Search

INTRODUCTION: Blinding is a methodologically important aspect in randomised controlled trials yet frequently overlooked in trials of spinal manual therapy interventions for back pain. To help inform the blinding methods of a future, double-placebo-controlled trial comparing spinal manual therapy and nerve root injection for lumbosacral radicular pain, we set four objectives: (1) to assess the feasibility of blinding participants, randomly allocated to an active or placebo-control spinal manual therapy intervention protocol, (2) to assess the feasibility of blinding outcome assessors within the trial, (3) to explore the influence of spinal manual therapy experience and low back pain on blinding, and (4) to explore factors contributing to perceptions about intervention assignment among participants and outcome assessors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two-parallel-group, single-centre, placebo-controlled, methodological blinding feasibility randomised trial. We will recruit between 60 and 100 adults with or without back pain and with or without experience of spinal manual therapy from Zurich, Switzerland. Participants will be randomised to either an active spinal manual therapy or a placebo-control spinal manual therapy protocol-both interventions delivered over two study visits, up to two weeks apart. The primary outcome is participant blinding using the Bang blinding index within each intervention arm immediately after each of the two study visits. Secondary outcomes are participant blinding using the James blinding index, outcome assessor blinding (Bang and James blinding indices), self-reported factors influencing perceived intervention assignment among participants and outcome assessors, and participant-reported credibility and expectancy of study interventions. Other outcomes-included to blind the study objective from participants-are lumbar spine range of motion, self-rated general health, satisfaction with care, pain intensity, and function. Intervention provider outcomes include intervention component fidelity and quality of intervention delivery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The independent ethics commission of Canton Zurich granted ethical approval for this study (KEK 2023-00381). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Findings will be disseminated in scientific conferences and a peer-reviewed publication and inform the blinding methods of a future double-placebo controlled trial comparing spinal manual therapy and nerve root injection for lumbosacral radicular pain-the SALuBRITY trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05778396.

ObjectiveTo evaluate longer term symptoms and health outcomes associated with post-covid-19 condition within a cohort of individuals with a SARS-CoV-2 infection.DesignPopulation based, longitudinal cohort.SettingGeneral population of canton of Zurich, Switzerland.Participants1106 adults with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who were not vaccinated before infection and 628 adults who did not have an infection.Main outcome measuresTrajectories of self-reported health status and covid-19 related symptoms between months six, 12, 18, and 24 after infection and excess risk of symptoms at six months after infection compared with individuals who had no infection.Results22.9% (95% confidence interval 20.4% to 25.6%) of individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 did not fully recover by six months. The proportion of individuals who had an infection who reported not having recovered decreased to 18.5% (16.2% to 21.1%) at 12 months and 17.2% (14.0% to 20.8%) at 24 months after infection. When assessing changes in self-reported health status, most participants had continued recovery (68.4% (63.8% to 72.6%)) or had an overall improvement (13.5% (10.6% to 17.2%)) over time. Yet, 5.2% (3.5% to 7.7%) had a worsening in health status and 4.4% (2.9% to 6.7%) had alternating periods of recovery and health impairment. The point prevalence and severity of covid-19 related symptoms also decreased over time, with 18.1% (14.8% to 21.9%) reporting symptoms at 24 months. 8.9% (6.5% to 11.2%) of participants reported symptoms at all four follow-up time points, while in 12.5% (9.8% to 15.9%) symptoms were alternatingly absent and present. Symptom prevalence was higher among individuals who were infected compared with those who were not at six months (adjusted risk difference 17.0% (11.5% to 22.4%)). Excess risk (adjusted risk difference) for individual symptoms among those infected ranged from 2% to 10%, with the highest excess risks observed for altered taste or smell (9.8% (7.7% to 11.8%)), post-exertional malaise (9.4% (6.1% to 12.7%)), fatigue (5.4% (1.2% to 9.5%)), dyspnoea (7.8% (5.2% to 10.4%)), and reduced concentration (8.3% (6.0% to 10.7%)) and memory (5.7% (3.5% to 7.9%)).ConclusionsUp to 18% of individuals who were not vaccinated before infection had post-covid-19 condition up to two years after infection, with evidence of excess symptom risk compared with controls. Effective interventions are needed to reduce the burden of post-covid-19 condition. Use of multiple outcome measures and consideration of the expected rates of recovery and heterogeneity in symptom trajectories are important in the design and interpretation of clinical trials.RegistrationsISRCTN18181860, .

Physical activity (PA) is of key importance for health among healthy persons and individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). PA has multiple dimensions that can be assessed and quantified objectively using activity monitors. Moreover, as shown in the published literature, variable methodologies have been used to date to quantify PA among individuals with COPD, precluding clear comparisons of outcomes across studies. The present paper aims to provide a summary of the available literature for the rationale behind using objectively measured PA and proposes a standardized methodology for assessment, including standard operating procedures for future research. The present paper, therefore, describes the concept of PA, reports on the importance of PA, summarizes the dimensions of PA, provides a standard operating procedure on how to monitor PA using objective assessments, and describes the psychometric properties of objectively measured PA. The present international task force recommends implementation of the standard operating procedure for PA data collection and reporting in the future. This should further clarify the relationship between PA and clinical outcomes, test the impact of treatment interventions on PA in individuals with COPD, and successfully propose a PA endpoint for regulatory qualification in the future.

Objectives: Before vaccines and effective treatments were available, quarantine of close contacts was important to limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2. To evaluate potential benefits and harms of quarantine, we aimed to estimate infection rates and describe experiences and mental health among persons in mandated quarantine during the early SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Methods: We invited adults in mandated quarantine after an exposure to SARS-CoV-2 identified through contact tracing of the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland, between August 2020 and January 2021. Participants completed two questionnaires and received up to two SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction tests, during and at the end of quarantine. Results: Among 395 participants, quarantine duration ranged from 2 to 20 days. By day 11 since the last contact, 11.1% [95% CI 8.4%-14.7%] were infected with SARS-CoV-2. The proportion of participants with symptoms of depression doubled from 9.3% before quarantine to 18.9% during quarantine, and 12.1% reported quarantine was very or extremely difficult. Conclusion: Although quarantine was only moderately burdensome for most participants, some experienced significant difficulties and burden. Policymakers need to balance infection control with potential harms placed on individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although healthcare practitioners (HCPs) are a valuable source of social support, research on support provided by neurologists to older persons with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) remains limited. Objectives: To explore expectations of pwMS aged 55 years or older regarding MS care and to identify support types, met and unmet needs within their relationship with neurologists. Methods: Utilizing a mixed-methods approach, we analyzed survey data from Swiss Multiple Sclerosis Registry participants. Quantitative data included Likert scales gauging the importance of various aspects of MS care for pwMS both in and out of neurological care. Qualitative data were derived from three open-ended questions, focusing on neurologist-provided support for pwMS in neurological care. Data underwent descriptive and deductive thematic analysis, using Cutrona and Suhr framework for coding social support. Results: Among the 286 participants (median age 61.0 years, interquartile range (IQR) 57.0–66.0; median disease duration 23.5 years, IQR 15.0–31.0), 84.6% (N = 244) were under neurological care. Quantitative findings highlighted the significance of HCP expertise and consultation time. Qualitative analysis identified all social support domains in the neurologist–pwMS relationship, with informational support being most prevalent, followed by emotional support. Neurologists' expertise, availability, comprehensive advising, listening, and validation emerged as key themes. Unmet needs were relatively infrequent and concerned insufficient information on complementary medicine, empathy, and understanding of symptoms like fatigue. Conclusions: Older pwMS see neurologists as adequate providers of comprehensive support and particularly value neurologists' sufficient availability, informational and emotional support. Areas for improvement include attention to complementary medicine and empathy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess the current quality of surgical outcome reporting in the medical literature and to provide recommendations for improvement. Background: In 1996, The Lancet labeled surgery as a "comic opera" mostly referring to the poor quality of outcome reporting in the literature impeding improvement in surgical quality and patient care. Methods: We screened 3 first-tier and 2 second-tier surgical journals, as well as 3 leading medical journals for original articles reporting on results of surgical procedures published over a recent 18-month period. The quality of outcome reporting was assessed using a prespecified 12-item checklist. Results: Six hundred twenty-seven articles reporting surgical outcomes were analyzed, including 125 randomized controlled trials. Only 1 (0.2%) article met all 12 criteria of the checklist, whereas 356 articles (57%) fulfilled less than half of the criteria. The poorest reporting was on cumulative morbidity burden, which was missing in 94% of articles (n= 591) as well as patient-reported outcomes missing in 83% of publications (n=518). Comparing journal groups for the individual criterion, we found moderate to very strong statistical evidence for better quality of reporting in high versus lower impact journals for 7 of 12 criteria and strong statistical evidence for better reporting of patientreported outcomes in medical versus surgical journals (P<0·001). Conclusions: The quality of outcomes reporting in the medical literature remains poor, lacking improvement over the past 20 years onmost key end points. The implementation of standardized outcome reporting is urgently needed to minimize biased interpretation of data thereby enabling improved patient care and the elaboration of meaningful guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]