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.

The objective of this document was to standardise published cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) protocols for improved interpretation in clinical settings and multicentre research projects. This document: 1) summarises the protocols and procedures used in published studies focusing on incremental CPET in chronic lung conditions; 2) presents standard incremental protocols for CPET on a stationary cycle ergometer and a treadmill; and 3) provides patients' perspectives on CPET obtained through an online survey supported by the European Lung Foundation. We systematically reviewed published studies obtained from EMBASE, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception to January 2017. Of 7914 identified studies, 595 studies with 26 523 subjects were included. The literature supports a test protocol with a resting phase lasting at least 3 min, a 3-min unloaded phase, and an 8- to 12-min incremental phase with work rate increased linearly at least every minute, followed by a recovery phase of at least 2-3 min. Patients responding to the survey (n=295) perceived CPET as highly beneficial for their diagnostic assessment and informed the Task Force consensus. Future research should focus on the individualised estimation of optimal work rate increments across different lung diseases, and the collection of robust normative data.

BackgroundCOPD increases susceptibility to sleep disturbances, which may in turn predispose to increased respiratory symptoms. The objective of this study was to evaluate, in a population-based sample, the relationship between subjective sleep quality and risk of COPD exacerbations.MethodsData were obtained from the Canadian Cohort Obstructive Lung Disease (CanCOLD) study. Participants with COPD who had completed 18 months of follow-up were included. Sleep quality was measured with the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and a three-factor analysis. Symptom-based (dyspnea or sputum change ≥ 48 h) and event-based (symptoms plus medication or unscheduled health services use) exacerbations were assessed. Association of PSQI with exacerbation rate was assessed by using negative binomial regression. Exacerbation-free survival was also assessed.ResultsA total of 480 participants with COPD were studied, including 185 with one or more exacerbations during follow-up and 203 with poor baseline sleep quality (PSQI score > 5). Participants with subsequent symptom-based exacerbations had higher median baseline PSQI scores than those without (6.0 [interquartile range, 3.0-8.0] vs 5.0 [interquartile range, 2.0-7.0]; P = .01), and they were more likely to have baseline PSQI scores > 5 (50.3% vs 37.3%; P = .01). Higher PSQI scores were associated with increased symptom-based exacerbation risk (adjusted rate ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01-1.18; P = .02) and event-based exacerbation risk (adjusted rate ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.00-1.21; P = .048). The association occurred mainly in those with undiagnosed COPD. Strongest associations were with Factor 3 (sleep disturbances and daytime dysfunction). Time to symptom-based exacerbation was shorter in participants with poor sleep quality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.09-2.03).ConclusionsHigher baseline PSQI scores were associated with increased risk of COPD exacerbation over 18 months' prospective follow-up.

BackgroundPhysical inactivity across the lifespan remains a public health issue for many developed countries. Inactivity has contributed considerably to the pervasiveness of lifestyle diseases. Government, national and local agencies and organizations have been unable to systematically, and in a coordinated way, translate behavioral research into practice that makes a difference at a population level. One approach for mobilizing multi-level efforts to improve the environment for physical activity is to engage in a process of citizen science. Citizen Science here is defined as a participatory research approach involving members of the public working closely with research investigators to initiate and advance scientific research projects. However, there are no common measures or protocols to guide citizen science research at the local community setting.ObjectivesWe describe overarching categories of constructs that can be considered when designing citizen science projects expected to yield multi-level interventions, and provide an example of the citizen science approach to promoting PA. We also recommend potential measures across different levels of impact.DiscussionEncouraging some consistency in measurement across studies will potentially accelerate the efficiency with which citizen science participatory research provides new insights into and solutions to the behaviorally-based public health issues that drive most of morbidity and mortality. The measures described in this paper abide by four fundamental principles specifically selected for inclusion in citizen science projects: feasibility, accuracy, propriety, and utility. The choice of measures will take into account the potential resources available for outcome and process evaluation. Our intent is to emphasize the importance for all citizen science participatory projects to follow an evidence-based approach and ensure that they incorporate an appropriate assessment protocol.ConclusionsWe provided the rationale for and a list of contextual factors along with specific examples of measures to encourage consistency among studies that plan to use a citizen science participatory approach. The potential of this approach to promote health and wellbeing in communities is high and we hope that we have provided the tools needed to optimally promote synergistic gains in knowledge across a range of Citizen Science participatory projects.

Objectives: Some people do not fully recover from an acute viral infection and experience persistent symptoms or incomplete recovery for months or even years. This is not unique to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and history shows that post-viral conditions like post COVID-19 condition, also referred to as Long Covid, are not new. In particular, during and after pandemics caused by respiratory viruses in which large parts of the population were infected or exposed, professional and public attention was increased, not least because of the large number of people affected. Methods: Given the current relevance of the topic, this article aims to narratively review and summarize the literature on post-viral symptoms during past pandemics and to supplement and illustrate it with Swiss examples from the pandemics of 1890, 1918-1920 and later. Results: Post-viral diseases were an increasingly emphasised health topic during and after past pandemics triggered by respiratory infections over the last 150 years. Conclusion: In the next pandemic, it should not be surprising that post-viral conditions will again play a role, and pandemic plans should reflect this. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although there are guidelines and ideas on how to improve public health education, translating innovative approaches into actual training programs remains challenging. In this article, we provide an overview of some initiatives that tried to put this into action in different parts of the world, and present the Emerging Health Care Leader (EHCL), a novel training program developed in Switzerland. Policy Options and Recommendations: Looking at the experience of the EHCL, we propose policymakers and other interested stakeholders who wish to help reform public health education to support these initiatives not only through funding, but by valuing them through the integration of early career healthcare leaders in projects where their developing expertise can be practically applied. Conclusion: By openly sharing the experiences, strengths, weaknesses, and lessons learned with the EHCL program, we aim to foster a transparent debate on how novel training programs in public health can be organised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: As there is no ranking designed for schools of Public Health, the aim of this project was to create one. Methods: To design the Public Health Academic Ranking (PHAR), we used the InCites Benchmarking and Analytics™ software and the Web Of Science™ Core Collection database. We collected bibliometric data on 26 schools of Public Health from each continent, between August and September 2022. We included 11 research indicators/ scores, covering four criteria (productivity, quality, accessibility for readers, international collaboration), for the period 2017–2021. For the Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), a network gathering faculties across different universities, a specific methodology was used, with member-specific research queries. Results: The five top schools of the PHAR were: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Public Health Foundation of India, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, SSPH+, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Conclusion: The PHAR allows worldwide bibliometric ordering of schools of Public Health. As this is a pilot project, the results must be taken with caution. This article aims to critically discuss its methodology and future improvements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study design: Single-centre, two-parallel group, methodological randomised controlled trial to assess blinding feasibility. Background: Trials of manual therapy interventions of the back face methodological challenges regarding blinding feasibility and success. We assessed the feasibility of blinding an active manual soft tissue mobilisation and control intervention of the back. We also assessed whether blinding is feasible among outcome assessors and explored factors influencing perceptions about intervention assignment. Methods: On 7–8 November 2022, 24 participants were randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to active or control manual interventions of the back. The active group (n = 11) received soft tissue mobilisation of the lumbar spine. The control group (n = 13) received light touch over the thoracic region with deep breathing exercises. The primary outcome was blinding of participants immediately after a one-time intervention session, as measured by the Bang blinding index (Bang BI). Bang BI ranges from –1 (complete opposite perceptions of intervention received) to 1 (complete correct perceptions), with 0 indicating 'random guessing'—balanced 'active' and 'control' perceptions within an intervention arm. Secondary outcomes included blinding of outcome assessors and factors influencing perceptions about intervention assignment among both participants and outcome assessors, explored via thematic analysis. Results: 24 participants were analysed following an intention-to-treat approach. 55% of participants in the active manual soft tissue mobilisation group correctly perceived their group assignment beyond chance immediately after intervention (Bang BI: 0.55 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.25 to 0.84]), and 8% did so in the control group (0.08 [95% CI, −0.37 to 0.53]). Bang BIs in outcome assessors were 0.09 (−0.12 to 0.30) and −0.10 (−0.29 to 0.08) for active and control participants, respectively. Participants and outcome assessors reported varying factors related to their perceptions about intervention assignment. Conclusions: Blinding of participants allocated to an active soft tissue mobilisation of the back was not feasible in this methodological trial, whereas blinding of participants allocated to the control intervention and outcome assessors was adequate. Findings are limited due to imprecision and suboptimal generalisability to clinical settings. Careful thinking and consideration of blinding in manual therapy trials is warranted and needed. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05822947 (retrospectively registered) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Genetic defects in the interferon (IFN) system or neutralizing autoantibodies against type I IFNs contribute to severe COVID-19. Such autoantibodies were proposed to affect post–COVID-19 syndrome (PCS), possibly causing persistent fatigue for >12 weeks after confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. In the current study, we investigated 128 patients with PCS, 21 survivors of severe COVID-19, and 38 individuals who were asymptomatic. We checked for autoantibodies against IFN-α, IFN-β, and IFN-ω. Few patients with PCS had autoantibodies against IFNs but with no neutralizing activity, indicating a limited role of type I IFNs in PCS pathogenesis. In a subset consisting of 28 patients with PCS, we evaluated IFN-stimulated gene activity and showed that it did not correlate with fatigue. In conclusion, impairment of the type I IFN system is unlikely responsible for adult PCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]