mean BCS of 3.0 (standard deviation = 0.14) on a 1 to 5 scale. Cows were then allocated in a balanced manner to 1 of 2 treatments (13 multiparous cows and 11 primiparous cows on each treatment): silage only (SO) or silage plus concentrates (S+C) until calving. Cows on SO were offered the same grass silage ad libitum. Cows on S+C were offered an ad libitum mixed ration of the same grass silage and additional concentrates in a 60:40 dry matter (DM) ratio, which provided a mean concentrate DM intake (DMI) of 4.5 kg/cow per d. After calving, all cows were offered a common mixed ration (grass silage and concentrates, 40:60 DM ratio) for 70 d postpartum. Offering concentrates in addition to grass silage during the 4 wk prepartum increased prepartum DMI (12.0 versus 10.1 kg/cow per d), EB (+40.0 versus +10.6 MJ/cow per d), and body weight (BW; 640 versus 628 kg), and tended to increase BCS (3.02 versus 2.97). However, postpartum DMI, milk yield, milk composition, BW change, BCS change, serum nonesterified fatty acid, and β-hydroxybutryrate concentrations, health, and corpus luteum measures were unaffected by treatment. The in vitro assays of neutrophil phagocytosis, neutrophil oxidative burst, and interferon gamma production, conducted on blood samples obtained at d 14 prepartum and d 3, 7, 14, and 21 postpartum, were unaffected by treatment. Primiparous cows had higher phagocytic fluorescence intensity at d 14 prepartum and d 3 and 7 postpartum; a higher percentage of neutrophils undergoing oxidative burst at d 3, 7, and 21 postpartum; and a higher oxidative burst fluorescence intensity at d 14 prepartum and d 7, 14, and 21 postpartum compared with multiparous cows. This suggests that neutrophil function of primiparous cows was less sensitive to the changes occurring during the transition period than that of multiparous cows. In conclusion, offering concentrates during the 4-wk period prepartum had no effect on postpartum DMI, milk yield, body tissue mobilization, EB, measures of neutrophil or lymphocyte function, health, or corpus luteum activity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M W Little
- Sustainable Agri-Food Sciences Division, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Large Park, Hillsborough, BT26 6DR, United Kingdom; School of Biological Sciences, Institute for Global Food Security, Queen's University Belfast, 18-30 Malone Road, Belfast, BT9 5BN, United Kingdom.
| | - N E O'Connell
- School of Biological Sciences, Institute for Global Food Security, Queen's University Belfast, 18-30 Malone Road, Belfast, BT9 5BN, United Kingdom
| | - M D Welsh
- Veterinary Sciences Division, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Stoney Road, Belfast, BT4 3SD, United Kingdom
| | - F J Mulligan
- School of Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
| | - C P Ferris
- Sustainable Agri-Food Sciences Division, Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Large Park, Hillsborough, BT26 6DR, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Bagg MK, Hübscher M, Rabey M, Wand BM, O'Hagan E, Moseley GL, Stanton TR, Maher CG, Goodall S, Saing S, O'Connell NE, Luomajoki H, McAuley JH. The RESOLVE Trial for people with chronic low back pain: protocol for a randomised clinical trial. J Physiother 2017; 63:47-48. [PMID: 27939089 DOI: 10.1016/j.jphys.2016.11.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2016] [Revised: 10/16/2016] [Accepted: 11/03/2016] [Indexed: 10/20/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Low back pain is the leading worldwide cause of disability, and results in significant personal hardship. Most available treatments, when tested in high-quality randomised, controlled trials, achieve only modest improvements in pain, at best. Recently, treatments that target central nervous system function have been developed and tested in small studies. Combining treatments that target central nervous system function with traditional treatments directed towards functioning of the back is a promising approach that has yet to be tested in adequately powered, prospectively registered, clinical trials. The RESOLVE trial will be the first high-quality assessment of two treatment programs that combine central nervous system-directed and traditional interventions in order to improve chronic low back pain. AIM To compare the effectiveness of two treatment programs that combine central nervous system-directed and traditional interventions at reducing pain intensity at 18 weeks post randomisation in a randomised clinical trial of people with chronic low back pain. DESIGN Two-group, randomised, clinical trial with blinding of participants and assessors. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING Two hundred and seventy-five participants with chronic low back pain that has persisted longer than 3 months and no specific spinal pathology will be recruited from the community and primary care in Sydney, Australia. INTERVENTIONS Both of the interventions contain treatments that target central nervous system function combined with treatments directed towards functioning of the back. Adherence to the intervention will be monitored using an individual treatment diary and adverse events recorded through passive capture. Participants are informed prior to providing informed consent that some of the treatments are not active. Blinding is maintained by not disclosing any further information. Complete disclosure of the contents of the intervention has been made with the UNSW HREC (HC15357) and an embargoed project registration has been made on the Open Science Framework to meet the Declaration of Helsinki requirement for transparent reporting of trial methods a priori. INTERVENTION A Participants randomised to Intervention A will receive a 12-session treatment program delivered as 60-minute sessions, scheduled approximately weekly, over a period of 12 to 18 weeks. All treatment sessions are one-on-one. The program includes a home treatment component of 30minutes, five times per week. The intervention comprises discussion of the participant's low back pain experience, graded sensory training, graded motor imagery training and graded, precision-focused and feedback-enriched, functional movement training. Treatment progression is determined by participant proficiency, with mandatory advancement at set time points with respect to a standard protocol. INTERVENTION B Participants randomised to Intervention B will receive a 12-session treatment program of the same duration and structure as Intervention A. The intervention comprises discussion of the participant's low back pain experience, transcranial direct current stimulation to the motor and pre-frontal cortices, cranial electrical stimulation, and low-intensity laser therapy and pulsed electromagnetic energy to the area of greatest pain. Treatment is delivered according to published recommendations and progressed with respect to a standard protocol. MEASUREMENTS The primary outcome is pain intensity at 18 weeks post randomisation. Secondary outcomes will include disability, depression, pain catastrophising, kinesiophobia, beliefs about back pain, pain self-efficacy, quality of life, healthcare resource use, and treatment credibility. Assessment will occur at baseline and at 18, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation. Treatment credibility will be assessed at baseline and 2 weeks after randomisation only. ANALYSIS A statistician blinded to group status will analyse the data by intention-to-treat using linear mixed models with random intercepts. Linear contrasts will be constructed to compare the adjusted mean change (continuous variables) in outcome from baseline to each time point between intervention A and intervention B. This will provide effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals for any difference between the interventions. SIGNIFICANCE Preliminary data suggest that combining treatments that target central nervous system function with traditional interventions is a promising approach to chronic low back pain treatment. In the context of modest effects on pain intensity from most available treatments, this approach may lead to improved clinical outcomes for people with chronic low back pain. The trial will determine which, if either, of two treatment programs that combine central nervous system-directed and traditional interventions is more effective at reducing pain intensity in a chronic low back pain cohort. Central nervous system-directed interventions constitute a completely new treatment paradigm for chronic low back pain management. The results have the potential to be far reaching and change current physiotherapy management of chronic low back pain in Australia and internationally.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew K Bagg
- Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Markus Hübscher
- Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Martin Rabey
- Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
| | - Benedict M Wand
- School of Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Australia
| | - Edel O'Hagan
- Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia
| | - G Lorimer Moseley
- Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; Sansom Institute for Health Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Tasha R Stanton
- Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; Sansom Institute for Health Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Chris G Maher
- The George Institute for Global Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Stephen Goodall
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Sopany Saing
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
| | - Hannu Luomajoki
- School of Health Professions, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Institute of Physiotherapy, Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - James H McAuley
- Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia; Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2005, Issue 4 (and last updated in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2013 issue 8), on local anaesthetic blockade (LASB) of the sympathetic chain to treat people with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy of LASB for the treatment of pain in CRPS and to evaluate the incidence of adverse effects of the procedure. SEARCH METHODS For this update we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 9), MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), LILACS (Birme), conference abstracts of the World Congresses of the International Association for the Study of Pain, and various clinical trial registers up to September 2015. We also searched bibliographies from retrieved articles for additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effect of sympathetic blockade with local anaesthetics in children or adults with CRPS compared to placebo, no treatment, or alternative treatments. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The outcomes of interest were reduction in pain intensity, the proportion who achieved moderate or substantial pain relief, the duration of pain relief, and the presence of adverse effects in each treatment arm. We assessed the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and created a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS We included an additional four studies (N = 154) in this update. For this update, we excluded studies that did not follow up patients for more than 48 hours. As a result, we excluded four studies from the previous review in this update. Overall we included 12 studies (N = 461), all of which we judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias. Overall, the quality of evidence was low to very low, downgraded due to limitations, inconsistency, imprecision, indirectness, or a combination of these.Two small studies compared LASB to placebo/sham (N = 32). They did not demonstrate significant short-term benefit for LASB for pain intensity (moderate quality evidence).One small study (N = 36) at high risk of bias compared thoracic sympathetic block with corticosteroid and local anaesthetic versus injection of the same agents into the subcutaneous space, reporting statistically significant and clinically important differences in pain intensity at one-year follow-up but not at short term follow-up (very low quality evidence).Of two studies that investigated LASB as an addition to rehabilitation treatment, the only study that reported pain outcomes demonstrated no additional benefit from LASB (very low quality evidence).Eight small randomised studies compared sympathetic blockade to various other active interventions. Most studies found no difference in pain outcomes between sympathetic block versus other active treatments (low to very low quality evidence).One small study compared ultrasound-guided LASB with non-guided LASB and found no clinically important difference in pain outcomes (very low quality evidence).Six studies reported adverse events, all with minor effects reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS This update's results are similar to the previous versions of this systematic review, and the main conclusions are unchanged. There remains a scarcity of published evidence and a lack of high quality evidence to support or refute the use of local anaesthetic sympathetic blockade for CRPS. From the existing evidence, it is not possible to draw firm conclusions regarding the efficacy or safety of this intervention, but the limited data available do not suggest that LASB is effective for reducing pain in CRPS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Clinical Sciences/Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK, UB8 3PH
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
Little MW, O'Connell NE, Ferris CP. A comparison of individual cow versus group concentrate allocation strategies on dry matter intake, milk production, tissue changes, and fertility of Holstein-Friesian cows offered a grass silage diet. J Dairy Sci 2016; 99:4360-4373. [PMID: 26995122 DOI: 10.3168/jds.2015-10441] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2015] [Accepted: 02/02/2016] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
A diverse range of concentrate allocation strategies are adopted on dairy farms. The objectives of this study were to examine the effects on cow performance [dry matter (DM) intake (DMI), milk yield and composition, body tissue changes, and fertility] of adopting 2 contrasting concentrate allocation strategies over the first 140 d of lactation. Seventy-seven Holstein-Friesian dairy cows were allocated to 1 of 2 concentrate allocation strategies at calving, namely group or individual cow. Cows on the group strategy were offered a mixed ration comprising grass silage and concentrates in a 50:50 ratio on a DM basis. Cows on the individual cow strategy were offered a basal mixed ration comprising grass silage and concentrates (the latter included in the mix to achieve a mean intake of 6kg/cow per day), which was formulated to meet the cow's energy requirements for maintenance plus 24kg of milk/cow per day. Additional concentrates were offered via an out-of-parlor feeding system, with the amount offered adjusted weekly based on each individual cow's milk yield during the previous week. In addition, all cows received a small quantity of straw in the mixed ration part of the diet (approximately 0.3kg/cow per day), plus 0.5kg of concentrate twice daily in the milking parlor. Mean concentrate intakes over the study period were similar with each of the 2 allocation strategies (11.5 and 11.7kg of DM/cow per day for group and individual cow, respectively), although the pattern of intake with each treatment differed over time. Concentrate allocation strategy had no effect on either milk yield (39.3 and 38.0kg/d for group and individual cow, respectively), milk composition, or milk constituent yield. The milk yield response curves with each treatment were largely aligned with the concentrate DMI curves. Cows on the individual cow treatment had a greater range of concentrate DMI and milk yields than those on the group treatment. With the exception of a tendency for cows on the individual cow treatment to lose more body weight to nadir than cows on the group treatment, concentrate allocation strategy had little effect on either body weight or body condition score over the experimental period. Cows on the individual cow treatment had a higher pregnancy rate to first and second service and tended to have a higher 100-d in calf rate than cows on the group treatment. This study demonstrates that concentrate allocation strategy had little effect on overall production performance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M W Little
- Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Sustainable Agri-Food Sciences Division, Large Park, Hillsborough, BT26 6DR, United Kingdom; Institute for Global Food Security, Queen's University Belfast, Northern Ireland Technology Centre, Malone Road, Belfast, BT9 5HN, United Kingdom.
| | - N E O'Connell
- Institute for Global Food Security, Queen's University Belfast, Northern Ireland Technology Centre, Malone Road, Belfast, BT9 5HN, United Kingdom
| | - C P Ferris
- Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Sustainable Agri-Food Sciences Division, Large Park, Hillsborough, BT26 6DR, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a painful and disabling condition that usually manifests in response to trauma or surgery. When it occurs, it is associated with significant pain and disability. It is thought to arise and persist as a consequence of a maladaptive pro-inflammatory response and disturbances in sympathetically-mediated vasomotor control, together with maladaptive peripheral and central neuronal plasticity. CRPS can be classified into two types: type I (CRPS I) in which a specific nerve lesion has not been identified, and type II (CRPS II) where there is an identifiable nerve lesion. Guidelines recommend the inclusion of a variety of physiotherapy interventions as part of the multimodal treatment of people with CRPS, although their effectiveness is not known. OBJECTIVES To determine the effectiveness of physiotherapy interventions for treating the pain and disability associated with CRPS types I and II. SEARCH METHODS We searched the following databases from inception up to 12 February 2015: CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, LILACS, PEDro, Web of Science, DARE and Health Technology Assessments, without language restrictions, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of physiotherapy interventions for treating pain and disability in people CRPS. We also searched additional online sources for unpublished trials and trials in progress. SELECTION CRITERIA We included RCTs of physiotherapy interventions (including manual therapy, therapeutic exercise, electrotherapy, physiotherapist-administered education and cortically directed sensory-motor rehabilitation strategies) employed in either a stand-alone fashion or in combination, compared with placebo, no treatment, another intervention or usual care, or of varying physiotherapy interventions compared with each other in adults with CRPS I and II. Our primary outcomes of interest were patient-centred outcomes of pain intensity and functional disability. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently evaluated those studies identified through the electronic searches for eligibility and subsequently extracted all relevant data from the included RCTs. Two review authors independently performed 'Risk of bias' assessments and rated the quality of the body of evidence for the main outcomes using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN RESULTS We included 18 RCTs (739 participants) that tested the effectiveness of a broad range of physiotherapy-based interventions. Overall, there was a paucity of high quality evidence concerning physiotherapy treatment for pain and disability in people with CRPS I. Most included trials were at 'high' risk of bias (15 trials) and the remainder were at 'unclear' risk of bias (three trials). The quality of the evidence was very low or low for all comparisons, according to the GRADE approach.We found very low quality evidence that graded motor imagery (GMI; two trials, 49 participants) may be useful for improving pain (0 to 100 VAS) (mean difference (MD) -21.00, 95% CI -31.17 to -10.83) and functional disability (11-point numerical rating scale) (MD 2.30, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.48), at long-term (six months) follow-up, in people with CRPS I compared to usual care plus physiotherapy; very low quality evidence that multimodal physiotherapy (one trial, 135 participants) may be useful for improving 'impairment' at long-term (12 month) follow-up compared to a minimal 'social work' intervention; and very low quality evidence that mirror therapy (two trials, 72 participants) provides clinically meaningful improvements in pain (0 to 10 VAS) (MD 3.4, 95% CI -4.71 to -2.09) and function (0 to 5 functional ability subscale of the Wolf Motor Function Test) (MD -2.3, 95% CI -2.88 to -1.72) at long-term (six month) follow-up in people with CRPS I post stroke compared to placebo (covered mirror).There was low to very low quality evidence that tactile discrimination training, stellate ganglion block via ultrasound and pulsed electromagnetic field therapy compared to placebo, and manual lymphatic drainage combined with and compared to either anti-inflammatories and physical therapy or exercise are not effective for treating pain in the short-term in people with CRPS I. Laser therapy may provide small clinically insignificant, short-term, improvements in pain compared to interferential current therapy in people with CRPS I.Adverse events were only rarely reported in the included trials. No trials including participants with CRPS II met the inclusion criteria of this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The best available data show that GMI and mirror therapy may provide clinically meaningful improvements in pain and function in people with CRPS I although the quality of the supporting evidence is very low. Evidence of the effectiveness of multimodal physiotherapy, electrotherapy and manual lymphatic drainage for treating people with CRPS types I and II is generally absent or unclear. Large scale, high quality RCTs are required to test the effectiveness of physiotherapy-based interventions for treating pain and disability of people with CRPS I and II. Implications for clinical practice and future research are considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Keith M Smart
- St Vincent's University HospitalPhysiotherapy DepartmentElm ParkDublinIreland4
| | - Benedict M Wand
- The University of Notre Dame AustraliaSchool of Physiotherapy19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225)FremantleWest AustraliaAustralia6959
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Brunel UniversityDepartment of Clinical Sciences/Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and SocietiesKingston LaneUxbridgeMiddlesexUKUB8 3PH
| | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Devitt C, Boyle L, Teixeira DL, O'Connell NE, Hawe M, Hanlon A. Pig producer perspectives on the use of meat inspection as an animal health and welfare diagnostic tool in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Ir Vet J 2016; 69:2. [PMID: 26862390 PMCID: PMC4746883 DOI: 10.1186/s13620-015-0057-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2015] [Accepted: 07/21/2015] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Currently, there is growing interest in developing ante and post mortem meat inspection (MI) to incorporate measures of pig health and welfare for use as a diagnostic tool on pig farms. However, the success of the development of the MI process requires stakeholder engagement with the process. Knowledge gaps and issues of trust can undermine the effective exchange and utilisation of information across the supply chain. A social science research methodology was employed to establish stakeholder perspectives towards the development of MI to include measures of pig health and welfare. In this paper the findings of semi-structured telephone interviews with 18 pig producers from the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland are presented. RESULTS Producers recognised the benefit of the utilisation of MI data as a health and welfare diagnostic tool. This acknowledgment, however, was undermined for some by dissatisfaction with the current system of MI information feedback, by trust and fairness concerns, and by concerns regarding the extent to which data would be used in the producers' interests. Tolerance of certain animal welfare issues may also have a negative impact on how producers viewed the potential of MI data. The private veterinary practitioner was viewed as playing a vital role in assisting them with the interpretation of MI data for herd health planning. CONCLUSIONS The development of positive relationships based on trust, commitment and satisfaction across the supply chain may help build a positive environment for the effective utilisation of MI data in improving pig health and welfare. The utilisation of MI as a diagnostic tool would benefit from the development of a communication strategy aimed at building positive relationships between stakeholders in the pig industry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine Devitt
- UCD Planning and Environmental Policy, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4 Ireland
| | - Laura Boyle
- Teagasc Pig Development Department, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co, Cork, Ireland
| | - D L Teixeira
- Laboratório de Etologia Aplicada e Bem-estar Animal, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Santa Catarina, Brazil
| | - N E O'Connell
- Institute for Global Food Security, Queens University Belfast, Northern Ireland Technology Centre, 18-30 Malone Road, Belfast, BT9 5BN UK
| | - M Hawe
- College of Agriculture, Food and Rural Enterprise, Greenmount Campus, Tirgracy Road, Antrim, BT41 4PS UK
| | - Alison Hanlon
- School of Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Belfield Dublin 4, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Chang WJ, O'Connell NE, Burns E, Chipchase LS, Liston MB, Schabrun SM. Organisation and function of the primary motor cortex in chronic pain: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2015; 5:e008540. [PMID: 26621512 PMCID: PMC4679840 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008540] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Primary motor cortical (M1) adaptation in the form of altered organisation and function is hypothesised to underpin motor dysfunction observed in chronic pain. The aim of this review is to assess the evidence for altered M1 organisation and function in chronic pain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Systematic review and meta-analysis. We will search electronic databases with predetermined search terms to identify relevant studies and evaluate the studies for inclusion and risks of bias. Two independent reviewers will extract data. Any disagreement will be resolved through a third reviewer. Cross-sectional or prospective studies published in English before May 2015 that investigate M1 organisation and function in chronic pain will be included if they meet the eligibility criteria. Primary outcomes will include M1 cortical excitability, spatial cortical representation, the function of inhibitory and facilitatory intracortical networks, cortical reactivity and cortical glucose metabolism. Clinical measures such as pain and disability will be included where the correlation with the primary outcomes of M1 organisation and function were investigated in the included studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This systematic review does not require ethical approval. The results of this review will be submitted for peer-reviewed publication regardless of outcome and will be presented at relevant conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Our systematic review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration number CRD42015014823).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wei-Ju Chang
- University of Western Sydney, School of Science and Health, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
| | - Emma Burns
- University of Western Sydney, School of Science and Health, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Lucy S Chipchase
- University of Western Sydney, School of Science and Health, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Matthew B Liston
- University of Western Sydney, School of Science and Health, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Siobhan M Schabrun
- University of Western Sydney, School of Science and Health, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Catley MJ, Gibson W, Wand BM, Meads C, O'Connell NE. Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) for chronic pain - an overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011890] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Mark J Catley
- University of South Australia; School of Health Sciences; GPO Box 2471 Adelaide South Australia Australia 5001
| | - William Gibson
- University of Notre Dame Australia; School of Physiotherapy; 19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225) Fremantle Western Australia Australia 6959
| | - Benedict M Wand
- University of Notre Dame Australia; School of Physiotherapy; 19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225) Fremantle Western Australia Australia 6959
| | - Catherine Meads
- Brunel University London; Health Economics Research Group, Institute for Environment Health and Societies; Kingston Lane London UK
| | - Neil E O'Connell
- Brunel University; Department of Clinical Sciences/Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies; Kingston Lane Uxbridge Middlesex UK UB8 3PH
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Affiliation(s)
- Neil E O'Connell
- Department of Clinical Sciences, Health Economics Research Group (HERG), Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University London, Uxbridge UB8 3PH, UK
| | - Benedict M Wand
- School of Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Catley MJ, O'Connell NE, Berryman C, Ayhan FF, Moseley GL. Is Tactile Acuity Altered in People With Chronic Pain? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. The Journal of Pain 2014; 15:985-1000. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2014.06.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 127] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2014] [Revised: 06/10/2014] [Accepted: 06/17/2014] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
|