The development of an informative leaflet for children and adolescents suffering from Osgood-Schlatter disease.

The mainstay in the treatment of Osgood-Schlatter Disease (OSD) is guidance on activity modification alongside exercises. The purpose of this study was to create an informative leaflet for patients with OSD, based on evidence and stakeholders perspectives. A synthesis of the literature, including national reference work, clinical research, and systematic reviews informed the initial leaflet. Twelve children with OSD and four clinical experts provided feedback through semi-structured interviews. After incorporating stakeholder input, the leaflet 'Osgood-Schlatter-Information and guidance' was developed. This provides a resource to assist the provision of information and translation of the current evidence.

Exploring the pain and disability continuum in adolescents with non-traumatic anterior knee pain: a mediation analysis using individual participant data of prospective studies.

OBJECTIVE: To use individual patient data (IPD) to investigate if the effect of pain on sports-related disability is mediated through physical (lower extremity isometric strength) or psychological (depression/anxiety and knee confidence) factors in adolescents with non-traumatic anterior knee pain. METHODS: This study included four datasets from a previously harmonised IPD dataset. Prior to analysis, the protocol and analysis approach were predefined and published on Open Science Framework. Potential mediators were pre-sepcified as isometric knee and hip strengths, self-reported anxiety/depression and confidence in the knee, allmeasured at 12 weeks after baseline evaluation. Mediation analyses were undertaken using the CMAVerse package in RStudio using the regression-based approach to decompose the total effect of the exposure (pain at baseline evaluation) on the outcome (sports-related disability at 6 months) into the 'indirect effect' (the portion of the total effect acting through the mediators) and the 'direct effect'. RESULTS: Two-hundred and seventy-nine adolescents with non-traumatic knee pain were included in the analysis. Median age was 13 (range 10-19), and 72% were women. Baseline pain was associated with sports-related disability at 6 months. There was no evidence of the association being mediated by any of the proposed mediators (total natural indirect effect for strength 0.01 (-1.14 to 1.80) and psychological factors 0.00 (-0.66 to 2.02)). CONCLUSION: We found an effect of pain on sports-related disability at 6 months which appears to be independent of lower extremity muscle strength, or depression/anxiety and knee confidence in adolescents with non-traumatic anterior knee pain.

Quadriceps or hip exercises for patellofemoral pain? A randomised controlled equivalence trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess effectiveness equivalence between two commonly prescribed 12-week exercise programmes targeting either the quadriceps or the hip muscles in patients with patellofemoral pain (PFP). METHODS: This randomised controlled equivalence trial included patients with a clinical diagnosis of PFP. Participants were randomly assigned to either a 12-week quadriceps-focused exercise (QE) or a hip-focused exercise (HE) programme. The primary outcome was the change in Anterior Knee Pain Scale (AKPS) (0-100) from baseline to 12-week follow-up. Prespecified equivalence margins of ±8 points on the AKPS were chosen to demonstrate comparable effectiveness. Key secondary outcomes were the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) questionnaire pain, physical function and knee-related quality of life subscales. RESULTS: 200 participants underwent randomisation; 100 assigned to QE and 100 to HE (mean age 27.2 years (SD 6.4); 69% women). The least squares mean changes in AKPS (primary outcome) were 7.6 for QE and 7.0 for HE (difference 0.6 points, 95% CI -2.0 to 3.2; test for equivalence p<0.0001), although neither programme surpassed the minimal clinically important change threshold. None of the group differences in key secondary outcomes exceeded predefined equivalence margins. CONCLUSION: The 12-week QE and HE protocols provided equivalent improvements in symptoms and function for patients with PFP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03069547.

Does a corticosteroid injection plus exercise or exercise alone add to the effect of patient advice and a heel cup for patients with plantar fasciopathy? A randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of patient advice plus heel cup alone (PA) versus PA and lower limb exercise (PAX) versus PAX plus corticosteroid injection (PAXI) to improve self-reported pain in patients with plantar fasciopathy. METHODS: We recruited 180 adults with plantar fasciopathy confirmed by ultrasonography for this prospectively registered three-armed, randomised, single-blinded superiority trial. Patients were randomly allocated to PA (n=62), PA plus self-dosed lower limb heavy-slow resistance training consisting of heel raises (PAX) (n=59), or PAX plus an ultrasound-guided injection of 1 mL triamcinolone 20 mg/mL (PAXI) (n=59). The primary outcome was changed in the pain domain of the Foot Health Status Questionnaire (ranging from 0 'worst' to 100 'best') from baseline to the 12-week follow-up. The minimal important difference in the pain domain is 14.1 points. The outcome was collected at baseline and at 4, 12, 26, and 52 weeks. RESULTS: The primary analysis found a statistically significant difference between PA and PAXI after 12 weeks favouring PAXI (adjusted mean difference: -9.1 (95% CI -16.8 to -1.3; p=0.023)) and over 52 weeks (adjusted mean difference: -5.2 (95% CI -10.4 to -0.1; p=0.045)). At no follow-up did the mean difference between groups exceed the pre-specified minimal important difference. No statistically significant difference was found between PAX and PAXI or between PA and PAX at any time. CONCLUSION: No clinically relevant between-group differences were found after 12 weeks. The results indicate that combining a corticosteroid injection with exercise is not superior to exercise or no exercise. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03804008.

Level of pain catastrophising determines if patients with long-standing subacromial impingement benefit from more resistance exercise: predefined secondary analyses from a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (the SExSI Trial).

OBJECTIVE: The primary aim was to investigate the effectiveness of adding more resistance exercise to usual care on pain mechanisms (including temporal summation, conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and local pain sensitivity) and pain catastrophising in people with subacromial impingement at 16 weeks follow-up. Second, to investigate the modifying effect of pain mechanisms and pain catastrophising on the interventions' effectiveness in improving shoulder strength and disability METHODS: 200 consecutive patients were randomly allocated to usual exercise-based care or the same plus additional elastic band exercise to increase total exercise dose. Completed add-on exercise dose was captured using an elastic band sensor. Outcome measures recorded at baseline, 5 weeks, 10 weeks and 16 (primary end point) weeks included temporal summation of pain (TSP) and CPM assessed at the lower leg, pressure pain threshold at the deltoid muscle (PPT-deltoid), pain catastrophising and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index. RESULTS: Additional elastic band exercise was not superior to usual exercise-based care in improving pain mechanisms (TSP, CPM and PPT-deltoid) or pain catastrophising after 16 weeks. Interaction analyses showed that pain catastrophising (median split) modified the effectiveness of additional exercises (effect size 14 points, 95% CI 2 to 25), with superior results in the additional exercise group compared with the usual care group in patients with less pain catastrophising. CONCLUSION: Additional resistance exercise added to usual care was not superior to usual care alone in improving pain mechanisms or pain catastrophising. Additional exercise was, however, superior in improving self-reported disability in patients with lower levels of pain catastrophising at baseline. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02747251.

Past-season, pre-season and in-season risk assessment of groin problems in male football players: a prospective full-season study.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed past-season, pre-season and in-season risk factors to investigate their association with an in-season groin problem in male amateur football players. METHODS: Past-season groin-pain information and pre-season short-lever and long-lever adductor squeeze strength were obtained at baseline, together with anthropometrics (weight, lower limb lever length) and player age. In-season hip-related and groin-related sporting function was monitored every 4 weeks using the Sports and Recreation (Sport) subscale from the Hip And Groin Outcome Score questionnaire (HAGOS (Sport)). Groin problems, including time-loss groin injuries and groin pain irrespective of time loss, were collected over a 39-week competitive in-season. We estimated relative risk (RR), and 95% credibility interval (ICr) from logistic regressions fitted in a Bayesian framework. RESULTS: Players (n=245) suffering from groin pain during the past-season had 2.4 times higher risk of experiencing a groin problem in the new season (2.40 RR; 95% ICr 1.5 to 3.7). This risk was reduced by 35% (0.65 RR; 95% ICr 0.42 to 0.99) per unit (N·m/kg) increase in the long-lever adductor squeeze test. Player age, short-lever squeeze test and the HAGOS (Sport) scores were not associated with the risk of a groin problem. CONCLUSIONS: Past-season groin pain increased the risk of a groin problem in the new in-season. This risk was reduced by higher pre-season long-lever adductor squeeze strength. Past-season groin-pain information and long-lever adductor squeeze strength can be quickly obtained during pre-season to identify players with an elevated risk of in-season groin problems. This may be key to reduce these problems in the new season.

Implementing the 27 PRISMA 2020 Statement items for systematic reviews in the sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation and sports science fields: the PERSiST (implementing Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science) guidance.

Poor reporting of medical and healthcare systematic reviews is a problem from which the sports and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and sports science fields are not immune. Transparent, accurate and comprehensive systematic review reporting helps researchers replicate methods, readers understand what was done and why, and clinicians and policy-makers implement results in practice. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and its accompanying Explanation and Elaboration document provide general reporting examples for systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. However, implementation guidance for sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and sports science does not exist. The Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science (PERSiST) guidance attempts to address this problem. Nineteen content experts collaborated with three methods experts to identify examples of exemplary reporting in systematic reviews in sport and exercise medicine (including physical activity), musculoskeletal rehabilitation (including physiotherapy), and sports science, for each of the PRISMA 2020 Statement items. PERSiST aims to help: (1) systematic reviewers improve the transparency and reporting of systematic reviews and (2) journal editors and peer reviewers make informed decisions about systematic review reporting quality.

Custom insoles versus sham and GP-led usual care in patients with plantar heel pain: results of the STAP-study - a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare custom-made insoles to sham insoles and general practice (GP)-led usual care in terms of pain at rest and during activity at 12 weeks follow-up in individuals with plantar heel pain. METHODS: In this randomised clinical trial 185 patients aged 18 to 65 years, with a clinical diagnosis of plantar heel pain for at least 2 weeks, but no longer than 2 years were recruited. Patients were randomly allocated into three groups: (1) GP-led treatment, plus an information booklet with exercises (usual care; n=46), (2) referral to a podiatrist for treatment with a custom-made insole plus an information booklet with exercises (custom-made insole; n=70) and (3) referral to a podiatrist and treatment with a sham insole plus an information booklet with exercises (sham insole; n=69). As well as the primary outcome of pain severity (11-point Numerical Rating Scale) we used the Foot Function Index (0 to 100) as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Of 185 randomised participants, 176 completed the 12-week follow-up. There was no difference in pain or function between the insole and the sham groups at 12 weeks. Participants in the GP-led usual care group reported less pain during activity at 12 weeks, (mean difference (MD) 0.94, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.65), less first step pain (MD 1.48, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.31), better function (MD 7.37, 95% CI 1.27 to 13.46) and higher recovery rates (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.96) compared with participants in the custom insole group. CONCLUSIONS: Referral to a podiatrist for a custom-made insole does not lead to a better outcome compared to sham insoles or compared to GP-led usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR5346.

Management of plantar heel pain: a best practice guide informed by a systematic review, expert clinical reasoning and patient values.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a best practice guide for managing people with plantar heel pain (PHP). METHODS: Mixed-methods design including systematic review, expert interviews and patient survey. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, trial registries, reference lists and citation tracking. Semi-structured interviews with world experts and a patient survey. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating any intervention for people with PHP in any language were included subject to strict quality criteria. Trials with a sample size greater than n=38 were considered for proof of efficacy. International experts were interviewed using a semi-structured approach and people with PHP were surveyed online. RESULTS: Fifty-one eligible trials enrolled 4351 participants, with 9 RCTs suitable to determine proof of efficacy for 10 interventions. Forty people with PHP completed the online survey and 14 experts were interviewed resulting in 7 themes and 38 subthemes. There was good agreement between the systematic review findings and interview data about taping (SMD: 0.47, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.88) and plantar fascia stretching (SMD: 1.21, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.63) for first step pain in the short term. Clinical reasoning advocated combining these interventions with education and footwear advice as the core self-management approach. There was good expert agreement with systematic review findings recommending stepped care management with focused shockwave for first step pain in the short-term (OR: 1.89, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.04), medium-term (SMD 1.31, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.01) and long-term (SMD 1.67, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.45) and radial shockwave for first step pain in the short term (OR: 1.66, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.76) and long term (OR: 1.78, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.96). We found good agreement to 'step care' using custom foot orthoses for general pain in the short term (SMD: 0.41, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.74) and medium term (SMD: 0.55, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.02). CONCLUSION: Best practice from a mixed-methods study synthesising systematic review with expert opinion and patient feedback suggests core treatment for people with PHP should include taping, stretching and individualised education. Patients who do not optimally improve may be offered shockwave therapy, followed by custom orthoses.

REPORT-PFP: a consensus from the International Patellofemoral Research Network to improve REPORTing of quantitative PatelloFemoral Pain studies.

Patellofemoral pain is a common and often debilitating musculoskeletal condition. Clinical translation and evidence synthesis of patellofemoral pain research are compromised by heterogenous and often inadequately reported study details. This consensus statement and associated checklist provides standards for REPORTing of quantitative PatelloFemoral Pain (REPORT-PFP) research to enhance clinical translation and evidence synthesis, and support clinician engagement with research and data collection. A three-stage Delphi process was initiated at the 2015 International Patellofemoral Research Network (iPFRN) retreat. An initial e-Delphi activity (n=24) generated topics and items, which were refined at the 2017 iPFRN retreat, and voted on prior to and following the 2019 iPFRN retreat (n=51 current and past retreat participants). Voting criteria included 'strongly recommended' (essential), 'recommended' (encouraged) and uncertain/unsure. An item was included in the checklist if ≥70% respondents voted 'recommended'. Items receiving ≥70% votes for 'strongly recommended' were labelled as such. The final REPORT-PFP checklist includes 31 items (11 strongly recommended, 20 recommended), covering (i) demographics (n=2,4); (ii) baseline symptoms and previous treatments (n=3,7); (iii) outcome measures (2,4); (iv) outcomes measure description (n=1,2); (v) clinical trial methodology (0,3) and (vi) reporting study results (n=3,0). The REPORT-PFP checklist is ready to be used by researchers and clinicians. Strong stakeholder engagement from clinical academics during development means consistent application by the international patellofemoral pain research community is likely. Checklist adherence will improve research accessibility for clinicians and enhance future evidence synthesis.

Concurrent musculoskeletal complaints in elbows, shoulders, and necks after common hand and forearm injuries or conditions: A cross-sectional study among 600 patients.

STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional study among 600 patients. INTRODUCTION: Isolated hand and forearm injuries or conditions are common in the emergency and orthopedic departments. So far, little is known about whether these patients suffer from concurrent musculoskeletal complaints (MSCs) besides their hand and forearm complaints. Neglecting concurrent MSCs in the upper limbs and necks could hamper rehabilitation and prolong the time taken to return to daily and work-related activities. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence of concurrent MSCs in the elbow, shoulder, and neck after common hand and/or forearm injuries or conditions. METHODS: This study included 600 patients with any type of diagnosis referred to rehabilitation after hand and/or forearm injuries or conditions. Basic characteristics, diagnoses, and location of patients' symptoms were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of concurrent MSCs was 40%. Twenty-eight percent of the whole sample developed concurrent MSCs after the hand and forearm injury or condition. The gender distribution was 68% women and 32% men. The most common location for complaints was the shoulder (62%), followed by the elbow (49%), and the neck (32%). DISCUSSION: The present results suggest that MSCs from the elbows, shoulders, or necks are very common in patients with hand and/or forearm injuries or conditions. CONCLUSION: Clinicians treating patients with isolated hand and forearm injuries or conditions should be aware of the high prevalence of concurrent MSCs. Future research should investigate if specific rehabilitation, focusing on concurrent MSCs, may influence the outcome in this population.

Groin problems from pre- to in-season: a prospective study on 386 male Spanish footballers.

This study investigated the weekly prevalence of groin problems over a 3-week football pre-season, compared to a 39-week competitive in-season. We registered time-loss groin injuries, and self-reported weekly groin-pain in 17 amateur male football teams (386 players). The average weekly prevalence of groin problems (prevalence ratio (PR)) was 1.8 times higher (95% CI 1.6 to 2.0) during pre-season (21%) compared to in-season (12%). We found a higher weekly prevalence (PR 1.8; 95% CI 1.6 to 2.1) of groin problems without time loss, during the pre-season (19%) compared to the in-season (10%), but no significant difference in the weekly prevalence of groin problems with time loss (PR 1.5; 95% CI 1.0 to 2.4). Attention should be given to optimal load progression, and early implementation of preventive measures during the football pre-season to reduce the prevalence of groin problems in both pre- and in-season.

Current management strategies in Osgood Schlatter: A cross-sectional mixed-method study.

BACKGROUND: Osgood Schlatter disease (OSD) is the most common knee condition in adolescent athletes aged 9-16. Without evidence to guide clinical practice, it is unclear how OSD is managed. The aim of this study was to investigate how international healthcare professionals (general practitioners, physiotherapists, rheumatologists, sports and exercise medicine doctors, and orthopedic surgeons) diagnose and manage OSD. METHODS: This mixed-method study used a convergent parallel design. A quantitative questionnaire and semi-structured interview covered prognosis, diagnosis, treatment, and return to play of adolescents with OSD. For quantitative data, those who reported likely/very likely considered "for" and unlikely/very unlikely "against" (for specific diagnostic/management strategy). Qualitative data analysis used a phenomenological approach. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-one healthcare professionals completed the questionnaire. The most common diagnostic criterion was pain at the tibial tuberosity (97% for). The most common treatments were patient education (99%) and exercise therapy (92%). Other treatment options were more heterogeneous, for example, pain medication (31% for and 34% against). Managing training load (97%), pain intensity (87%), and psychological factors (86%) were considered the most important factors influencing the return to activities. Several themes emerged from the interviews (on N = 20) including imaging, pain management, family, and psychosocial factors influencing prognosis. CONCLUSION: Diagnosis criteria of OSD were relatively well agreed upon, whereas the triangulation of qualitative and quantitative data showed heterogeneity of treatments. Psychosocial factors including family were highlighted as critical in the management of OSD.

Prevalence and severity of groin problems in Spanish football: A prospective study beyond the time-loss approach.

The time-loss definition of injury is commonly adopted in epidemiological groin-injury studies in football, with a significant risk of underestimating the impact of these injuries. This study investigated the extent of groin problems, beyond the time-loss approach, over a full Spanish football season. Players from 17 amateur male teams were followed over 39 consecutive weeks. Groin-injury time loss and self-reported groin pain, irrespective of time loss, were combined to calculate the average weekly prevalence of all groin problems with or without time loss. A subscale measuring hip- and groin-related sporting function from the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score questionnaire (HAGOS, Sport/Rec) was registered every 4 weeks. In total, 407 players participated in the study. The average (range) weekly prevalence of all groin problems was 11.7% (7.2%-20.8%); 1.3% with time loss (0.0%-3.2%) and 10.4% without time loss (6.3%-17.6%). Players with groin problems reported lower scores (mean difference) on the HAGOS, Sport/Rec subscale compared with players without (-19.5 [95% CI: -20.7 to -18.4]), while there was no difference between players reporting groin problems with and without time loss (4.0 [95% CI: -1.1 to 9.1]). The traditional time-loss measure only captured 10% of all groin problems. Hip- and groin-related sporting function was not different between players reporting groin problems with or without time loss, suggesting the reason for continuing to play is not only related to the severity of symptoms. These findings question the judicious use of the time-loss approach in overuse conditions, such as groin pain in footballers.

Comparative effectiveness of treatments for patellofemoral pain: a living systematic review with network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the comparative effectiveness of all treatments for patellofemoral pain (PFP). DESIGN: Living systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA). DATA SOURCES: Sensitive search in seven databases, three grey literature resources and four trial registers. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials evaluating any treatment for PFP with outcomes 'any improvement', and pain intensity. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias with Risk of Bias Tool V.2. We used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation to appraise the strength of the evidence. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: 'Any improvement' measured with a Global Rating of Change Scale. RESULTS: Twenty-two trials (with forty-eight treatment arms) were included, of which approximately 10 (45%) were at high risk of bias for the primary outcome. Most comparisons had a low to very low strength of the evidence. All treatments were better than wait and see for any improvement at 3 months (education (OR 9.6, 95% credible interval (CrI): 2.2 to 48.8); exercise (OR 13.0, 95% CrI: 2.4 to 83.5); education+orthosis (OR 16.5, 95% CrI: 4.9 to 65.8); education+exercise+patellar taping/mobilisations (OR 25.2, 95% CrI: 5.7 to 130.3) and education+exercise+patellar taping/mobilisations+orthosis (OR 38.8, 95% CrI: 7.3 to 236.9)). Education+exercise+patellar taping/mobilisations, with (OR 4.0, 95% CrI: 1.5 to 11.8) or without orthosis (OR 2.6, 95% CrI: 1.7 to 4.2), were superior to education alone. At 12 months, education or education+any combination yielded similar improvement rates. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION: Education combined with a physical treatment (exercise, orthoses or patellar taping/mobilisation) is most likely to be effective at 3 months. At 12 months, education appears comparable to education with a physical treatment. There was insufficient evidence to recommend a specific type of physical treatment over another. All treatments in our NMA were superior to wait and see at 3 months, and we recommend avoiding a wait-and-see approach. PROSPERO REGISTERATION NUMBER: PROSPERO registration CRD42018079502.

Does foot mobility affect the outcome in the management of patellofemoral pain with foot orthoses versus hip exercises? A randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To test (i) if greater foot pronation (measured as midfoot width mobility) is associated with better outcomes with foot orthoses treatment, compared with hip exercises and (ii) if hip exercises are superior to foot orthoses, irrespective of midfoot width mobility. METHODS: A two-arm parallel, randomised superiority clinical trial was conducted in Australia and Denmark. Participants (18-40 years) were included who reported an insidious onset of knee pain (≥6 weeks duration); ≥3/10 numerical pain rating, that was aggravated by activities (eg, stairs, squatting, running). Participants were stratified by midfoot width mobility (high ≥11 mm change in midfoot width) and site, randomised to foot orthoses or hip exercises and blinded to objectives and stratification. Success was defined a priori as much better or better on a patient-perceived 7-point scale at 12 weeks. RESULTS: Of 218 stratified and randomised participants, 192 completed 12-week follow-up. This study found no difference in success rates between foot orthoses versus hip exercises in those with high (6/21 vs 9/20; 29% vs 45%, respectively) or low (42/79 vs 37/72; 53% vs 51%) midfoot width mobility. There was no association between midfoot width mobility and treatment outcome (Interaction effect p=0.19). This study found no difference in success rate between foot orthoses versus hip exercises (48/100 vs 46/92; 48% vs 50%). CONCLUSION: Midfoot width mobility should not be used to help clinicians decide which patient with patellofemoral pain might benefit most from foot orthoses. Clinicians and patients may consider either foot orthoses or hip exercises in managing patellofemoral pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12614000260628.

Point-of-Care Ultrasound in General Practice: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: Ultrasound examinations are currently being implemented in general practice. This study aimed to systematically review the literature on the training in and use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) by general practitioners. METHODS: We followed the Cochrane guidelines for conduct and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for reporting. We searched the databases MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials using the key words ultrasonography and general practice in combination and using thesaurus terms. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies using an established checklist. RESULTS: We included in our review a total of 51 full-text articles. POCUS was applied for a variety of purposes, with the majority of scans focused on abdominal and obstetric indications. The length of training programs varied from 2 to 320 hours. Competence in some types of focused ultrasound scans could be attained with only few hours of training. Focused POCUS scans were reported to have a higher diagnostic accuracy and be associated with less harm than more comprehensive scans or screening scans. The included studies were of a low quality, however, mainly because of issues with design and reporting. CONCLUSIONS: POCUS has the potential to be an important tool for the general practitioner and may possibly reduce health care costs. Future research should aim to assess the quality of ultrasound scans in broader groups of general practitioners, further explore how these clinicians should be trained, and evaluate the clinical course of patients who undergo scanning by general practitioners.

Manifestations of Pain Sensitization Across Different Painful Knee Disorders: A Systematic Review Including Meta-analysis and Metaregression.

OBJECTIVES: Previous reviews have reported that manifestations of pain sensitization may play an important role in the pain experienced by people with knee osteoarthritis. However, it is unknown if manifestations of pain sensitization are common features across other painful knee disorders or if sensitization requires targeted intervention. This review aims to synthesize the published research investigating manifestations of pain sensitization in painful knee disorders and to evaluate if the manifestations of pain sensitization change in response to treatment. METHODS: The systematic review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015024211). We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Sportsdiscus, and Cochrane Central for studies that investigated between-group differences (knee pain vs pain-free subjects) or the effect of treatment on manifestations of pain sensitization. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion and quality. Available data were synthesized via predetermined levels of evidence, meta-analysis, and metaregression where possible. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies investigating evidence related to pain sensitization distributed across four different painful knee disorders were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis provides evidence of pain sensitization in people with knee osteoarthritis (strong evidence), people with patellofemoral pain (moderate evidence), and postmeniscectomy patients (very limited evidence). However, conflicting evidence exists in patellar tendinopathy. Metaregression indicates that pain is associated with pressure pain thresholds in knee osteoarthritis. In people with knee osteoarthritis and patellofemoral pain, several interventions were found to reduce manifestations of pain sensitization. This review highlights that pain sensitization may be amenable to treatment through exercise therapy, mobilization, and pharmacological and surgical intervention.

Prevalence and incidence rate of lower-extremity tendinopathies in a Danish general practice: a registry-based study.

BACKGROUND: Tendinopathies of the lower extremity (e.g. Achilles, patellar, and plantar heel pain) are common in both general and sporting populations. However, the prevalence and incidence in Danish general practice is unknown. The aim was to determine the prevalence and incidence rate of lower-extremity tendinopathies in a Danish general practice. METHODS: In this registry-based study, we extracted data from the electronic patient files of all patients in a single Danish general practice. The practice included 8836 patients. We searched ICPC-2 codes to identify patients with either of the following lower-extremity tendinopathies: plantar heel pain; Achilles tendinopathy; patellar tendinopathy; greater trochanteric pain syndrome or adductor tendinopathy. We defined an incident and prevalent case as a patient with a consultation because of tendinopathy in 2016 only. A prevalent, but not incident case was a patient with consultations in both 2015 and 2016. Incidence and prevalence were expressed as the number of patients with a tendinopathy per 1000 registered patients. RESULTS: The prevalence and incidence rate were 16.6 and 7.9 per 1000 registered patients, respectively. Plantar heel pain was the most prevalent tendinopathy and accounted for 39% of lower-extremity tendinopathies. Patients with tendinopathies were significantly older than all registered patients (46.0 years (95%CI: 43.3;48.7) versus 38.8 years (95%CI: 38.4;39.3), respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Lower-extremity tendinopathies, especially plantar heel pain, had a high prevalence and incidence rate in a Danish general practice. In a typical general practice with 5000 patients, general practitioners should expect to see more than 80 patients with a lower-extremity tendinopathy every year.

A loaded self-managed exercise programme for patellofemoral pain: a mixed methods feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: A novel loaded self-managed exercise programme that includes pain education and self-management strategies may result in better outcomes for people with patellofemoral pain (PFP). However, establishing program feasibility is an essential first step before testing efficacy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a definitive RCT which will evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a loaded self-managed exercise programme for people with PFP compared with usual physiotherapy. METHODS: In a mixed methods, pragmatic, randomised controlled feasibility study, 60 participants with PFP (57% female; mean age 29 years) were recruited from a physiotherapy clinic within a large UK teaching hospital. They were randomly allocated to receive either a loaded self-managed exercise programme (n = 30) or usual physiotherapy (n = 30). Feasibility indicators of process, resources, and management were collected through follow-up of standardised questionnaires six months after recruitment and semi-structured interviews with 20 participants and physiotherapists. RESULTS: Recruitment rate was 5 participants per month; consent rate was 99%; adherence to intervention appointments was 87%; completeness of questionnaire data was 100%; and adherence to intervention delivery was 95%. Three exercise diaries were returned at six months (5%). At six months, 25 questionnaire booklets were returned (9 in the loaded self-managed group, 16 in the usual physiotherapy group), with a total retention rate of 42%. At six months, 56% (5/9) of respondents in the loaded self-managed group and 56% (9/16) in the usual physiotherapy group were classified as 'recovered'. Both groups demonstrated improvements in average pain (VAS), kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing, general self-efficacy and EQ-5D-5 L from baseline to six months. CONCLUSION: The results of this feasibility study confirm that it is feasible and acceptable to deliver a loaded self-managed exercise programme to adults with PFP in an NHS physiotherapy outpatient setting. However, between group differences in lost to follow up and poor exercise diary completion mean we are uncertain on some feasibility aspects. These methodological issues need addressing prior to conducting a definitive RCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 35272486 . Registered 19th December 2016.