Identifying sports chiropractic global research priorities: an international Delphi study of sports chiropractors.

Objectives: Developing a research agenda is one method to facilitate broad research planning and prioritise research within a discipline. Despite profession-specific agendas, none have specifically addressed the research needs of the specialty of sports chiropractic. This study determined consensus on research priorities to inform a global sports chiropractic research agenda. Methods: A Delphi consensus methodology was used to integrate expert opinions. Clinicians, academics and leaders from the international sports chiropractic specialty were recruited using purposive sampling to participate in (1) a Delphi panel involving three voting rounds to determine consensus on research priorities and (2) a priority importance ranking of the items that reached consensus. Results: We identified and contacted 141 participants, with response rates for rounds 1, 2 and 3, of 44%, 31% and 34%, respectively. From the original 149 research priorities, 66 reached consensus in round 1, 63 in round 2 and 45 items in round 3. Research priorities reaching consensus were collapsed by removing redundancies, and priority ranking identified 20 research priorities, 11 related to collaboration and 6 to research themes. Conclusions: The top-ranked items for research priorities, research themes and collaborations included the effects of interventions on performance, recovery and return to play; clinical research in sport; and collaborations with researchers in chiropractic educational institutions, respectively. Implications: The prioritisation of research items can be evaluated by key stakeholders (including athletes) and implemented to develop the first international research agenda for sports chiropractic.

Measurement Properties and Minimal Important Change of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in Persons With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the measurement properties and minimal important change (MIC) of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) short (12 questions) and full (36 questions) versions in persons with nonspecific low back pain (LBP). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, APA PsycInfo, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (inception to May 2021). STUDY SELECTION: Eligible studies assessed measurement properties or MIC of WHODAS 2.0 in persons with LBP. DATA EXTRACTION: Paired reviewers screened articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Consensus-Based Standards for Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) and COSMIN-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology checklists. DATA SYNTHESIS: We descriptively synthesized results stratified by measurement property and LBP duration (subacute: 6 weeks to 3 months; chronic: ≥3 months). RESULTS: We screened 297 citations and included 14 studies (reported in 15 articles). Methodological quality of studies was very good for internal consistency and varied between very good and doubtful for construct validity, doubtful for responsiveness, and adequate for all other properties assessed. Evidence suggests that WHODAS 2.0 full version has adequate content validity (2 studies); WHODAS 2.0 short and full versions have adequate structural validity (3 studies), but construct validity is indeterminate (9 studies). WHODAS 2.0 short and full versions have adequate internal consistency (10 studies), and the full version has adequate test-retest and interrater reliability (3 studies) in persons with LBP. Minimal detectable change (MDC) was 10.45-13.99 of 100 for the full version and 8.6 of 48 for the short version in persons with LBP (4 studies). WHODAS 2.0 full version has no floor or ceiling effects, but the short version has potential floor effects in persons with chronic LBP (3 studies). One study estimated MIC for the full version as 4.87 of 100 or 9.74 of 100 (corresponding to 1- and 2-point change on 0- to 10-cm visual analog scale for pain, respectively), and 1 study estimated 3.09-4.68 of 48 for the short version. CONCLUSIONS: In persons with LBP, WHODAS 2.0 full version has adequate content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, and reliability. WHODAS 2.0 short version has adequate structural validity and internal consistency. Construct validity of the short and full versions is indeterminate. Since MDC is estimated to be larger than MIC, users may consider both MIC and MDC thresholds to measure change in functioning for LBP.

Pre-rehabilitation scores of functioning measured using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in persons with nonspecific low back pain: a scoping review.

Knowledge of the pre-rehabilitation generic status of functioning in individuals with low back pain is necessary to understand the clinical utility of rehabilitation care. We conducted a scoping review to describe the pre-rehabilitation functioning status of persons with nonspecific low back pain using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS)-36 or WHODAS-12. We searched multiple databases from 2010 to 2021 for studies reporting pre-rehabilitation scores using WHODAS in persons with low back pain. Reviewers independently screened articles and extracted data, and we descriptively summarized results by the duration of low back pain (acute/subacute <3 months; chronic ≥3 months), and the WHODAS version. Of 1770 citations screened, eight citations were relevant. Five studies were conducted in Europe, two in America, and one in the African Region (mostly high-income countries). In persons with acute low back pain, the mean WHODAS-36 pre-rehabilitation summary score (complex scoring) was 22.8/100 (SD = 15.4) (one study). In persons with chronic low back pain, the mean WHODAS-36 summary score (complex scoring) ranged from 22.8/100 (SD = 5.7) to 41.5/100 (SD = 13.8) (two studies). For WHODAS-12 in persons with chronic low back pain, the mean summary score was 11.4/48 (SD = 8.7) or 14.4/48 (SD = 9.4) using simple scoring (two studies), and 25.8/100 (SD = 2.2) using complex scoring (one study). No floor or ceiling effects were observed in WHODAS-36 summary scores for chronic low back pain. Our scoping review comprehensively summarizes available studies reporting pre-rehabilitation levels of functioning using WHODAS in persons with low back pain. Persons with low back pain seeking rehabilitation have moderate limitations in functioning, and limitations level tends to be worse with chronic low back pain.

Identifying and prioritizing research to inform a research agenda for Canadian chiropractors working in sport - the Canadian sports chiropractic perspective.

Objectives: To identify and prioritize research to inform research agenda development for Canadian chiropractors working in sport. Methods: Clinicians, researchers and leaders from the Canadian sports chiropractic field were invited to participate in 1) a survey to refine a list of research priorities, 2) a Delphi procedure to determine consensus on these priorities, and 3) a prioritization survey. Results: The top three research priorities were 1) effects of interventions on athletic outcomes, 2) research about sports healthcare teams, and 3) clinical research related to spinal manipulative and mobilization therapy. The three highest ranked conditions to research were 1) low back pain, 2) neck pain, and 3) concussion. Collaborations with sports physicians and universities/ colleges were rated as important research collaborations to pursue. Conclusions: These results represent the Canadian sports chiropractic perspective to research priority setting and will be used alongside stakeholder input to set the first research agenda for the Canadian sports chiropractic field.

Objectifs: Définir et prioriser la recherche afin d'élaborer un programme de recherche pour les chiropraticiens canadiens travaillant dans le domaine du sport. Méthodologie: Des cliniciens, des chercheurs et des chefs de file du domaine de la chiropratique sportive canadienne ont été invités à participer à 1) un sondage pour préciser une liste de priorités de recherche, 2) une procédure Delphi pour déterminer le consensus sur ces priorités, et 3) un sondage d'établissement de priorités. Résultats: Les trois principales priorités de recherche sont 1) les effets des interventions sur les résultats sportifs, 2) la recherche sur les équipes de soins de santé dans le domaine du sport et 3) la recherche clinique liée à la thérapie de manipulation et de mobilisation de la colonne vertébrale. Les trois problèmes de santé les plus importants cités comme priorité de recherche sont 1) la lombalgie, 2) la cervicalgie et 3) les commotions cérébrales. Les collaborations avec les médecins du sport et les universités/collèges sont considérées comme des collaborations de recherche importantes à poursuivre. Conclusions: Ces résultats représentent le point de vue de la chiropratique sportive canadienne sur l'établissement des priorités en matière de recherche et seront utilisés avec les commentaires des intervenants pour établir le premier programme de recherche du domaine de la chiropratique sportive canadienne.

A qualitative study investigating research priorities and investigative capacity in sports-focused chiropractic research, part 1 - identifying research priorities to inform a Delphi study.

OBJECTIVES: To identify sports-focused research priorities to inform the development of a research agenda for sports chiropractors. METHODS: A qualitative description study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with 20 sports chiropractic researchers from 8 different countries and focus group interviews with 12 sports chiropractic leaders from Canada. RESULTS: 150 research priorities were identified, and three main themes emerged: area of research, research actions, and research methodology. Six areas of research were identified: basic science and mechanism research, clinical research, health services research, population health, specific conditions and topics in sport, and chiropractic research in sport. Collaboration in research and contributing to the broader sports research effort were two subthemes identified as research actions, and the remaining codes were related to research methodology. CONCLUSIONS: The research priorities identified can be utilized to plan future research prioritization studies to inform a research agenda for the sports chiropractic field.

OBJECTIFS: Identifier les priorités de recherche axées sur le sport pour guider le développement d'un programme de recherche pour les chiropraticiens du sport. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Une étude de description qualitative a été menée à l'aide d'entretiens semi-structurés auprès de 20 chercheurs en chiropratique sportive de huit pays et d'entretiens en groupes de discussion avec 12 dirigeants de la chiropratique sportive du Canada. RÉSULTATS: 150 priorités de recherche ont été identifiées, et trois thèmes principaux sont ressortis : le domaine de recherche, les actions de recherche et la méthodologie de recherche. Six domaines de recherche ont été identifiés : la science fondamentale et la recherche sur les mécanismes, la recherche clinique, la recherche sur les services de santé, la santé de la population, des conditions et des sujets particuliers liés au sport et la recherche en chiropratique sportive. La collaboration dans la recherche et de façon plus générale, la contribution à l'effort de recherche sur le sport sont deux sous-thèmes identifiés comme des actions de recherche, et les autres codes sont liés à la méthodologie de recherche. CONCLUSIONS: Les priorités de recherche identifiées peuvent servir à préparer de futures études sur la priorisation de la recherche et à guider un programme de recherche dans le domaine de la chiropratique sportive.

Hip pain in an elite cyclist with Non-Hodgkin's Follicular Lymphoma: a case report.

OBJECTIVE: We present a case of an elite cyclist that hesitated to follow the medical advice from her practitioners, as she was determined to train and compete resulting in delayed diagnosis and management of a rare hip pathology. CASE PRESENTATION: A 51-year old elite female cyclist had a history of years of hip pain with insidious onset. The chiropractor in this case observed a lack of response to treatment, and advised the patient to get an MRI with suspicion of a labral tear. She eventually agreed to further investigations and was diagnosed with Non-Hodgkin's follicular lymphoma and a labral tear. SUMMARY: Elite athletes are not immune to serious pathology. Chiropractors should be vigilant and ensure to investigate any patients with a lack of response to conservative management. Chiropractors should be aware of the risk of athletic patients that continue to train and compete when advised not to.

OBJECTIF: Nous présentons le cas d'une cycliste d'élite qui a hésité à suivre les conseils médicaux de ses praticiens, car elle était déterminée à s'entraîner et à participer à des compétitions, ce qui a retardé le diagnostic et la prise en charge d'une pathologie rare de la hanche. PRÉSENTATION DU CAS: Une cycliste d'élite de 51 ans avait des antécédents de douleurs à la hanche depuis des années; le début de ses douleurs avait été insidieux. Le chiropraticien a observé une absence de réponse au traitement et a conseillé à la patiente de subir un examen par IRM en soupçonnant une déchirure du labrum. La patiente a fini par accepter de subir des examens complémentaires. Un lymphome folliculaire non hodgkinien et une déchirure labrum ont été diagnostiqués. RÉSUMÉ: Les athlètes d'élite ne sont pas à l'abri d'une pathologie grave. Les chiropraticiens doivent être vigilants et s'assurer d'examiner tous les patients réfractaires à un traitement conservateur. Les chiropraticiens doivent être conscients du risque que représentent les patients sportifs qui continuent à s'entraîner et à participer à des compétitions alors qu'on leur a conseillé de ne pas le faire.

Rare subtype of multiple myeloma presenting as sacroiliac joint pain in an avid golfer: a case report.

OBJECTIVE: Kappa (κ) light chain multiple myeloma can be disguised as low back pain (LBP), and as such may present to a primary contact provider such as a chiropractor. The rarity and non-specific nature of the clinical presentation of this condition typically lead to a delayed diagnosis. CASE PRESENTATION: A 53-year old male avid golfer presented to a chiropractor with a chief complaint of LBP. He was diagnosed with sacroiliac joint dysfunction. His pain was initially improving with chiropractic management. The character of his pain changed, and the chiropractor referred for further imaging. He was subsequently diagnosed with κ light chain multiple myeloma. SUMMARY: This case presentation highlights that spinal malignancy is a possible cause of LBP. It reminds the clinician to investigate signs and symptoms that could lead to a suspicion of malignancy, to monitor patient progression, and consider further evaluations if the expected response to treatment is not achieved.

OBJECTIF: Un myélome multiple à chaîne légère (kappa) (κ) peut se cacher derrière des lombalgies qu'un fournisseur de soins primaires, comme un chiropraticien, peut ne pas reconnaître. En raison de la rareté et de la nature imprécise des symptômes cliniques, ce type de myélome est souvent diagnostiqué tardivement. EXPOSÉ DU CAS: Un fervent golfeur de 53 ans s'est présenté dans une clinique de chiropratique en se plaignant de lombalgies. Le chiropraticien a diagnostiqué une trouble de l'articulation sacroiliaque. Au début, le traitement de chiropraxie a soulagé la douleur. Mais comme sa nature évoluait, le chiropraticien a recommandé un examen par imagerie, qui a révélé un myélome multiple à chaîne légère k. RÉSUMÉ: Les tumeurs de la colonne vertébrale peuvent être une cause de lombalgies. Le présent exposé de cas rappelle au clinicien de rechercher les causes des signes et des symptômes pouvant faire soupçonner un cancer, de surveiller l'état du patient et d'envisager des examens plus approfondis si le traitement ne donne pas les résultats attendus.