Search

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy and readability of the answers generated by large language model (LLM)-chatbots to common patient questions about low back pain (LBP)., Methods: This cross-sectional study analysed responses to 30 LBP-related questions, covering self-management, risk factors and treatment. The questions were developed by experienced clinicians and researchers and were piloted with a group of consumer representatives with lived experience of LBP. The inquiries were inputted in prompt form into ChatGPT 3.5, Bing, Bard (Gemini) and ChatGPT 4.0. Responses were evaluated in relation to their accuracy, readability and presence of disclaimers about health advice. The accuracy was assessed by comparing the recommendations generated with the main guidelines for LBP. The responses were analysed by two independent reviewers and classified as accurate, inaccurate or unclear. Readability was measured with the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES)., Results: Out of 120 responses yielding 1069 recommendations, 55.8% were accurate, 42.1% inaccurate and 1.9% unclear. Treatment and self-management domains showed the highest accuracy while risk factors had the most inaccuracies. Overall, LLM-chatbots provided answers that were 'reasonably difficult' to read, with a mean (SD) FRES score of 50.94 (3.06). Disclaimer about health advice was present around 70%-100% of the responses produced., Conclusions: The use of LLM-chatbots as tools for patient education and counselling in LBP shows promising but variable results. These chatbots generally provide moderately accurate recommendations. However, the accuracy may vary depending on the topic of each question. The reliability level of the answers was inadequate, potentially affecting the patient's ability to comprehend the information., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ on behalf of EULAR.)

Background: The current literature supports the effectiveness of exercise, education, and self-management interventions for the long-term management of persistent low back pain. However, there is significant uncertainty about the implementation of interventions related to barriers, facilitators, and patient's preferences. This study will evaluate the Back to Living Well program implementation from a participant and organizational perspective. More specifically we address the following objectives: 1) identify program barriers and facilitators from participants' perspectives, 2) identify factors related to program, personal and contextual factors that contribute to negative and positive outcomes, and outcome trajectories, 3) identify factors influencing participants' selection of an in-person or e-health program, and 4) evaluate program specific barriers and facilitators from the organization and care delivery perspectives., Methods: This study will utilize a mixed-method convergent design including a longitudinal cohort strand and a longitudinal qualitative interview strand. The RE-AIM framework will be used to assess program implementation. Participants (n = 90, 1:1: in person or virtual) who choose to register in the program as well as staff (n = 10 to 15) involved in the delivery of the program will be invited to participate. Participants will participate in a 12-week physical activity, education, and self-management program. Implementation outcomes will be measured at 3-, 6-, 12-months, and six months after the end of the follow-ups. Interview scripts and directed content analysis will be constructed based on the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Neuromatrix Model of Pain, Theoretical Domains Framework. Staff interviews will be constructed and analyzed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Participants will also complete pain, disability, quality of life and psychological questionnaires, wear an activity tracker at all time points, and complete weekly pain and activity limitation questions using a mobile application., Discussion: The study results will provide evidence to inform potential future implementation of the program. An effective, appropriately targeted, and well implemented exercise program for the long-term management (i.e., tertiary prevention) of LBP could minimize the burden of the condition on patients, the health care system and society., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05929846. This (Registration Date: July 3 2023) study has been approved by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board Project ID#15,354., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objectives: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: To evaluate the effects of exercise alone or exercise plus education compared with inactive control or education alone to prevent non-specific LBP., (Copyright © 2024 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Purpose: Kinesio taping (KT) is an approach that has been used in the rehabilitation of patients with chronic stroke. The aim of this review is to evaluate the effectiveness of KT alone or combined with other interventions for patients with chronic stroke., Materials and Methods: The search was performed on CENTRAL, EMBASE, PEDro, and five other databases and two trial registries up to July 2022. We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effectiveness of KT compared to control interventions. The primary outcomes were upper limb function and gait. We assessed the risk of bias in the included studies using the PEDro scale. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach., Results: We included 14 RCTs undertaken in six different countries. PEDro score ranged from 4 to 9 points. There is very-low certainty evidence that KT has no effect on gait, balance, and postural control. We found very-low certainty evidence of a slightly benefit when used in addition to other therapies for gait, balance and postural control, and pain intensity., Conclusions: Our study findings show KT does not have enough robust evidence for improving upper limb function, gait, balance and postural control, and pain intensity in chronic stroke patients.

Introduction: Cupping therapy is a widely used technique in Brazilian physical therapy for the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders. However, there is limited scientific evidence to support its effectiveness., Objective: To investigate the profile, training, clinical practice, and scientific updates of Brazilian Physical Therapists who use cupping therapy as a therapeutic resource for musculoskeletal disorders., Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted through an online questionnaire, including 646 Physical Therapists who use cupping therapy in their practice. All data were analysed descriptively., Results: Cupping therapy is a technique that has been widely adopted in clinical practice by Physical Therapists, particularly among young, female professionals who have recently graduated from private universities. The primary reason for interest in this technique among these Physical Therapists is the high demand from patients. Additionally, it is often used in conjunction with other manual therapeutic techniques. They identified easy access, low cost, and ease of use as the key factors that make cupping therapy an attractive option. However, a lack of high-quality scientific evidence, as described in the literature, was identified as a major barrier to its use., Conclusion: The Physical Therapists included in this study use cupping therapy in their clinical practice, relying heavily on their own experience and the preferences of their patients, rather than utilizing the third pillar of evidence-based practice, which is to rely on the best available evidence. This study suggests that these Physical Therapists are currently implementing a technique without current scientific recommendations for its use in the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: There are no studies investigating the methodological and report quality of systematic reviews of non-pharmacological interventions for musculoskeletal pain management among children and adolescents., Objective: To evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews on conservative non-pharmacological pain management in children and adolescents with musculoskeletal pain., Methods: Searches were conducted on the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, Embase, and three other databases. Two pairs of reviewers independently assessed each article according to the predetermined selection criteria. We assessed the methodological quality of systematic reviews, using the AMSTAR 2 checklist and the quality of reporting, using PRISMA checklist. Descriptive analysis was used to summarise the characteristics of all included systematic reviews. The percentage of systematic reviews achieving each item from the AMSTAR 2, PRISMA checklist and the overall confidence in the results were described., Results: We included 17 systematic reviews of conservative non-pharmacological pain management for musculoskeletal pain in children and adolescents. Of the 17 systematic reviews included, nine (53%) were rated as "critically low", seven (41%) were rated as "low", and one (6%) was rated as "high" methodological quality by AMSTAR-2. The reporting quality by items from PRISMA range from 17.6% (95% CI 6.2 to 41) to 100% (95% CI 81.6 to 100)., Conclusion: This systematic review of physical interventions in children and adolescents showed overall 'very low' to 'high' methodological quality and usually poor reporting quality., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Telehealth has emerged as an alternative model for treatment delivery and has become an important component of health service delivery. However, there is inconsistency in the use of terminologies and a lack of research priorities in telehealth in musculoskeletal pain. The purpose of this international, multidisciplinary expert panel assembled in a modified three-round e-Delphi survey is to achieve a consensus on research priorities and for the standard terminology for musculoskeletal pain telehealth practice., Methods: In this international modified e-Delphi survey, we invited an expert panel consisting of researchers, clinicians, consumer representatives, industry partners, healthcare managers, and policymakers to participate in a three-round e-Delphi. Expert panels were identified through the Expertscape website, PubMed database, social media, and a snowball approach. In Round 1, potential research priorities and terminologies were presented to panel members. Panel members rated the agreement of each research priority on a 5-point Likert scale and an 11-point numerical scale, and each terminology on a 5-point Likert scale for the "telehealth in musculoskeletal pain " field over rounds. At least 80% of the panel members were required to agree to be deemed a consensus. We analyzed the data descriptively and assessed the stability of the results using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test., Results: We performed an international e-Delphi survey from February to August 2022. Of 694 invited people, 160 panel members participated in the first round, 133 in the second round (83% retention), and 134 in the third round (84% retention). Most of the panel members were researchers 76 (47%), clinicians 57 (36%), and consumer representatives 9 (6%) of both genders especially from Brazil 31 (19%), India 22 (14%), and Australia 19 (12%) in the first round. The panel identified fourteen telehealth research priorities spanned topics including the development of strategies using information and communication technology, telehealth implementation services, the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telehealth interventions, equity of telehealth interventions, qualitative research and eHealth literacy in musculoskeletal pain conditions from an initial list of 20 research priorities. The consensus was reached for "digital health" and "telehealth" as standard terminologies from an initial list of 37 terminologies., Conclusion: An international, multidisciplinary expert consensus recommends that future research should consider the 14 research priorities for telehealth musculoskeletal pain reached. Additionally, the terms digital health and telehealth as the most appropriate terminologies to be used in musculoskeletal telehealth research., Register: Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/tqmz2/ )., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Recent clinical practice guidelines recognize the importance of the biopsychosocial model in the management of patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain, and the attitudes and beliefs of physical therapists are believed to directly influence clinical decision-making., Objective: To investigate factors associated to biomedical and biopsychosocial approaches and its impact on attitudes and beliefs to treat patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain., Method: This was a cross-sectional study conducted online with 302 Brazilian physiotherapists who treat patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain. The HC-PAIRS and PABS-PT were used to investigate attitudes and beliefs low back pain. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were performed for association tests, comparing the scores on the scales between groups. In addition, multiple linear regression analyses were also used., Results: The overall mean score of HC-PAIRS was 54.0 (9.0), and the biomedical and biopsychosocial factors of PABS-PT were 29.7 (9.0) and 36.2 (5.3), respectively. Significant associations were identified between gender (p = 0.04) and level of academic training (p < 0.00) and both scales, HC-PAIRS and PABSPT, respectively., Conclusion: Sociodemographic characteristics were associated with the beliefs of physical therapists; a higher score for treatment options for chronic low back pain based on the biomedical mode, was observed in female physiotherapist and in physios with higher education level. Variables such as age and length of professional experience indicated that the lower the age and/or length of professional experience of Brazilian physical therapists, the stronger the belief in the relationship between low back pain and tissue damage., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest All authors have nothing to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Neck pain is the fourth worldwide leading cause of disability and represents 22% of musculoskeletal disorders. Conservative intervention has been strongly recommended to treat chronic neck pain and Telerehabilitation is the alternative for the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions. There is a lack of high-quality research on the effects of telerehabilitation in patients with neck pain and functional disability. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the effect of a telerehabilitation exercise program versus a digital booklet only with self-care information in individuals with non-specific chronic neck pain., Methods: This is a prospectively registered, assessor-blinded, two-arm randomized controlled trial comparing a telerehabilitation exercise program versus a digital booklet with self-care information. Seventy patients will be recruited with non-specific chronic neck pain. Follow-ups will be conducted post-treatment, 6 weeks, and 3 months after randomization. The primary outcome will be disability at post-treatment (6 weeks) measured using neck pain disability. Secondary outcomes will be pain intensity levels, global perceived effect, self-efficacy, quality of life, kinesiophobia, and adherence to treatment. In our hypothesis, patients allocated to the intervention group experience outcomes that are similar to those of those assigned to the self-care digital booklet. Our hypothesis can then be approved or disapproved based on the results of the study., Discussion: This randomized clinical trial will provide reliable information on the use of telerehabilitation to treat patients with chronic non-specific neck pain., Trial Registration: The study was prospectively registered at the Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (number: RBR-10h7khvk). Registered on 16 September 2022., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Although clinical practice guidelines recommend pain education as the first-line option for the management of chronic musculoskeletal pain, there is a lack of pain education programmes in healthcare. Thus, digital health programmes can be an effective tool for implementing pain education strategies for public health. This trial will aim to analyse the implementation and effectiveness outcomes of three online pain science education strategies in the Brazilian public health system (SUS) for individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain., Methods: We will conduct a hybrid type III effectiveness-implementation randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation. We will include adult individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain, recruited from primary healthcare in the city of Guarapuava, Brazil. Individuals will be randomised to three implementation groups receiving a pain science education intervention (EducaDor) but delivered in different modalities: group 1) synchronous online; group 2) asynchronous videos; and group 3) interactive e-book only. Implementation outcomes will include acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, adoption, fidelity, penetration, sustainability, and costs. We will also assess effectiveness outcomes, such as pain, function, quality of life, sleep, self-efficacy, and adverse effects. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses will be conducted from the SUS and societal perspectives. The evaluations will be done at baseline, post-intervention (10 weeks), and 6 months., Discussion: This study will develop and implement a collaborative intervention model involving primary healthcare professionals, secondary-level healthcare providers, and patients to enhance self-management of chronic pain. In addition to promoting better pain management, this study will also contribute to the field of implementation science in public health by generating important insights and recommendations for future interventions., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05302180; 03/29/2022)., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: To translate and cross-culturally adapt into Brazilian-Portuguese, and to test the measurement properties of the following items of implementation outcome measures: Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM) and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM)., Methods: This was a measurement properties study in accordance with the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). We conducted a translation and cross-cultural adaptation of three implementation measures according to guidelines for translation and cross-cultural adaptation, then we collected information from patients who had participated in remotely delivered physical therapy treatment for musculoskeletal condition. The patients answered the translated versions of the implementation outcome measures. The measurement properties of the three implementation outcome measures were collected in a test-retest assessment, with an interval of 7 to 14 days.. The measurement properties evaluated in this study were interpretability, measured using Ceiling and Floor Effects, reliability in test-retest evaluation, measured using Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient, internal consistency, measured using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and construct validity, measured using Pearson Correlation., Results: We included 104 participants (76 female). The average age of the sample was 56.8 (SD 14.8) years old. The items of implementation outcome measures (AIM, IAM, and FIM) showed 66.39%, 63.11%, and 63.93% of ceiling effects. The items of implementation outcome measures showed adequate internal consistency measured using Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient (AIM: 0.89, IAM: 0.91, FIM: 0.93) and values of Standard Error of Measurement between 5 and 10%, showing good measurement error. The results of AIM and IAM was classified as moderate reliability and the FIM as substantial reliability. In a total 96 correlations, > 75% of correlations met our prior hypothesis., Conclusion: The three Brazilian-Portuguese versions of items of implementation outcome measures had adequate internal consistency, measurement error and construct validity. The three implementation outcome measures showed moderate to substantial reliability values. The Ceiling Effect was observed in the three measures, showing maximum values ​​in more than 15% of the evaluations., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Given the rapid advances in communication technology and the need that emerged from the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth initiatives have been widely used worldwide. This masterclass aims to provide an overview of telerehabilitation for musculoskeletal conditions, synthesizing the different terminologies used to describe telehealth and telerehabilitation, its effectiveness and how to use it in clinical practice, barriers and facilitators for the implementation in health services, and discuss the need of a curriculum education for the near future., Main Body: Telerehabilitation refers to the use of information and communication technologies provided by any healthcare professionals for rehabilitation services. Telerehabilitation is a safe and effective option in the management of musculoskeletal conditions in different models of delivery. There are many technologies, with different costs and benefits, synchronous and asynchronous, that can be used for telerehabilitation: telephone, email, mobile health, messaging, web-based systems and videoconferences applications. To ensure a better practice of telerehabilitation, the clinician should certify safety and access, and appropriateness of environment, communication, technology, assessment, and therapeutic prescription. Despite the positive effect of telerehabilitation in musculoskeletal disorders, a suboptimal telerehabilitation implementation may have happened due to the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in countries where telehealth was not a reality, and clinicians lacked training and guidance. This emphasizes the need to identify the necessary curriculum content to guide future clinicians in their skills and knowledge for telerehabilitation. There are some challenges and barriers that must be carefully accounted for to contribute to a health service that is inclusive and relevant to health professionals and end users., Conclusions: Telerehabilitation can promote patient engagement in health care and plays an important role in improving health outcomes in patients with musculoskeletal conditions. Digital health technologies can also offer new opportunities to educate patients and facilitate the process of behavior change to a healthy lifestyle. Currently, the main needs in telerehabilitation are the inclusion of it in health curriculums in higher education and the development of cost-effectiveness and implementation trials, especially in low- and middle-income countries where access, investments and digital health literacy are limited., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, telerehabilitation allowed the continuation of physical therapy care in parallel with public health measures to prevent the virus spread. However, in low- and middle-income countries including Brazil, telerehabilitation was unfamiliar to most of the population., Objective: To investigate acceptability, preferences, and needs in telerehabilitation by Brazilian physical therapists and the general population., Methods: We conducted an observational cross-sectional study with an online survey consisting of 13 multiple-choice items. Items were distributed among acceptability, preferences, and needs sections, and encompassed confidence in delivering or receiving telerehabilitation, its perceived efficacy and costs, and suitable content., Results: A total of 1107 responses were registered, 717 from physical therapists. Half of them self-reported confidence in conducting telerehabilitation through the internet (synchronous or asynchronous). The same proportion disagreed that telerehabilitation is as effective as in-person interventions. Physical therapists agreed telerehabilitation should contain educational, self-management strategies, and exercises information, but the general population endorsed the provision of technical advice on exercise execution. The general population mostly reported that telerehabilitation could help their specific health condition (86%), but only 14% of respondents would pay the same as they pay for in-person consultations. Participants reported an overall preference for synchronous communication and concern about the lack of a hands-on approach., Conclusion: Physical therapists and the general population appear to demonstrate apprehension towards telerehabilitation. Insufficient preparation or inadequate knowledge might influence participants' acceptance, preferences, and needs., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Dr Fagundes is the CEO of the startup Hi! Healthcare Intelligence, which develops solutions in telerehabilitation for insurance companies. Dr Fagundes was not involved in the data collection or data analysis; he contributed as a stakeholder perspective to validate the research question and design of the study. Dr Saragiotto is advisor of the startup but he did not receive any financial support from the company. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 Associação Brasileira de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação em Fisioterapia. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Internet-based self-management programs and telerehabilitation initiatives have increased and have been extensively used for delivering health care in many areas. These programs overcome common barriers that patients face with traditional face-to-face health care, such as travel expenditures, lack of time, and high demand on the public health system. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this mode of web-based health care delivery had become more popular. However, there is still a lack of studies testing this mode of delivery in low- and middle-income countries. To gain a better understanding of the context, feasibility, and factors involved in the implementation of a web-based program, pilot and implementation studies are necessary. These studies can better inform whether a strategy is feasible, acceptable, and adequate for its purposes and for optimizing resource allocation., Objective: This study aims to evaluate the feasibility, usability, and implementation context of a self-management internet-based program based on exercises and pain education (ReabilitaDOR) in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain and to compare this program with a program using only a web-based self-management booklet., Methods: The study design was a parallel pilot study of a prospectively registered, assessor-blinded, 2-arm randomized controlled trial with economic evaluation. This study was performed using waiting lists of physiotherapy and rehabilitation centers and advertisements on social media networks. The participants were 65 patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain aged between 18 and 60 years. The effects of an 8-week telerehabilitation program based on exercises and pain education (intervention group) were compared with those of a program based only on a web-based self-management booklet (control group). The main outcome measures were implementation outcomes of patients' perceptions of acceptability, appropriateness, feasibility, and usability of the program and the societal costs and feasibility of the main trial at 8-week posttreatment follow-up. Adverse events were also analyzed., Results: In total, 56 participants were analyzed at the 8-week follow-up. The intervention group showed responses with a mean of 4.5 (SD 0.6) points for acceptability, 4.5 (SD 0.5) points for appropriateness, and 4.5 (SD 0.6) points for feasibility measured on a 1 to 5 scale. All patients in the intervention group showed satisfactory responses to the system usability outcome. There is satisfactory evidence for the feasibility of the main trial. For costs related to the interventions, health care, patients, and loss of productivity at 8 weeks, we found a total expenditure of US $278.30 per patient in the intervention group and US $141.52 per patient in the control group. No adverse events were reported during the intervention period., Conclusions: We found that the ReabilitaDOR program is feasible, appropriate, and acceptable from the users' implementation perspective. This system was considered usable by all the participants, and the main trial seemed feasible. Cost data were viable to be collected, and the program is likely to be safe., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04274439; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04274439., (©Iuri Fioratti, Gisela Cristiane Miyamoto, Junior Vitorino Fandim, Camila Pereira Pontes Ribeiro, Geovana Domingues Batista, Gabriella Evangelista Freitas, Andressa Santos Palomo, Felipe José Jandré dos Reis, Leonardo Oliveira Pena Costa, Christopher G Maher, Bruno Tirotti Saragiotto. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 30.08.2022.)

Objective: To estimate the prevalence, incidence, and prognosis of back pain in children and adolescents., Design: Prospective cohort study., Methods: We followed children and adolescents between the ages of 8 and 18 years with and without back pain over 12 months (3, 6, and 12 months) from public and private schools. At baseline, parents (or guardians) answered questionnaires including sociodemographic characteristics and perception of sleep quality of their children and adolescents. Children and adolescents answered questionnaires including sociodemographic characteristics, presence of back pain, pain intensity, quality of life, and psychosomatic symptoms. At follow-up, children and adolescents answered questions about the presence of back pain., Results: Six hundred fifteen children and adolescents were included, 163 of whom had back pain and 452 of whom had no back pain at baseline. The mean age of participants was 11.6 years (SD = 2.5), and the majority were female (n = 362; 59%). The 1-month prevalence of back pain was 26% (95% confidence interval: 23%-30%). The incidence rate of back pain was 35% (31%-40%) over 12 months. Of the 163 participants who had back pain at baseline, 83% had recovered by 12 months. Of those who recovered within 6 months, 31% had a recurrence of back pain at the 12-month follow-up., Conclusion: Two to 3 in every 10 children and adolescents reported back pain in the last month. New cases of back pain were reported by 3-4 in every 10 children and adolescents for a period of 12 months. Nearly all children recover within 12 months, but recurrence seems to be common. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(8):554-562. Epub: 19 June 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10819 .

Background: Psychosomatic symptoms seem to influence both the onset and development of pain. There is lack of Brazilian-Portuguese questionnaires that measure psychosomatic symptoms in children and adolescents., Objective: To translate and cross-culturally adapt the Psychosomatic Questionnaire for Children and Adolescents into Brazilian-Portuguese and English and test the measurement properties of the Brazilian-Portuguese version., Methods: The translation and cross-cultural adaptation (from Dutch to Brazilian-Portuguese and English) followed six steps. Interviews were conducted in 33 Brazilian children and adolescents. We also recruited 107 children and adolescents with musculoskeletal pain from schools to test the measurement properties of the Brazilian-Portuguese version. The questionnaire was completed twice with a 7-day interval. Ceiling and floor effects, missing data, internal consistency, reliability, measurement error and construct validity were assessed., Results: We recruited 140 children and adolescents from public and private schools. During the cross-cultural adaptation process, no major difficulty answering and understanding the questionnaire were reported by children and adolescents. The questionnaire did not show ceiling or floor effects and had minimal missing data (0.37%). Internal consistency by the Cronbach's Alpha was 0.69. Test-retest reliability by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.64, 0.84). The smallest detectable change was 6.5 points out of 18 points. We observed a moderate correlation of 0.54 (p<0.01) with the Spence Children's Anxiety Scale, consistent with our a-priori hypothesis., Conclusion: The Brazilian-Portuguese version of the Psychosomatic Questionnaire for Children and Adolescents has acceptable measurement properties and is a good option for assessing psychosomatic symptoms in clinical practice and research., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Associação Brasileira de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação em Fisioterapia. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Advice to stay active is the primary management strategy for sciatica. Other conservative treatments such as neural management techniques may also contribute to sciatica recovery, but currently, the effects have not been robustly assessed. Thus, the aim of this study is to compare the effects of adding neural management to advice to stay active versus advice to stay active alone in improving pain intensity and functional limitation. Secondarily, to compare the effects of the experimental intervention in the sciatic neurodynamic, pain modulation, and psychosocial factors. A parallel-group, controlled, examiner-blinded superiority clinical trial randomised at a 1:1 allocation will be conducted in 210 participants with chronic sciatica. Patients will be recruited from outpatient physiotherapy clinics and community advertisements. The experimental group will receive neural mobilisation techniques and soft tissue mobilisation techniques for 30 minutes per session, 10 weekly sessions, plus advice to stay active on their activities of daily living, information on physical activity, imaging tests, and sciatica for 5 biweekly sessions lasting 25-30 minutes. The control group will receive advice to stay active only. The re-evaluation will be performed out after 5 weeks, 10 weeks, and 26 weeks after randomisation and primary endpoints will be pain intensity and functional limitation at 10 weeks. Secondary outcomes will include neuropathic symptoms, sciatic neurodynamic, pain modulation, and psychosocial factors. Adverse events and patient satisfaction will be assessed. Ethical approval has been granted from an Institutional Human Research Ethics Committee. Trial registration: Trial was prospectively registered in the Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (number: RBR-3db643c)., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Abstract: Telehealth is a promising approach to support self-management with the potential to overcome geographical barriers. Understanding patient perspectives will identify practical challenges to delivering self-management strategies by telehealth. The aim of this study was to synthesize the perceptions of people with chronic musculoskeletal pain for engaging in interventions delivered using telehealth. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, and PsycINFO databases. We included qualitative studies that explored perceptions or experiences or attitudes of people with chronic musculoskeletal pain engaging with telehealth. We assessed the methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Meta-synthesis was guided by a thematic synthesis approach. The level of confidence of review findings was assessed using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Studies (GRADE-CERQual). Twenty-one studies were included (n = 429). Telehealth comprised web-based, videoconference-based, telephone-based, video-based, and smartphone app-based programs delivered solely or combined. Chronic musculoskeletal conditions included people with knee or hip osteoarthritis, chronic low back pain, persistent pain (chronic joint pain or nonspecific chronic musculoskeletal pain), rheumatoid arthritis, and functional fatigue syndrome. The enablers for engaging in telehealth interventions were as follows: (1) "at my own pace, space, and place" and (2) empowered patient. Barriers to engaging in telehealth interventions were as follows: (1) impersonal, (2) technological challenges, (3) irrelevant content, and (4) limited digital (health) literacy. Telehealth interventions with well-designed interactive platforms, flexibility to fit patients' routine, and the broad availability of material may favor better engagement. Encouragement of self-efficacy is linked to successful telehealth-delivered self-management programs., (Copyright © 2021 International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Background: Access to full-text articles is an essential element of evidence-based practice., Objective: Estimate the percentage of articles in the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) that have free full-text access and compare free access between PEDro and PubMed. Secondary objectives for access via PEDro: determine if publication year and geographic location impact on free access; determine if adding a link to a portable document format (PDF) locator website would improve free access; and evaluate the association between article characteristics and free access., Methods: This observational study used a random sample of 200 articles published in 2000-2019 and indexed in PEDro. Data collectors in Australia, Brazil, Nepal, and Spain attempted to access free full text for each article via PEDro. One data collector attempted to access free full text via PubMed. One data collector attempted to access full text via a PDF locator (http://www.pdfsearchengine.net/). The percentage (95% confidence interval [CI]) of articles with free full-text access from PEDro, PubMed, and the PDF locator website were calculated. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between free full-text access and article characteristics., Results: Free full text could be accessed via PEDro for 51% of the articles (95% CI: 44, 58). PEDro had 4% higher free access than PubMed (95% CI: 1, 7). Access via PEDro did not vary systematically with time, geographic location, or article characteristics. Access improved by 9% (95% CI: 6, 14) by adding a PDF locator website., Conclusions: PEDro is a good source of free full-text articles for physical therapists and other rehabilitation professionals. Evidence resources, professional organisations, employers, researchers, and research agencies could all help to increase access to free full text., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest Two of the authors (AMM, MRE) sit on the PEDro Steering Committee., (Copyright © 2022 Associação Brasileira de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação em Fisioterapia. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Clinicians commonly try to use mechanism-based knowledge to make sense of the complexity and uncertainty of chronic pain treatments to create a rationale for their clinical decision-making. Although this seems intuitive, there are some problems with this approach., Discussion: The widespread use of mechanism-based knowledge in clinical practice can be a source of confusion for clinicians, especially when complex interventions with different proposed mechanisms of action are equally effective. Although the available mechanistic evidence is still of very poor quality, in choosing from various treatment options for people with chronic pain, an approach that correctly incorporates mechanistic reasoning might aid clinical thinking and practice., Conclusion: By explaining that not all evidence of mechanism is the same and by making a proposal to start using mechanism-based knowledge in clinical practice properly, we hope to help clinicians to incorporate mechanistic reasoning to prioritize and start choosing what may best work for whom., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Question: What are the effects of specific types of exercise treatments on pain intensity and functional limitation outcomes for adults with chronic low back pain?, Design: Systematic review with network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials., Participants: Adults with non-specific low back pain for ≥ 12 weeks., Intervention: Exercise treatments prescribed or planned by a health professional that involved conducting specific activities, postures and/or movements with a goal to improve low back pain outcomes., Outcome Measures: Pain intensity (eg, visual analogue scale or numerical rating scale) and back-related functional limitations (eg, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire or Oswestry Disability Index), each standardised to range from 0 to 100., Results: This review included 217 randomised controlled trials with 20,969 participants and 507 treatment groups. Most exercise types were more effective than minimal treatment for pain and functional limitation outcomes. Network meta-analysis results were compatible with moderate to clinically important treatment effects for Pilates, McKenzie therapy, and functional restoration (pain only) and flexibility exercises (function only) compared with minimal treatment, other effective treatments and other exercise types. The estimated mean differences for these exercise types compared with minimal treatment ranged from -15 to -19 for pain and from -10 to -12 for functional limitation., Conclusion: This review found evidence that Pilates, McKenzie therapy and functional restoration were more effective than other types of exercise treatment for reducing pain intensity and functional limitations. Nevertheless, people with chronic low back pain should be encouraged to perform the exercise that they enjoy to promote adherence., Registration: DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD009790., (Copyright © 2021 Australian Physiotherapy Association. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of web-based pain education programs without clinical support in patients with musculoskeletal pain., Methods: PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO were searched from inception to February 2020. Included studies were randomized clinical trials in which people with musculoskeletal pain were allocated to an experimental group that received web-based pain education as a standalone approach. Three review authors performed data extraction. The PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database) scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the studies. The primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability., Results: Six trials with a total of 1664 participants were included. There is moderate-quality evidence with a small effect size that web-based pain education programs, as a standalone approach, are better than minimal intervention (no intervention or booklets) for pain intensity (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.23; 95% CI = -0.43 to -0.04) in the short term and intermediate term (SMD = -0.26; 95% CI = -0.42 to -0.10). Regarding disability, there is low-quality evidence that web-based pain education programs are better than minimal intervention (SMD = -0.36; 95% CI = -0.64 to -0.07) in the short term. Web-based pain education added to usual care was no better than usual care alone in the intermediate or long term for primary outcomes., Conclusions: Web-based pain education for adults with musculoskeletal pain, as a standalone approach, was better than minimal intervention for pain intensity and disability in the short term, and for pain intensity in the intermediate term. Web-based pain education added to usual care did not provide additional benefits for primary outcomes in the intermediate or long term., Impact: Web-based pain education as a standalone intervention provided small improvements in pain intensity and disability in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Poorly resourced settings and overburdened health systems should consider this delivery method in the management of chronic musculoskeletal pain., Lay Summary: If you have chronic musculoskeletal pain, your physical therapist might recommend web-based pain education as treatment to help you reduce pain intensity and disability., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Physical Therapy Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Cerebral palsy (CP) is one of the main causes of disability in childhood. Virtual reality (VR) has been used as a treatment option in this population, however its effectiveness is unclear., Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of VR in patients with CP., Methods: We conducted electronic searches in EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane library, PEDro, AMED, PsycoINFO, and LILACS databases and trial site registries such as ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. We included randomized controlled trials that tested the use of VR alone or in combination with other interventions compared to more conventional rehabilitation or usual care in individuals with CP. The primary outcomes were upper and lower limb function, postural control, and balance. The secondary outcomes included global motor function, perception, cognition and spatial functions, motivation, motor learning, and adverse events. Two independent reviewers extracted and assessed included articles for risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We use a meta-analysis with random effect model whenever possible. We analyzed the quality of evidence using theGRADE approach., Results: We included 38 trials (pooled n = 1233 participants) in this review. There is very low quality of evidence that VR plus conventional rehabilitation is better than conventional rehabilitation for upper limb function. There is also very low quality evidence that VR alone is no better than conventional rehabilitation for upper and lower limb function. No adverse events were observed among the 10 trials that provided information on this outcome., Conclusion: At present we have very limited to limited confidence in effect estimation for utilization of VR in this population. Future studies may change our confidence in results and effect estimates., Protocol Registration: PROSPERO CRD 42018102759., (Copyright © 2020 Associação Brasileira de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação em Fisioterapia. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Question: What are the effects of dry cupping on pain intensity, physical function, functional mobility, trunk range of motion, perceived overall effect, quality of life, psychological symptoms and medication use in individuals with chronic non-specific low back pain?, Design: Randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation, intention-to-treat analysis and blinding of participants and assessors., Participants: Ninety participants with chronic non-specific low back pain., Interventions: The experimental group (n = 45) received dry cupping therapy, with cups bilaterally positioned parallel to the L1 to L5 vertebrae. The control group (n = 45) received sham cupping therapy. The interventions were applied once a week for 8 weeks., Outcome Measures: Participants were assessed before and after the first treatment session, and after 4 and 8 weeks of intervention. The primary outcome was pain intensity, measured with the numerical pain scale at rest, during fast walking and during trunk flexion. Secondary outcomes were physical function, functional mobility, trunk range of motion, perceived overall effect, quality of life, psychological symptoms and medication use., Results: On a 0-to-10 scale, the between-group difference in pain severity at rest was negligible: MD 0.0 (95% CI -0.9 to 1.0) immediately after the first treatment, 0.4 (95% CI -0.5 to 1.5) at 4 weeks and 0.6 (95% CI -0.4 to 1.6) at 8 weeks. Similar negligible effects were observed on pain severity during fast walking or trunk flexion. Negligible effects were also found on physical function, functional mobility and perceived overall effect, where mean estimates and their confidence intervals all excluded worthwhile effects. No worthwhile benefits could be confirmed for any of the remaining secondary outcomes., Conclusion: Dry cupping therapy was not superior to sham cupping for improving pain, physical function, mobility, quality of life, psychological symptoms or medication use in people with non-specific chronic low back pain., Protocol Registration Number: NCT03909672., (Copyright © 2021 Australian Physiotherapy Association. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the effect of walking promotion strategies on physical activity, pain, and function in people with musculoskeletal disorders., Design: Intervention systematic review with meta-analysis., Literature Search: We performed the searches in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) from inception to August 2019., Study Selection Criteria: We included randomized controlled trials evaluating interventions that promote walking in people with musculoskeletal disorders., Data Synthesis: We used the PEDro scale for assessing risk of bias and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to evaluate the quality of evidence. We expressed pooled effects for between-group differences as mean differences or standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals, or as risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals, using random-effects meta-analyses., Results: Twelve eligible trials (n = 1456 participants) were identified. There was moderate- to very low-quality evidence of no difference in physical activity levels for walking promotion interventions when compared to minimal interventions, and a significant effect favoring walking promotion when compared with usual care in the short term. There was moderate-quality evidence that walking promotion was modestly effective for reducing pain and improving function compared with minimal intervention and usual care. There was no difference in pain and function for walking promotion compared to supervised exercise. Walking promotion was not associated with different rates of adverse events compared to control conditions., Conclusion: Strategies to promote walking did not increase physical activity in people with musculoskeletal disorders. Walking promotion was associated with small improvements in pain and function compared to minimal intervention and usual care. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2020;50(11):597-606. doi:10.2519/jospt.2020.9666 .

Background: Chronic musculoskeletal pain is one of the main causes of years lived with disability and generates the highest cost of health care among chronic pain conditions. Internet-based treatments have been shown to be an alternative for the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions, in addition to reducing barriers such as travel, high demands on the public health system, lack of time, lack of insurance coverage for private care, and high costs for long-term treatment. The aim of this clinical trial is to develop and test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of, an internet-based self-management program based on pain education and exercise for people with chronic musculoskeletal pain., Methods: This is a prospectively registered, assessor-blinded, two-arm randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation comparing the Internet-based pain education and exercise intervention with a control group that will receive an online booklet. One hundred and sixty patients will be recruited from Sao Paulo, Brazil. Follow-ups will be conducted in post-treatment, 6 and 12 months after randomisation. The conduct of the study, as well as the evaluations and follow-ups will be carried out entirely remotely, through online platforms and telephone calls. The primary outcome will be pain intensity at post-treatment (8 weeks) measured using the 11-item Pain Numerical Rating Scale. Secondary outcomes will be biopsychosocial factors presents in the chronic musculoskeletal pain condition. Costs due to chronic musculoskeletal pain will be also measured, and cost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective will performed., Discussion: Our hypothesis is that internet-based pain education and exercise will be better than an online booklet in reducing pain and improving biopsychosocial outcomes in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. In addition, we believe that there will be good acceptance of patients for the internet-based intervention and that internet-based intervention will be more cost effective than the online booklet., Trial Registration: The study was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT04274439 , registered 18 February 2020).

Background: Chronic musculoskeletal pain represents an enormous burden in society. Best-practice care for chronic musculoskeletal pain suggests adoption of self-management strategies. Telehealth interventions (e.g., videoconferencing) are a promising approach to promote self-management and have the potential to overcome geographical barriers between patient and care providers. Understanding patient perspectives will inform and identify practical challenges towards applying the self-management strategies delivered via telehealth to everyday lives. The aim of this study is to synthesize the perceptions of individuals with musculoskeletal pain with regards to enablers and barriers to engaging in telehealth interventions for chronic musculoskeletal pain self-management., Methods: A systematic review of qualitative studies will be performed based on searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, and PsycINFO databases. Screening of identified titles will be conducted by two independent investigators. Data extraction will retrieve detailed qualitative information from selected articles. The critical appraisal skills program (CASP) checklist will be used for critical appraisal of included studies, and the level of confidence in the findings will be assessed using the confidence in the evidence from reviews of qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual). A thematic synthesis approach will be used to derive analytical themes., Discussion: This review will systematically identify, synthesize, and present enablers and barriers reported by people with musculoskeletal pain to engage in telehealth interventions. The review will provide information required to support the design and improvement of telehealth services., Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42019136148.

Objective: To evaluate the overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews of exercise therapy for chronic non-specific low back pain using the AMSTAR 2 tool., Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PEDro and CINAHL was searched up to February 2017. Two independent reviewers selected systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials that investigated exercise therapy in patients with low back pain. AMSTAR 2 assessment was performed by pairs of reviewers, and the overall confidence in the results of the systematic reviews were rated as 'High', 'Moderate', 'Low' and 'Critically low'. Descriptive analysis was used to summarize the characteristics of included systematic reviews. The percentage of systematic reviews achieving each item from the AMSTAR 2 and the overall confidence in the results were tabulated., Results: The search identified 38 systematic reviews. Most of the reviews included a median of 10 clinical trials and total sample size of 813 participants per review. Five of 38 (13%) reviews were Cochrane reviews, and 8 (21%) systematic reviews had a protocol published or registered prospectively. The overall confidence in the results of 28 reviews (74%) was rated as 'Critically low', 6 (16%) as 'Low', 1 (2%) as Moderate, while 3 of 38 reviews (8%) were rated as 'High'., Conclusion: The results demonstrate very low confidence in the results of most systematic reviews of exercise in chronic non-specific low back pain. Clinicians are more likely to deliver the most efficacious interventions to patients by critically appraising systematic reviews using AMSTAR 2 before making their decisions., (Copyright © 2019 Associação Brasileira de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação em Fisioterapia. Publicado por Elsevier Editora Ltda. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Smoking is a risk factor for chronic pain conditions. Epidemiological evidence suggests that smoking cessation may be an important treatment target in people with chronic pain. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in people with chronic pain., Methods: We systematically searched for clinical trials investigating the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for people with chronic pain, compared with any control comparator. Primary outcomes were pain and physical function. Secondary outcomes were smoking status, quality of life, psychological and cognitive function, and adverse events. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias criteria and the quality of evidence with GRADE., Results: Searches retrieved 3845 records and identified two trials for inclusion (total n = 99 participants). There was low-quality evidence of no effect of smoking cessation programs on pain and very low-quality evidence of no effect on function at short-term follow-up. There was conflicting evidence on the effect of smoking cessation interventions for changing the smoking status and number of cigarettes consumed per day. There was no effect on depression and anxiety., Conclusion: Current evidence does not indicate clinically important effects of smoking cessation interventions in people with chronic pain. There is a need for high-quality trials in this area., Implications: Our review highlights an important evidence gap. We found only two studies investigating smoking cessation programs for chronic pain conditions providing very low- to low-quality evidence., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests The BMJ has judged that there are no disqualifying financial ties to commercial companies. The authors declare the following other interests: none. Further details of The BMJ policy on financial interests are here: https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/resources-authors/forms-policies-and-checklists/declaration-competing-interests

Background: Low back pain is a very prevalent condition in the population and cupping therapy has been presented as a frequently used non-pharmacological treatment in this population. However, there is a lack of well-designed studies that evaluate the effects of this technique. This protocol describes a placebo-controlled, randomised, double-blind study that aims to evaluate the effect of dry cupping therapy on pain, physical function, trunk range of motion, quality of life and psychological symptoms in individuals with non-specific chronic low back pain., Methods and Analysis: Ninety individuals with chronic non-specific low back pain, aged from 18 to 59 years, will be randomised into two groups: intervention group, which will be submitted to dry cupping therapy application with two suctions; and placebo group which will undergo placebo dry cupping therapy. Both applications will occur bilaterally in parallel to the vertebrae from L1 to L5. The application will be performed once a week for 8 weeks. The volunteers will be evaluated before the treatment (T0), immediately after the first intervention (T1), after 4 weeks of intervention (T4) and after 8 weeks of intervention (T8). The primary outcome will be pain intensity, and secondary outcomes will be physical function, lumbar range of motion, patient expectation, overall perception of effect, quality of life and psychological factors., Ethics and Dissemination: This protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee of FACISA/UFRN (number: 3639814). The results of the study will be disseminated to participants through social networks and will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and scientific meetings., Trial Registration Number: NCT03909672., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Low back pain (LBP) is extremely common and causes an enormous burden on the society. This perspective article aims to provide an evidence-based summary in the field of LBP. More specifically, we aimed to present epidemiological data on cost, diagnosis, prognosis, prevention and interventions for patients with LBP. It is critical that both clinicians and policymakers follow best practices by using high-value care for patients with LBP. In addition, nonevidence-based procedures must be immediately abandoned. These actions are likely to reduce societal costs and will improve the quality of life of these patients.

Background: Shoulder pain is common among patients with musculoskeletal pain and the prevalence of patients with subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS) is high. Despite the high prevalence, there is a lack of an extensive evaluation of the proprioception acuity in patients with SAPS. Knowledge of the proprioceptive deficit would assist clinicians in the proper treatment and may offer an alternative explanation for the mechanisms underlying SAPS, which are poorly understood., Objective: To compare the proprioceptive function of the shoulder in patients with SAPS and matched controls., Study Design: Matched case-control study., Setting: Physical Functional Rehabilitation Service of an outpatient clinic., Participants: A total of 32 consecutive patients with SAPS who sought physical therapy for shoulder pain and 32 healthy participants (control group) matched for age, sex, and handedness., Interventions: All participants completed a questionnaire containing sociodemographic information, pain intensity and characteristics, the Numerical Pain Rating Scale, and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index., Main Outcome Measurements: The proprioceptive assessment was performed through kinesthesia, passive joint position sense (PJPS), and the active joint position sense (AJPS)., Results: The groups showed no statistically significant differences in kinesthesia, PJPS, and AJPS for internal or external rotation. The proprioceptive acuity was not associated with pain intensity or functional disability in patients with SAPS., Conclusions: Participants with SAPS did not present proprioceptive deficits in a pain-free motion of medial and lateral rotation when compared to their matched controls. The proprioceptive deficit may not be involved with the mechanisms underlying SAPS and seems not to interfere with the clinical outcomes of patients with SAPS., Level of Evidence: Level III., (© 2019 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.)

Introduction: Reporting confidence intervals in scientific articles is important and relevant for evidence-based practice. Clinicians should understand confidence intervals in order to determine if they can realistically expect results similar to those presented in research studies when they implement the scientific evidence in clinical practice. The aims of this masterclass are: (1) to discuss confidence intervals around effect estimates; (2) to understand confidence intervals estimation (frequentist and Bayesian approaches); and (3) to interpret such uncertainty measures., Content: Confidence intervals are measures of uncertainty around effect estimates. Interpretation of the frequentist 95% confidence interval: we can be 95% confident that the true (unknown) estimate would lie within the lower and upper limits of the interval, based on hypothesized repeats of the experiment. Many researchers and health professionals oversimplify the interpretation of the frequentist 95% confidence interval by dichotomizing it in statistically significant or non-statistically significant, hampering a proper discussion on the values, the width (precision) and the practical implications of such interval. Interpretation of the Bayesian 95% confidence interval (which is known as credible interval): there is a 95% probability that the true (unknown) estimate would lie within the interval, given the evidence provided by the observed data., Conclusions: The use and reporting of confidence intervals should be encouraged in all scientific articles. Clinicians should consider using the interpretation, relevance and applicability of confidence intervals in real-world decision-making. Training and education may enhance knowledge and skills related to estimating, understanding and interpreting uncertainty measures, reducing the barriers for their use under either frequentist or Bayesian approaches., (Copyright © 2019 Associação Brasileira de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação em Fisioterapia. Publicado por Elsevier Editora Ltda. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate if allocation concealment and intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis influence the treatment effects of physical therapy interventions in low back pain (LBP) trials., Data Sources: We searched on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), and CINAHL up to February 2017., Study Selection: We included LBP trials that compared physical therapy interventions to placebo or no intervention or minimal intervention with pain or disability outcomes., Data Extraction: Information about allocation concealment and ITT analysis was extracted from PEDro and pain and disability outcomes converted to a 0-100 scale. A meta-regression was performed to evaluate the influence of these methodological features of interest on treatment effects. Other covariates included in the meta-regression were sample size and sequence generation., Data Synthesis: We identified 128 eligible trials (pooled N=20,555 participants). A total of 44.5% of the trials achieved allocation concealment, while 32% performed ITT analysis. Meta regression analyses showed no influence of allocation concealment on treatment effects for pain (regression coefficient 0.009; 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.91 to 2.91) and disability (regression coefficient 1.13; 95% CI -1.35 to 3.62), and no influence of ITT analysis for pain (regression coefficient 1.38; 95% CI -1.73 to 4.50) or disability (regression coefficient 1.27; 95% CI -1.39 to 3.64). For the other covariates, there was also no clinically significant influence on the treatment effects., Conclusion: There is no influence of allocation concealment or ITT analysis on treatment effects of physical therapy interventions for pain and disability in LBP trials., (Copyright © 2019 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Randomised clinical trials to date investigating the efficacy of bisphosphonates in knee osteoarthritis (OA) have found divergent results, with a recent meta-analysis finding no superiority of these drugs over placebo. Whether particular patient subgroups are more likely to benefit from this therapy than others is still unclear. We aim to investigate the effects of bisphosphonates compared with a control group (placebo, no treatment, another active treatment) on clinical and structural outcomes in specific knee OA subpopulations with possible distinct rates of subchondral bone turnover., Methods and Analysis: Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Sciences and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched from inception to February 2018. Randomised clinical trials will be eligible if they reported at least one potential treatment effect modifier at baseline: gender, menopausal status, age, body mass index, radiographic stage, knee pain severity, presence of bone marrow lesions, levels of biochemical markers of bone turnover (serum and/or urinary) and systemic bone mineral density status. Authors of original trials will be contacted to obtain individual patient data from each study. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. The primary outcomes will include pain and radiographic joint space width loss. Studies using other MRI-based assessment of disease progression will also be eligible. Outcomes will be grouped into short-term (≤3 months), intermediate-term (>3 months; ≤12 months) and long-term (>12 months). Regression models will be used, adding an interaction term for each subgroup of interest to determine possible subgroup effects. There was no source of funding for this study., Ethics and Dissemination: Dissemination of our findings is planned to occur through conference presentations, publication in peer-reviewed journals and social media. No formal ethics approval is generally required as no new data collection will be undertaken., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42018093327., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Professor David Hunter reports personal fees from consulting fees from Merck Serono, Flexion and Tissuegene, outside the submitted work. Prof. Bierma-Zeinstra reports grants from the European Union, The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Dutch Arthritis Foundation, CZ, Nuts Ohra, Stichting Coolsingel, personal fees from Infirst Healthcare and from Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, outside the submitted work. All other authors have nothing to disclose., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The Lumbar Spine Instability Questionnaire (LSIQ) is a self-report measure of 15 items. Previous studies have used the LSIQ as a measure of clinical instability; however, a comprehensive evaluation of its clinimetric properties has not been conducted., Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinimetric properties of the LSIQ in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (LBP)., Methods: In this clinical measurement study, the authors included patients with nonspecific LBP presenting to primary care clinicians in Australia. Rasch analysis was conducted to assess item hierarchy, targeting, unidimensionality, person fit, internal consistency, and differential item functioning. The researchers assessed test-retest reliability of total scores and individual item scores, as well as convergent and divergent validity., Results: A total of 107 participants with LBP (60 men and 47 women) were recruited. The results were variable. The LSIQ appeared to constitute a unidimensional measure, targeted the sample well, and showed adequate test-retest reliability. However, the scale had poor internal consistency, did not appear to function as an interval-level measure, and had unclear construct validity. Although no items appeared to be redundant, several items were biased by factors other than the proposed construct of the measure., Conclusion: The LSIQ does not seem to be ready to be implemented in clinical practice and may require theoretical reconsideration. Although the LSIQ provided satisfactory estimates for some clinimetric features, the authors do not consider the instrument to be useful as an interval-level measure but rather as an index. Future studies are needed to investigate whether the LSIQ could measure clinical instability or some other construct. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(12):915-922. Epub 22 Jun 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7866.

Objective: The aim of this study was to construct and evaluate a summary score of reporting completeness based on the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR)., Study Design and Setting: We included 200 reports published in 2013 randomly selected from the Physiotherapy Evidence Database. We summed the scores for the 12 items for the intervention and control groups for each trial to create a summary score from 0 to 24. Rasch analysis was used to investigate the item hierarchy, category function and reliability of the TIDieR checklist and determine the extent to which the summary score can be considered an interval-level measure., Results: The data fit the Rasch model suggesting the summary score is able to assess the completeness of reporting. The items appeared to target the study sample well (average report measure was 0.48 [0.87] compared to the average item measure of 0.0 [1.82]), and progressed in a logical manner, suggesting the summary score can be used as a single variable. The low internal consistency (0.62) suggests the summary score may only be able to discriminate between the least and most detailed reports., Conclusions: Our results support the use of the TIDieR summary score; however, we encourage the replication of our study in an independent data set., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Aims: To investigate the use of an enriched study design on the estimates of treatment effect in analgesic trials for chronic musculoskeletal pain., Methods: Database searches were conducted from 2004 to 2014. We included randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating pain medications for chronic musculoskeletal pain. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale. The estimates of treatment effect on pain and adverse events were compared between enriched and nonenriched designs. Metaregression was used to assess the association between the effect size estimate and the study design controlling for analgesic dose and methodological quality., Results: We included 108 trials, of which 99 were included in the meta-analysis (n = 44 171). There were no overall differences in effect sizes between enriched and nonenriched designs for pain intensity. There was a significant difference for a reduction in any adverse events favouring enriched designs for opioids, but not for other analgesics or the outcome serious adverse events. There was an association between effect size and methodological quality, with failure to blind the outcome assessor and failure to use intention-to-treat analysis being associated with larger effect sizes., Conclusions: There is no evidence that the use of an enriched study design changes the treatment effect size estimate for pain. There is some evidence that clinical trials that employ enriched designs report a reduced risk of adverse events in trials for chronic musculoskeletal pain, but it is unclear whether enriched designs influence estimates of serious adverse events. Features of trial design and study quality were associated with treatment effect estimates., (© 2017 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Introduction: Meta-epidemiological studies examining the influence of methodological characteristics, such as allocation concealment and intention-to-treat analysis have been performed in a large number of healthcare areas. However, there are no studies investigating these characteristics in physical therapy interventions for patients with low back pain. The aim of this study is to investigate the influence of allocation concealment and the use of intention-to-treat analysis on estimates of treatment effects of physical therapy interventions in low back pain clinical trials., Methods and Analysis: Searches on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) and CINAHL databases will be performed. We will search for systematic reviews that include a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials that compared physical therapy interventions in patients with low back pain with placebo or no intervention, and have pain intensity or disability as the primary outcomes. Information about selection (allocation concealment) and attrition bias (intention-to-treat analysis) will be extracted from the PEDro database for each included trial. Information about bibliographic data, study characteristics, participants' characteristics and study results will be extracted. A random-effects model will be used to provide separate estimates of treatment effects for trials with and without allocation concealment and with and without intention-to-treat analysis (eg, four estimates). A meta-regression will be performed to measure the association between methodological features and treatment effects from each trial. The dependent variable will be the treatment effect (the mean between-group differences) for the primary outcomes (pain or disability), while the independent variables will be the methodological features of interest (allocation concealment and intention-to-treat analysis). Other covariates will include sample size and sequence generation., Ethics and Dissemination: No ethical approval will be required for this study. The study findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at international conferences., Registration Number: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42016052347)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)