Rehabilitation after total or hemi elbow arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Introduction: Total and hemi elbow arthroplasty (TEA/HEA) are relatively uncommon orthopedic procedures, but physiotherapists are involved in both pre- and postoperative treatment of people who undergo TEA/HEA. The purpose of this article is to summarize existing knowledge about the effects of rehabilitation versus standard care after total and hemi elbow arthroplasty (TEA/HEA). Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted searching Ovid MEDLINE ®, SweMED+, Cochrane, Embase, AMED and PEDro. "The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" was followed. Results: No one has studied the effects of rehabilitation after TEA/HEA. The aim of the only study included was to assess the safety and length of hospital stay (LOS) after omission of casting, start of early mobilization and implementation of functional discharge criteria. Results show that the non-casting cohort had a shorter mean LOS (5.4 days) than the index cohort (6.2 days). The cohort with functional discharge criteria had a shorter mean LOS (3.8 days) than the cohort without functional discharge (5.4 days). Conclusion: Effects of rehabilitation components or programs after TEA/HEA are still unknown. It is important to focus on the lack of evidence in this field, and plan for more studies to come.

Effects of Analgesics on Self-Reported Physical Function and Walking Ability in People With Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Hip and knee osteoarthritis are among the leading causes of global disability, and one of the main aims of the management is to improve physical function. The objective of this review was to investigate the effect of analgesics on physical function (self-reported physical function and walking ability). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the findings were performed. Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of analgesics on self-reported physical function and walking ability were included. Analgesics were orally administered acetaminophen, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or opioids. Data were pooled in a random-effects model, and the standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI was calculated (SMDs: 0.2-0.4 = small, 0.5-0.7 = medium, and ≥0.8 = large effect sizes). The quality of the evidence was evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: A total of 1454 studies were identified, of which 33 were included. On self-reported physical function, the results showed low- to moderate-quality evidence for a small beneficial effect of acetaminophen (SMD = -0.13 [95% CI = -0.26 to 0.00]), NSAIDs (SMD = -0.32 [95% CI = -0.37 to -0.27]), or opioids (SMD = -0.20 [95% CI = -0.32 to -0.09]). There was moderate-quality evidence for a small effect of NSAIDs on pain during walking (SMD = -0.34 [95% CI = -0.45 to -0.23]). CONCLUSION: In people with hip or knee osteoarthritis, there was low- to moderate-quality evidence for small beneficial effects of analgesics on physical function and walking ability. IMPACT: Analgesics may improve physical function by reducing pain during exercise and walking.

Motivational interviewing for substance use reduction.

BACKGROUND: Substance use is a global issue, with around 30 to 35 million individuals estimated to have a substance-use disorder. Motivational interviewing (MI) is a client-centred method that aims to strengthen a person's motivation and commitment to a specific goal by exploring their reasons for change and resolving ambivalence, in an atmosphere of acceptance and compassion. This review updates the 2011 version by Smedslund and colleagues. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of motivational interviewing for substance use on the extent of substance use, readiness to change, and retention in treatment. SEARCH METHODS: We searched 18 electronic databases, six websites, four mailing lists, and the reference lists of included studies and reviews. The last search dates were in February 2021 and November 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials with individuals using drugs, alcohol, or both. Interventions were MI or motivational enhancement therapy (MET), delivered individually and face to face. Eligible control interventions were no intervention, treatment as usual, assessment and feedback, or other active intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane, and assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE. We conducted meta-analyses for the three outcomes (extent of substance use, readiness to change, retention in treatment) at four time points (post-intervention, short-, medium-, and long-term follow-up). MAIN RESULTS: We included 93 studies with 22,776 participants. MI was delivered in one to nine sessions. Session durations varied, from as little as 10 minutes to as long as 148 minutes per session, across included studies. Study settings included inpatient and outpatient clinics, universities, army recruitment centres, veterans' health centres, and prisons. We judged 69 studies to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain and 24 studies to be at low or unclear risk. Comparing MI to no intervention revealed a small to moderate effect of MI in substance use post-intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.89; I2 = 75%; 6 studies, 471 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effect was weaker at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.20, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.28; 19 studies, 3351 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This comparison revealed a difference in favour of MI at medium-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.20; 16 studies, 3137 participants; low-certainty evidence) and no difference at long-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.25; 9 studies, 1525 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.22; 5 studies, 1495 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Retention in treatment was slightly higher with MI (SMD 0.26, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.52; 2 studies, 427 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Comparing MI to treatment as usual revealed a very small negative effect in substance use post-intervention (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.02; 5 studies, 976 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.17; 14 studies, 3066 participants), a very small benefit of MI at medium-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.22; 9 studies, 1624 participants), and no difference at long-term follow-up (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.17; 8 studies, 1449 participants), all with low-certainty evidence. There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.39; 2 studies, 150 participants) and retention in treatment (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.16; 5 studies, 1295 participants), both with very low-certainty evidence. Comparing MI to assessment and feedback revealed no difference in substance use at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.23; 7 studies, 854 participants; low-certainty evidence). A small benefit for MI was shown at medium-term (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.40; 6 studies, 688 participants) and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.41; 3 studies, 448 participants), both with moderate-certainty evidence. None of the studies in this comparison measured substance use at the post-intervention time point, readiness to change, and retention in treatment. Comparing MI to another active intervention revealed no difference in substance use at any follow-up time point, all with low-certainty evidence: post-intervention (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.29; 3 studies, 338 participants); short-term (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.13; 18 studies, 2795 participants); medium-term (SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.17; 15 studies, 2352 participants); and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.13; 10 studies, 1908 participants). There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.15, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.30; 5 studies, 988 participants; low-certainty evidence) and retention in treatment (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.14; 12 studies, 1945 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence due to inconsistency, study limitations, publication bias, and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Motivational interviewing may reduce substance use compared with no intervention up to a short follow-up period. MI probably reduces substance use slightly compared with assessment and feedback over medium- and long-term periods. MI may make little to no difference to substance use compared to treatment as usual and another active intervention. It is unclear if MI has an effect on readiness to change and retention in treatment. The studies included in this review were heterogeneous in many respects, including the characteristics of participants, substance(s) used, and interventions. Given the widespread use of MI and the many studies examining MI, it is very important that counsellors adhere to and report quality conditions so that only studies in which the intervention implemented was actually MI are included in evidence syntheses and systematic reviews. Overall, we have moderate to no confidence in the evidence, which forces us to be careful about our conclusions. Consequently, future studies are likely to change the findings and conclusions of this review.

PROTOCOL: The FRIENDS preventive programme for reducing anxiety symptoms in children and adolescents: A systematic review.

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The main objective of this review is to answer the following research question: What are the effects of the FRIENDS preventive programme on anxiety symptoms in children and adolescents? Further, the review will attempt to answer if the effects differ between participant age groups, participant socio-economic status, type of prevention (universal, selective or indicated), type of provider (lay or mental health provider), country of implementation (Australia or other countries) and implementation issues in relation to the booster sessions and parent sessions (implemented, partly implemented or not at all).

Patient engagement in the development and delivery of healthcare services: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Patient engagement (PE) is required to improve future healthcare services. PE in the development and delivery of healthcare services is likely to be complex but is scarcely described. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this scoping review was to summarise primary studies on mesolevel PE regarding structure, process and outcomes. More specifically, the aim was to explore barriers and facilitators to successful PE, how persons are engaged in the process and summarise reported consequences. METHOD: A systematic scoping review was conducted, searching the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane and PsycINFO databases. Primary studies, published between 7 July 2005 and 4 October 2022, were considered for inclusion. Two reviewers extracted data about PE (eg, attributes of PE settings, facilitators and barriers, and outcomes to PE) and the first author coded the extracted data into structural, processual and outcome themes. RESULTS: Of 8588 identified records, 37 studies were eligible. Most of the included studies were conducted in Europe (n=19; 51%) and North America (n=13; 35%). Structures that ensure sufficient stakeholder representativeness and PE knowledge through education may facilitate the PE process further, regardless of the environmental setting. Interpersonal relationships with uneven power dynamics were reported as noteworthy processual barriers to meaningful PE, while clearly described roles and tasks were reported as important facilitators. In contrast to hard outcomes with operationalised PE effects, the most noteworthy outcomes of PE were reported as soft processual consequences such as patient representatives improving their self-esteem and feeling valued. CONCLUSIONS: Unfortunately, there is a dearth of studies exploring hard and operationalised PE outcomes on healthcare services and patients receiving healthcare. The PE process may be facilitated by dedicated finances to PE education and by ensuring sufficient stakeholder representativeness.

Umbilical cord blood acid-base analysis at birth and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Umbilical cord blood acid-base sampling is routinely performed at many hospitals. Recent studies have questioned this practice and the association of acidosis with cerebral palsy. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the associations between the results of umbilical cord blood acid-base analysis at birth and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes and mortality in children. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched six databases using the search strategy: umbilical cord AND outcomes. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, cohorts and case-control studies from high-income countries that investigated the association between umbilical cord blood analysis and neurodevelopmental outcomes and mortality from 1 year after birth in children born at term. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We critically assessed the included studies, extracted data and conducted meta-analyses comparing adverse outcomes between children with and without acidosis, and the mean proportions of adverse outcomes. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach. MAIN RESULTS: We have very low confidence in the following findings: acidosis was associated with higher cognitive development scores compared with non-acidosis (mean difference 5.18, 95% CI 0.84-9.52; n = two studies). Children with acidosis also showed a tendency towards higher risk of death (relative risk [RR] 5.72, 95% CI 0.90-36.27; n = four studies) and CP (RR 3.40, 95% CI 0.86-13.39; n = four studies), although this was not statistically significant. The proportion of children with CP was 2.39/1000 across the studies, assessed as high certainty evidence. CONCLUSION: Due to low certainty of evidence, the associations between umbilical cord blood gas analysis at delivery and long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes in children remains unclear.

Interventions for osteoarthritis pain: A systematic review with network meta-analysis of existing Cochrane reviews.

Objective: To conduct a network meta-analysis comparing all treatments for osteoarthritis (OA) pain in the Cochrane Library. Design: The Cochrane Library and Epistemonikos were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about treatments for hip and knee OA. We constructed 17 broad categories, comprising drug treatments, exercise, surgery, herbs, orthotics, passive treatments, regenerative medicine, diet/weight loss, combined treatments, and controls. In addition to a full network analysis, we compared the direct/indirect effects, and studies with shorter-/longer follow-up. CINeMA software was used for assessing confidence in network meta-analysis estimates. Results: We included 35 systematic reviews including 445 RCTs. There were 153 treatments for OA. In total, 491 comparisons were related to knee OA, less on hip OA, and only nine on hand OA. Six treatment categories showed clinically significant effects favoring treatment over control on pain. "Diet/weight loss" and "Surgery" had effect sizes close to zero. The network as a whole was not coherent. Of 136 treatment comparisons, none were rated as high confidence, six as moderate, 13 as low, and 117 as very low. Conclusions: Direct comparison of different available treatment options for OA is desirable, however not currently feasible in practice, due to heterogeneous study populations and lack of clear descriptions of control interventions. We found that many treatments were effective, but since the network as a whole was not coherent and lacked high confidence in the treatment comparisons, we could not produce a ranking of effects.

Sarcoidosis with musculoskeletal manifestations: systematic review of non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments.

We aimed to summarise effects and use of non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments for sarcoidosis with musculoskeletal manifestations. We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, Scopus, clinical.trials.gov, PROSPERO and PEDro for systematic reviews from 2014 to 2022 and for primary studies from date of inception to March 29, 2022, and studies with patients diagnosed with sarcoidosis with musculoskeletal manifestations. Inclusion criteria required that studies reported effects of non-pharmacological and/or pharmacological treatments or number of patients receiving these treatments. Results were reported narratively and in forest plots. Eleven studies were included. No systematic reviews fulfilled our inclusion criteria. None of the included studies had a control group. We found that between 23 and 100% received corticosteroids, 0-100% received NSAIDs, 5-100% received hydroxychloroquine, 12-100% received methotrexate, 0-100% received TNF inhibitors, and 3-4% received azathioprine. Only ten patients in one study had used non-pharmacological treatments, including occupational therapy, chiropractic and acupuncture. There are no controlled studies on treatment effects for patients with sarcoidosis with musculoskeletal manifestations. We found 11 studies reporting use of pharmacological treatments and only one study reporting use of non-pharmacological treatments. Our study identified major research gaps for pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment in musculoskeletal sarcoidosis and warrant randomised clinical trials for both.

Is psychological science progressing? Explained variance in PsycINFO articles during the period 1956 to 2022.

We aimed to numerically assess the progress of modern psychological science. Average explained variance in 1565 included articles was 42.8 percent, and this was constant during 1956 to 2022. We explored whether this could be explained by a combination of methodological conventions with the semantic properties of the involved variables. Using latent semantic analysis (LSA) on a random sample of 50 studies from the 1,565, we were able to replicate the possible semantic factor structures of 205 constructs reported in the corresponding articles. We argue that the methodological conventions pertaining to factor structures will lock the possible explained variance within mathematical constraints that will make most statistics cluster around 40 percent explained variance. Hypotheses with close to 100 percent semantic truth value will never be part of any assumed empirical study. Nor will hypotheses approaching zero truth value. Hypotheses with around 40 percent truth value will probably be experienced as empirical and plausible and, consequently, as good candidates for psychological research. Therefore, to the extent that the findings were indeed produced by semantic structures, they could have been known without collecting data. Finally, we try to explain why psychology had to abandon an individual, causal method and switch to studying whether associations among variables at the group level differ from chance. Psychological processes take place in indefinitely complex and irreversibly changing contexts. The prevalent research paradigm seems bound to producing theoretical statements that explain each other to around 40%. Any theoretical progress would need to address and transcend this barrier.

Effects of a mindfulness-based and acceptance-based group programme followed by physical activity for patients with fibromyalgia: a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Non-pharmacological approaches are recommended as first-line treatment for patients with fibromyalgia. This randomised controlled trial investigated the effects of a multicomponent rehabilitation programme for patients with recently diagnosed fibromyalgia in primary and secondary healthcare. METHODS: Patients with widespread pain ≥3 months were referred to rheumatologists for diagnostic clarification and assessment of study eligibility. Inclusion criteria were age 20-50 years, engaged in work or studies at present or during the past 2 years, and fibromyalgia diagnosed according to the American College of Rheumatology 2010 criteria. All eligible patients participated in a short patient education programme before inclusion and randomisation. The multicomponent programme, a 10-session mindfulness-based and acceptance-based group programme followed by 12 weeks of physical activity counselling was evaluated in comparison with treatment as usual, that is, no treatment or any other treatment of their choice. The primary outcome was the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Secondary outcomes were self-reported pain, fatigue, sleep quality, psychological distress, physical activity, health-related quality of life and work ability at 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 170 patients were randomised, 1:1, intervention:control. Overall, the multicomponent rehabilitation programme was not more effective than treatment as usual; 13% in the intervention group and 8% in the control group reported clinically relevant improvement in PGIC (p=0.28). No statistically significant between-group differences were found in any disease-related secondary outcomes. There were significant between-group differences in patient's tendency to be mindful (p=0.016) and perceived benefits of exercise (p=0.033) in favour of the intervention group. CONCLUSIONS: A multicomponent rehabilitation programme combining patient education with a mindfulness-based and acceptance-based group programme followed by physical activity counselling was not more effective than patient education and treatment as usual for patients with recently diagnosed fibromyalgia at 12-month follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: BMC Registry (ISRCTN96836577).

The mental health impact of the covid-19 pandemic on healthcare workers, and interventions to help them: A rapid systematic review.

The covid-19 pandemic has heavily burdened healthcare systems throughout the world. We performed a rapid systematic review to identify, assess and summarize research on the mental health impact of the covid-19 pandemic on HCWs (healthcare workers). We utilized the Norwegian Institute of Public Health's Live map of covid-19 evidence on 11 May and included 59 studies. Six reported on implementing interventions, but none reported on effects of the interventions. HCWs reported low interest in professional help, and greater reliance on social support and contact. Exposure to covid-19 was the most commonly reported correlate of mental health problems, followed by female gender, and worry about infection or about infecting others. Social support correlated with less mental health problems. HCWs reported anxiety, depression, sleep problems, and distress during the covid-19 pandemic. We assessed the certainty of the estimates of prevalence of these symptoms as very low using GRADE. Most studies did not report comparative data on mental health symptoms before the pandemic or in the general population. There seems to be a mismatch between risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes among HCWs in the current pandemic, their needs and preferences, and the individual psychopathology focus of current interventions.

Mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions for patients with fibromyalgia - A systematic review and meta-analyses.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze health effects of mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions, including mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) and acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT). Additionally, we aimed to explore content and delivery components in terms of procedure, instructors, mode, length, fidelity and adherence in the included interventions. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in the databases MEDLINE, PsychINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Central and AMED from 1990 to January 2019. We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials analyzing health effects of mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions for patients with fibromyalgia compared to no intervention, wait-list control, treatment as usual, or active interventions. MBSR combined with other treatments were included. Predefined outcomes were pain, fatigue, sleep quality, psychological distress, depression, anxiety, mindfulness, health-related quality of life and work ability. The Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide was used to explore content and delivery components in the interventions. Meta-analyses were performed, and GRADE was used to assess the certainty in the evidence. RESULTS: The search identified 4430 records, of which nine original trials were included. The vast majority of the participants were women. The analyses showed small to moderate effects in favor of mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions compared to controls in pain (SMD -0.46 [95% CI -0.75, -0.17]), depression (SMD -0.49 [95% CI -0.85, -0.12]), anxiety (SMD -0.37 [95% CI -0.71, -0.02]), mindfulness (SMD -0.40 [-0.69, -0.11]), sleep quality (SMD -0.33 [-0.70, 0.04]) and health-related quality of life (SMD -0.74 [95% CI -2.02, 0.54]) at end of treatment. The effects are uncertain due to individual study limitations, inconsistent results and imprecision. CONCLUSION: Health effects of mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions for patients with fibromyalgia are promising but uncertain. Future trials should consider investigating whether strategies to improve adherence and fidelity of mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions can improve health outcomes.

Evidence of reduced parasympathetic autonomic regulation in inflammatory joint disease: A meta-analyses study.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and spondyloarthritis (SpA) are inflammatory joint disorders (IJD) with increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Autonomic dysfunction (AD) is a risk factor for CVD, and parasympathetic AD is linked to key features of IJD such as inflammation, physical inactivity and pain. Heart-rate variability (HRV) is a marker of cardiac AD. The study objective was to compare parasympathetic cardiac AD, measured by HRV, between patients with IJD and healthy controls, using meta-analysis methodology, and to examine the impact of inflammation, physical inactivity and pain on HRV in IJD. METHODS: Medline, Embase and Amed were searched. Inclusion criteria were adult case-control studies published in English or a Scandinavian language, presenting HRV data in IJD. Two measures of HRV and 3 from the Ewing protocol were selected: square root of mean squared difference of successive R-R intervals (RMSSD), high frequency (HF), Ewing protocol; standing (E-S), breathing (E-B) and Valsalva (E-V). Patients with RA, SpA and healthy controls were compared separately using random-effects meta-analyses of standardized mean differences (SMD). RESULTS: In all, 35 papers were eligible for inclusion. For RMSSD the pooled SMD (95% CI) RA vs. controls was -0.90 (-1.35 to -0.44), for SpA vs. controls; -0.34 (-0.73 to 0.06). For HF pooled SMD RA vs. controls was -0.78 (-0.99 to -0.57), for SpA vs. controls; -0.04 (-0.22 to 0.13). All Ewing parameters were significantly lower in cases, except for E-V which was comparable between cases and controls in patients with RA. CONCLUSION: Patients with IJD have cardiac parasympathetic AD which is related to inflammation.

Exercise for Hand Osteoarthritis: A Cochrane Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefits and harms of exercise compared with other interventions, including placebo or no intervention, in people with hand osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Systematic review using Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Six electronic databases were searched up until September 2015. INCLUSION CRITERIA: randomized or controlled clinical trials comparing therapeutic exercise versus no exercise, or comparing different exercise programs. MAIN OUTCOMES: hand pain, hand function, finger joint stiffness, quality of life, adverse events, and withdrawals because of adverse effects. Risk of bias and quality of the evidence were assessed. RESULTS: Seven trials were included in the review, and up to 5 trials (n = 381) were included in the pooled analyses with data from postintervention. Compared to no exercise, low-quality evidence indicated that exercise may improve hand pain [5 trials, standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.27, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.07], hand function (4 trials, SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.58 to 0.02), and finger joint stiffness (4 trials, SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.15) in people with hand OA. Quality of life was evaluated by 1 study (113 participants) showing very low-quality evidence for no difference. Three studies reported on adverse events, which were very few and not severe. CONCLUSION: Pooled results from 5 studies with low risk of bias showed low-quality evidence for small to moderate beneficial effects of exercise on hand pain, function, and finger joint stiffness postintervention. Estimated effect sizes were small, and whether they represent a clinically important change may be debated.

Effect of cardiorespiratory and strength exercises on disease activity in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of cardiorespiratory and strength exercises on disease activity for patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs). DESIGN: A systematic review with meta-analysis registered at PROSPERO (CRD42015020004). PARTICIPANTS: Patients with IRDs. DATA SOURCES: The databases MEDLINE, AMED, Embase and CINAHL were searched from inception up to April 2016. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Trials were included if they were randomised controlled trials of adults with IRDs, comparing the effect of cardiorespiratory and strength exercises with usual care on disease activity and followed the American College of Sports Medicine's exercise recommendations. The primary outcome was disease activity in terms of inflammation, joint damage and symptoms. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were pooled in a random-effect model for all outcomes, and standardised mean differences (SMDs) were calculated. The quality of evidence was evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: Twenty-six trials with a total of 1286 participants were included. There was high to moderate quality evidence, for a small beneficial effect on disease activity scores (0.19 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.33), p<0.01) and joint damage (SMD 0.27 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.46), p<0.01). Furthermore, moderate quality evidence for a small beneficial effect on erythrocyte sedimentation rate (SMD 0.20 (95% CI 0.0 to 0.39), p=0.04) and for no effect on C reactive protein (SMD -0.14 (95% CI -0.37 to 0.08), p=0.21). Beneficial effects were also seen for symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review suggest beneficial effects of exercises on inflammation, joint damage and symptoms in patients with IRDs.

Exercise for hand osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Hand osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent joint disease that may lead to pain, stiffness and problems in performing hand-related activities of daily living. Currently, no cure for OA is known, and non-pharmacological modalities are recommended as first-line care. A positive effect of exercise in hip and knee OA has been documented, but the effect of exercise on hand OA remains uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of exercise compared with other interventions, including placebo or no intervention, in people with hand OA. Main outcomes are hand pain and hand function. SEARCH METHODS: We searched six electronic databases up until September 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised and controlled clinical trials comparing therapeutic exercise versus no exercise or comparing different exercise programmes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and assessed the quality of the body of evidence using the GRADE approach. Outcomes consisted of both continuous (hand pain, physical function, finger joint stiffness and quality of life) and dichotomous outcomes (proportions of adverse events and withdrawals). MAIN RESULTS: We included seven studies in the review. Most studies were free from selection and reporting bias, but one study was available only as a congress abstract. It was not possible to blind participants to treatment allocation, and although most studies reported blinded outcome assessors, some outcomes (pain, function, stiffness and quality of life) were self-reported. The results may be vulnerable to performance and detection bias owing to unblinded participants and self-reported outcomes. Two studies with high drop-out rates may be vulnerable to attrition bias. We downgraded the overall quality of the body of evidence to low owing to potential detection bias (lack of blinding of participants on self-reported outcomes) and imprecision (studies were few, the number of participants was limited and confidence intervals were wide for the outcomes pain, function and joint stiffness). For quality of life, adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events, we further downgraded the overall quality of the body of evidence to very low because studies were very few and confidence intervals were very wide.Low-quality evidence from five trials (381 participants) indicated that exercise reduced hand pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.47 to -0.07) post intervention. The absolute reduction in pain for the exercise group, compared with the control group, was 5% (1% to 9%) on a 0 to 10 point scale. Pain was estimated to be 3.9 points on this scale (0 = no pain) in the control group, and exercise reduced pain by 0.5 points (95% CI 0.1 to 0.9; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 9).Four studies (369 participants) indicated that exercise improved hand function (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.58 to 0.02) post intervention. The absolute improvement in function noted in the exercise group, compared with the control group, was 6% (0.4% worsening to 13% improvement). Function was estimated at 14.5 points on a 0 to 36 point scale (0 = no physical disability) in the control group, and exercise improved function by 2.2 points (95% CI -0.2 to 4.6; NNTB 9).One study (113 participants) evaluated quality of life, and the effect of exercise on quality of life is currently uncertain (mean difference (MD) 0.30, 95% CI -3.72 to 4.32). The absolute improvement in quality of life for the exercise group, compared with the control group, was 0.3% (4% worsening to 4% improvement). Quality of life was 50.4 points on a 0 to 100 point scale (100 = maximum quality of life) in the control group, and the mean score in the exercise group was 0.3 points higher (3.5 points lower to 4.1 points higher).Four studies (369 participants) indicated that exercise reduced finger joint stiffness (SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.15) post intervention. The absolute reduction in finger joint stiffness for the exercise group, compared with the control group, was 7% (3% to 10%). Finger joint stiffness was estimated at 4.5 points on a 0 to 10 point scale (0 = no stiffness) in the control group, and exercise improved stiffness by 0.7 points (95% CI 0.3 to 1.0; NNTB 7).Three studies reported intervention-related adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events. The few reported adverse events consisted of increased finger joint inflammation and hand pain. Low-quality evidence from the three studies showed an increased likelihood of adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 4.55, 95% CI 0.53 to 39.31) and of withdrawals due to adverse events in the exercise group compared with the control group (RR 2.88, 95% CI 0.30 to 27.18), but the effect is uncertain and further research may change the estimates.Included studies did not measure radiographic joint structure changes. Two studies provided six-month follow-up data (220 participants), and one (102 participants) provided 12-month follow-up data. The positive effect of exercise on pain, function and joint stiffness was not sustained at medium- and long-term follow-up.The exercise intervention varied largely in terms of dosage, content and number of supervised sessions. Participants were instructed to exercise two to three times a week in four studies, daily in two studies and three to four times daily in another study. Exercise interventions in all seven studies aimed to improve muscle strength and joint stability or function, but the numbers and types of exercises varied largely across studies. Four studies reported adherence to the exercise programme; in three studies, this was self-reported. Self-reported adherence to the recommended frequency of exercise sessions ranged between 78% and 94%. In the fourth study, 67% fulfilled at least 16 of the 18 scheduled exercise sessions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: When we pooled results from five studies, we found low-quality evidence showing small beneficial effects of exercise on hand pain, function and finger joint stiffness. Estimated effect sizes were small, and whether they represent a clinically important change may be debated. One study reported quality of life, and the effect is uncertain. Three studies reported on adverse events, which were very few and were not severe.

Quality of Community-Based Osteoarthritis Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the state of quality of care for osteoarthritis (OA) by summarizing studies that have assessed the care provided to patients. METHODS: A systematic review of community-based observational studies of actual clinical practice treating people with OA compared with quality indicators (QIs) was performed. Four databases were searched from January 2000 to November 2015. Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility, assessed risk of bias, and extracted study data. The outcome was adherence to the QIs (pass rate). The overall pass rate (the total number of indicators passed divided by the total number of indicators for which the patients were eligible) was extracted from each study. When at least 50% of the studies had comparable individual QIs, the data were pooled with proportion meta-analyses. RESULTS: Fifteen studies comprising 16,103 patients were included, and the median overall pass rate across studies was 41% (range 22-65%). The pooled pass rates for individual QIs were "referral to orthopedic surgeon if no response to other therapy": 59.4% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 47.5-70.3); "paracetamol or acetaminophen first drug used": 46.0% (95% CI 26.6-66.7); "assessed for pain and/or function": 45.5% (95% CI 33.9-57.6); "referral or recommendation to exercise": 38.7% (28.9-49.5); "offered education and self-management": 35.4% (95% CI 27.8-44.0); and "informed about potential risks if NSAIDs prescribed": 34.1% (95% CI 24.7-44.9). CONCLUSION: There is room for improvement in community-based OA care.

Design and effects of supportive followup interventions in clinical care of patients with rheumatic diseases: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the design and determine the clinical effects of supportive followup interventions delivered after or alongside nonsurgical treatment or rehabilitation of patients with rheumatic diseases. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials searching the Ovid Medline, Embase, Cinahl, AMED, PsychINFO, and Cochrane Library databases. Trials evaluating the effects of interventions designed to enhance and/or prolong the effects of rheumatic treatment or rehabilitation were included. Data on pain, depression, and physical function were pooled in separate meta-analyses, including analyses made to calculate short-term (0-2 months) and long-term (5-6 months after followup intervention) effects. Risk of bias was assessed by 2 independent reviewers. RESULTS: The searches generated 3,231 citations, of which 11 original trials were included. The results demonstrated a great variety in the design of followup interventions. We found moderate quality evidence for small effects on self-reported physical function, with standardized mean differences of -0.15 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.30, 0.00; P = 0.05) at short term, and -0.18 (95% CI -0.37, 0.00; P = 0.05) at long-term followup. Moderate quality evidence showed no effect of supportive followup interventions on short-term depression. Low quality evidence showed no significant effects on short-term pain, and very low quality evidence showed no significant effects on long-term pain and depression. CONCLUSION: Currently there is no clear evidence concerning what constitutes an optimal design of supportive followup interventions. There is evidence that supportive followup can improve physical function in patients with rheumatic diseases, whereas no significant effects were found for pain and depression.