Exercise-based interventions targeting balance and falls in people with COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This review quantifies the mean treatment effect of exercise-based interventions on balance and falls risk in people with COPD. METHODS: A structured search strategy (2000-2023) was applied to eight databases to identify studies evaluating the impact of exercise-based interventions (≥14 days in duration) on balance or falls in people with COPD. Pooled mean treatment effects (95% confidence intervals (CIs), 95% prediction intervals (PIs)) were calculated for outcomes reported in five or more studies. Inter-individual response variance and the promise of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were explored. RESULTS: 34 studies (n=1712) were included. There were greater improvements in balance post intervention compared to controls for the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) (mean 2.51, 95% CI 0.22-4.80, 95% PI -4.60-9.63), Timed Up and Go (TUG) test (mean -1.12 s, 95% CI -1.69- -0.55 s, 95% PI -2.78-0.54 s), Single-Leg Stance (SLS) test (mean 3.25 s, 95% CI 2.72-3.77 s, 95% PI 2.64-3.86 s) and Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) scale (mean 8.50%, 95% CI 2.41-14.58%, 95% PI -8.92-25.92%). Effect on falls remains unknown. Treatment effects were larger in male versus mixed-sex groups for the ABC scale and SLS test, and in balance training versus other exercise-based interventions for the BBS and TUG test. Falls history was not associated with changes in balance. Meta-analysis of individual response variance was not possible and study-level results were inconclusive. Eleven promising BCTs were identified (promise ratio ≥2). CONCLUSION: Evidence for the effect of exercise-based interventions eliciting clinically important improvements in balance for people with COPD is weak, but targeted balance training produces the greatest benefits. Future exercise interventions may benefit from inclusion of the identified promising BCTs.

The Test-Retest Reliability of Pain Outcome Measures in People With Phantom Limb Pain.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the test-retest reliability of 3 patient-reported outcome measures of pain for people living with phantom limb pain (PLP) and assess the impact of test-retest errors on future research and clinical decisions. METHODS: Thirty-nine participants (30 males), mean (SD) age: 55 (16), mean (SD) years postamputation: 6.8 (8.3), reported their PLP levels on a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain intensity, the revised short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ-2), and a pain diary, on 2 occasions 7 to 14 days apart. Mean systematic change, within-subjects SD, limits of agreement (LOA), coefficient of variation, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were quantified alongside their respective 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). RESULTS: Systematic learning effects (mean changes) were not clinically relevant across the VAS, SF-MPQ-2, and pain diary. Within-subject SDs (95% CI) were 11.8 (9.6-15.3), 0.9 (0.7-1.2), and 8.6 (6.9-11.5), respectively. LOA (95% CI) were 32.6 (26.5-42.4), 2.5 (2-3.3), and 23.9 (19.2-31.8), respectively. ICCs (95% CI) were 0.8 (0.6-0.9), 0.8 (0.7-0.9), and 0.9 (0.8-0.9), respectively, but may have been inflated by sample heterogeneity. The test-retest errors allowed detection of clinically relevant effect sizes with feasible sample sizes in future studies, but individual errors were large. DISCUSSION: For people with PLP, a pain intensity VAS, the SF-MPQ-2, and a pain diary show an acceptable level of intersession reliability for use in future clinical trials with feasible sample sizes. Nevertheless, the random error observed for all 3 of the pain outcome measures suggests they should be interpreted with caution in case studies and when monitoring individuals' clinical status and progress.

Utilisation and experience of emergency medical services by patients with back pain: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Back pain is recognised as a common reason for people to access emergency medical services (EMS). EMS focus on identifying and treating serious and life-threatening conditions. Back pain frequently has a non-specific cause, however back pain is also a symptom for potentially serious pathology best suited for management by EMS. OBJECTIVES: This scoping review explores how and why patients with back pain access EMS, the care provided, and patients' and clinicians' perceptions of EMS. METHODS: The established methodology advocated by the Joanna Briggs Institute was followed. Literature was identified via a comprehensive search of six databases as well as grey literature searching. Data was extracted to form a narrative review supported by summary tables and figures. RESULTS: The review included 144 papers across the last 36 years, with half the papers published since 2018, the majority from the USA and Australia. Rates of back pain presentation range from 1 to 9% depending on the definition used, with the rate of serious pathology higher than in primary care. Patients present due to concerns about their condition, positive perceptions of the care provided by EMS and difficulty in accessing primary care. Imaging and opioids are widely used, blood markers may aid diagnosis of serious pathology, whilst physiotherapists in Emergency Departments may support management of patients without serious pathology. CONCLUSIONS: Back pain is a common reason for EMS presentation. Whilst non-specific back pain is the most common diagnosis further research to support the recognition and care of serious cases would be beneficial.

Acceptability and feasibility of virtual reality to promote health literacy in primary care from the health professional's view: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: The development of health literacy is important in the management of chronic pain and virtual reality may be an effective medium for its development. This study aims to understand the usability and acceptability of a virtual reality-based pain education system for the facilitation of health literacy. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with health professionals who had used a VR-based pain education system within their clinical practice, to explore perceptions of feasibility. Data collection and analyses were informed by the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology and the Integrated Model of Health Literacy. RESULTS: From 10 participants, the VR-based system was considered feasible in providing immersive experiential learning which addressed patient understanding and health-related communication. CONCLUSION: VR appears to be perceived as an acceptable and feasible technology to support the development of health literacy in people with chronic pain. Its largest perceived benefit was its capacity to provide an immersive and entertaining alternative to conventional methods of pain education. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Virtual reality is considered as a feasible method of facilitating patient understanding and health-related communication related to chronic pain. Feasibility of such a tool relies clinically on time available, social expectations of VR, and the role of immersive and experiential learning within the management of chronic pain.