Search

Background: The United States military strives to prepare soldiers physically and mentally for war while preventing injury and attrition. Previous research has focused on physical injury risk factors but has not prospectively examined psychological risk factors., Purpose: This study's purpose was to investigate whether self-efficacy is a risk factor for musculoskeletal injury in an initial military training environment and compare it to other known risk factors., Study Design: Prospective, Longitudinal Cohort Study., Materials and Methods: Shortly after starting cadet basic training, new cadets rated self-efficacy by an 11-point questionnaire. Other risk factor data including injury history, sex, height, weight, body mass index, age, aerobic fitness, upper body muscular endurance, core muscular endurance and previous military experience were collected by self-report questionnaire and military fitness testing. The primary dependent variable was musculoskeletal injury that originated during the seven-week course. Independent variables were compared between participants who were and were not injured using Chi-squared test, t-tests, Cox regression analysis and time to injury was evaluated using Kaplan-Meyer survival analyses., Results: Seven hundred eighty-one (65.1%) new cadets were eligible and consented to participate. Injured cadets had significantly lower self-efficacy scores (p=0.003 and p=<0.001), shorter height (p=<0.001), lower weight (p=0.036), lower push-up and plank performance (p=<0.001), slower two-mile run performance (p=<0.001), and females sustained a proportionally higher number of injuries than males (p=<0.001). Cadets with low self-efficacy, shorter height, lower hand release push-up performance, lower plank performance and slower two-mile run performance were at greater risk for musculoskeletal injury. Cadets with less self-efficacy were also less likely to continue uninjured throughout cadet basic training according to a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (log rank test<0.002). Multivariable Cox regression revealed that only aerobic fitness predicted musculoskeletal injury (HR=1.005 [1.003-1.006], p=<0.001)., Conclusions: Participants with less self-efficacy sustained injuries earlier and more often than those with greater self-efficacy. However, aerobic fitness alone predicted future injury after controlling for all risk factors. Resolved prior injury was not a risk factor for future injury., Level of Evidence 2b: Individual cohort study., (© The Author(s).)

Background: Static balance is often impaired in patients after ankle sprains. The ability to identify static balance impairments is dependent on an effective balance assessment tool. The Sway Balance Mobile Application (SWAY App) (Sway Medical, Tulsa, OK) uses a smart phone or tablet to assess postural sway during a modified Balance Error Scoring System (mBESS) assessment and shows promise as an accessible method to quantify changes in static balance after injury., Purpose: The primary purposes of this study were to determine the ability to differentiate between those with ankle sprain versus controls (construct validity) and ability to detect change over time (responsiveness) of a mBESS assessment using a mobile device application to evaluate static balance after an acute ankle sprain., Study Design: Case-control study., Methods: Twenty-two military academy Cadets with an acute ankle sprain and 20 healthy Cadets were enrolled in the study. All participants completed an assessment measuring self-reported function, ankle dorsiflexion range of motion (via the weightbearing lunge), dynamic balance, and static balance. Static balance measured with the mBESS using the SWAY App was validated against laboratory-based measures. Cadets with ankle sprains completed their assessment twice: once within two weeks of injury (baseline) and again after four weeks of rehabilitation that included balance training. Independent and paired t-tests were utilized to analyze differences over time and between groups. Effect sizes were calculated and relationships explored using Pearson's correlation coefficients., Results: The mBESS scores measured by the SWAY App were lower in participants with acute ankle sprains than healthy Cadets ( t = 3.15, p = 0.004). Injured participants improved their mBESS score measured by SWAY at four weeks following their initial assessments ( t = 3.31, p = 0.004; Baseline: 74.2 +/- 16.1, 4-weeks: 82.7 +/- 9.5). The mBESS measured by the SWAY App demonstrated moderate to good correlation with a laboratory measure of static balance ( r = -0.59, p \< 0.001)., Conclusion: The mBESS assessed with a mobile device application is a valid and responsive clinical tool for evaluating static balance. The tool demonstrated construct (known groups) validity detecting balance differences between a healthy and injured group, concurrent validity demonstrating moderate to good correlation with established laboratory measures, and responsiveness to changes in static balance in military Cadets during recovery from an acute ankle sprain., Level of Evidence: Level 3., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s).)

Background: Concussions are often accompanied by balance disturbances. Clinically accurate evaluation systems are often expensive, large, and inaccessible to most clinicians. The Sway Balance Mobile Application (SWAY) is an accessible method to quantify balance changes., Purpose: To determine the known groups and convergent validity of the SWAY to assess balance after a concussion., Study Design: Case-Control Study., Methods: Twenty participants with acute concussion and twenty controls were recruited. At initial, one-week, and final return to activity (RTA) evaluations, all participants completed the Sports Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT-5), and balance control measured by SWAY mBESS and NeuroCom Balance Master Sensory Organization Test (SOT). Mixed model ANOVAs were used to detect differences in SWAY mBESS and NeuroCom SOT scores with time (initial, one-week, final RTA) as the within-subjects factor and group (concussed, healthy) as the between-subjects factor. Spearman's Rho correlations explored the associations between NeuroCom SOT scores, SWAY scores, SCAT-5 symptom scores, and time in days to final RTA., Results: The sampled population was predominantly male and age (20 ± 1), and BMI differences were insignificant between groups. The SWAY did not detect differences between healthy and concussed participants and did not detect change over time [F(2,40) = .114, p = 0.89; F(2,40)= .276, p =0.60]. When assessing the relationship between the SWAY and the SOT, no correlation was found at any time point (r = -0.317 to -0.062, p > 0.05). Time to RTA demonstrated a moderate correlation with both SCAT-5 symptom severity score (r = .693, p < 0.01) and SCAT-5 total symptom score (r = .611, p < 0.01) at the one-week follow-up., Conclusion: The SWAY mBESS does not appear to be a valid balance assessment for the concussed patient. The SWAY mBESS in patients with concussion failed to demonstrate convergent validity and did not demonstrate an ability to validate known groups. When assessing the time to final RTA, the one-week post-initial assessment SCAT-5 symptom severity and total scores may help determine the length of recovery in this population., Level of Evidence: Level 3., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. This work was funded by the Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Center (TATRC) at the U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command through the Advanced Medical Technology Initiative (AMTI). The views, opinions and/or findings contained in this research/presentation/publication are those of the author(s)/company and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Defense and should not be construed as an official DoD/Army position, policy or decision unless so designated by other documentation. No official endorsement should be made. Reference herein to any specific commercial products, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Government., (© The Author(s).)

Background: Military physical therapists practicing direct-access routinely utilize diagnostic imaging and numerous published case reports demonstrate the ability of physical therapists to diagnose and appropriately disposition patients with foot/ankle and wrist/hand fractures. However, no larger cohort studies have explored the utilization of diagnostic imaging by physical therapists to detect fractures., Hypothesis/purpose: To describe the utilization of diagnostic imaging in foot/ankle and wrist/hand injuries by physical therapists in a direct-access sports physical therapy clinic., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Methods: The Agfa Impax Client 6 image viewing software (IMPAX) was searched from 2014 to 2018 for patients with diagnostic imaging ordered for foot/ankle and wrist/hand injuries. The Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA) electronic medical record was independently reviewed by the principal and co-investigator physical therapists. Data extracted were demographics and elements from the patient history and physical examination., Results: In foot/ankle injuries, physical therapists diagnosed a fracture in 16% of the 177 cases and waited for an average of 3.9 days and 1.3 visits before ordering imaging. In wrist/hand injuries, physical therapists diagnosed a fracture in 24% of the 178 cases and waited for an average of 3.7 days and 1.2 visits before ordering imaging. The time to definitive care from the initial physical therapy evaluation was significantly different (p = 0.04) for foot/ankle fractures (0.6 days) compared to wrist/hand fractures (5.0 days). The Ottawa Ankle Rules demonstrated a negative likelihood ratio (-LR) of 0.11 (0.02, 0.72) and a positive likelihood ratio (+LR) of 1.99 (1.62, 2.44) for the diagnosis of foot/ankle fracture., Conclusions: Physical therapists utilizing diagnostic imaging in a direct-access sports physical therapy clinic diagnosed fractures in similar proportions for foot/ankle and wrist/hand injuries and quickly dispositioned patients to definitive care for those fractures. The diagnostic accuracy of the Ottawa Ankle Rules was similar to previously reported values., Level of Evidence: Level 3.

Background: Traumatic shoulder instability is a common injury in athletes and military personnel. Surgical stabilization reduces recurrence, but athletes often return to sport before recovering upper extremity rotational strength and sport-specific abilities. Blood flow restriction (BFR) may stimulate muscle growth without the need for heavy resistance training post-surgically., Hypothesis/purpose: To observe changes in shoulder strength, self-reported function, upper extremity performance, and range of motion (ROM) in military cadets recovering from shoulder stabilization surgery who completed a standard rehabilitation program with six weeks of BFR training., Study Design: Prospective case series., Methods: Military cadets who underwent shoulder stabilization surgery completed six weeks of upper extremity BFR training, beginning post-op week six. Primary outcomes were shoulder isometric strength and patient-reported function assessed at 6-weeks, 12-weeks, and 6-months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included shoulder ROM assessed at each timepoint and the Closed Kinetic Chain Upper Extremity Stability Test (CKCUEST), the Upper Extremity Y-Balance Test (UQYBT), and the Unilateral Seated Shotput Test (USPT) assessed at the six-month follow-up., Results: Twenty cadets performed an average 10.9 BFR training sessions over six weeks. Statistically significant and clinically meaningful increases in surgical extremity external rotation strength ( p < 0.001; mean difference, .049; 95% CI: .021, .077), abduction strength ( p < 0.001; mean difference, .079; 95% CI: .050, .108), and internal rotation strength ( p < 0.001; mean difference, .060; CI: .028, .093) occurred from six to 12 weeks postoperatively. Statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements were reported on the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation ( p < 0.001; mean difference, 17.7; CI: 9.4, 25.9) and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index ( p < 0.001; mean difference, -31.1; CI: -44.2, -18.0) from six to 12 weeks postoperatively. Additionally, over 70 percent of participants met reference values on two to three performance tests at 6-months., Conclusion: While the degree of improvement attributable to the addition of BFR is unknown, the clinically meaningful improvements in shoulder strength, self-reported function, and upper extremity performance warrant further exploration of BFR during upper extremity rehabilitation., Level of Evidence: 4, Case Series., Competing Interests: The authors have no relevant or material financial interests that relate to this study. The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or reflecting the views of the United States Army or Department of Defense.

Background: Overutilization of diagnostic imaging is associated with poor outcomes and increased costs. Physical therapists demonstrate the ability to order diagnostic imaging safely and appropriately, and early access to physical therapy reduces unnecessary imaging, lowers healthcare costs, and improves outcomes., Hypothesis/purpose: The primary purpose of this study was to compare rates of compliance with the National Committee for Quality Assurance - Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) recommendations for diagnostic imaging in low back pain between physical therapists and primary care providers in young, athletic patients., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Methods: Military Health System Data Repository (MDR) data from January 2019 to May 2020 was reviewed for compliance with the low back pain HEDIS recommendation. The low back pain imaging HEDIS measure identifies the percentage of patients who did not have an imaging study (plain X-ray, MRI, CT Scan) ordered on the first encounter with a diagnosis of low back pain or in the 28 days following that first diagnosis. Chi-square tests compared HEDIS compliance rates, with α = 0.05 set a priori., Results: From January 2019 to May 2020, in patients age 18-24, the MDR database identified 1,845 total visits for LBP identified in the Physical Therapy Clinic and 467 total visits for LBP in the Primary Care Clinic. In the Physical Therapy Clinic, 96.7% of encounters did not have imaging ordered within the first 28 days of onset of symptoms, compared with 82.0% in the Primary Care Clinic (p < .001)., Conclusions: Utilizing data from a national standardized healthcare performance measure, physical therapists practicing in a direct-access setting were significantly more likely than primary care providers to adhere to guidelines for low back pain imaging in young, athletic patients., Level of Evidence: Level 3., Competing Interests: The authors have no relevant or material financial interests that relate to this study. The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or reflecting the views of the United States Army or Department of Defense.

Background: While advanced diagnostic imaging is a large contributor to the growth in health care costs, direct-access to physical therapy is associated with decreased rates of diagnostic imaging. No study has systematically evaluated with evidence-based criteria the appropriateness of advanced diagnostic imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), when ordered by physical therapists. The primary purpose of this study was to describe the appropriateness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or magnetic resonance arthrogram (MRA) exams ordered by physical therapists in a direct-access sports physical therapy clinic., Study Design: Retrospective observational study of practice., Hypothesis: Greater than 80% of advanced diagnostic imaging orders would have an American College of Radiology (ACR) Appropriateness Criteria rating of greater than 6, indicating an imaging order that is usually appropriate., Methods: A 2-year retrospective analysis identified 108 MRI/MRA examination orders from four physical therapists. A board-certified radiologist determined the appropriateness of each order based on ACR appropriateness criteria. The principal investigator and co-investigator radiologist assessed agreement between the clinical diagnosis and MRI/surgical findings., Results: Knee (31%) and shoulder (25%) injuries were the most common. Overall, 55% of injuries were acute. The mean ACR rating was 7.7; scores from six to nine have been considered appropriate orders and higher ratings are better. The percentage of orders complying with ACR appropriateness criteria was 83.2%. Physical therapist's clinical diagnosis was confirmed by MRI/MRA findings in 64.8% of cases and was confirmed by surgical findings in 90% of cases., Conclusions: Physical therapists providing musculoskeletal primary care in a direct-access sports physical therapy clinic appropriately ordered advanced diagnostic imaging in over 80% of cases. Future research should prospectively compare physical therapist appropriateness and utilization to other groups of providers and explore the effects of physical therapist imaging privileging on outcomes., Level of Evidence: Diagnosis, Level 3.

Unlabelled: Accurate diagnosis and management of knee pain with or without mechanical symptoms challenges the physical therapist's clinical reasoning skills. Meniscal cysts are one relatively rare disorder of the knee that can cause both pain and mechanical symptoms and are frequently associated with a meniscal tear. In patients with suspected meniscal cysts, systematic differential diagnosis and sound clinical reasoning encourages appropriate integration of the clinical examination with diagnostic imaging. These case reports describe two different presentations of lateral parameniscal cysts where integration of the clinical examination with appropriate imaging allowed the physical therapist to provide a timely and appropriate intervention. In both cases, the diagnostic process is described along with the subsequent interventions that lead to positive outcomes., Level of Evidence: 5 (Case Report).