Patients with worse disability respond best to cognitive functional therapy for chronic low back pain: a pre-planned secondary analysis of a randomised trial.

QUESTION: Do five baseline moderators identify patients with chronic low back pain who respond best to cognitive functional therapy (CFT) when compared with usual care? DESIGN: Secondary analysis of the RESTORE randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 492 adults with low back pain for > 3 months with at least moderate pain-related activity limitation. INTERVENTION: Participants were allocated to CFT alone or CFT plus biofeedback; these two groups were combined for this secondary analysis. The control group was usual care. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome was activity limitation measured using the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) at 3, 6, 13, 26, 40 and 52 weeks. Investigated effect modifiers were baseline measures of activity limitation, cognitive flexibility, pain intensity, self-efficacy and catastrophising. RESULTS: Baseline levels of activity limitation and, potentially, cognitive flexibility were associated with different effects of CFT treatment, while pain intensity, self-efficacy and catastrophising were not. Patients who had higher baseline activity limitation had greater treatment effects at 13 and 52 weeks. A person with a baseline RMDQ score of 18 (90th percentile) would on average be 6.1 (95% CI 4.8 to 7.4) points better at 13 weeks if they received CFT compared with usual care. However, a person with a baseline score of 7 (10th percentile) would on average be 3.6 (95% CI 2.6 to 4.6) points better at 13 weeks. CONCLUSION: The finding that CFT is most effective among patients who are most disabled and incur the greatest burden strongly suggests that CFT should be considered as a treatment for this group of patients. REGISTRATION: ACTRN12618001396213.

People with painful knee osteoarthritis hold negative implicit attitudes towards activity.

ABSTRACT: Negative attitudes/beliefs surrounding osteoarthritis, pain, and activity contribute to reduced physical activity in people with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). These attitudes/beliefs are assessed using self-report questionnaires, relying on information one is consciously aware of and willing to disclose. Automatic (ie, implicit) assessment of attitudes does not rely on conscious reflection and may identify features unique from self-report. We developed an implicit association test that explored associations between images of a person moving/twisting their knee (activity) or sitting/standing (rest), and perceived threat (safe vs dangerous). We hypothesised that people with KOA would have greater implicit threat-activity associations (vs pain-free and non-knee pain controls), with implicit attitudes only weakly correlating with self-reported measures (pain knowledge, osteoarthritis/pain/activity beliefs, fear of movement). Participants (n = 558) completed an online survey: 223 had painful KOA (n = 157 female, 64.5 ± 8.9 years); 207 were pain free (n = 157 female, 49.3 ± 15.3 years); and 99 had non-KOA lower limb pain (n = 74 female, 47.5 ± 15.04 years). An implicit association between "danger" and "activity" was present in those with and without limb pain (KOA: 0.36, 95% CI 0.28-0.44; pain free: 0.13, 95% CI 0.04-0.22; non-KOA lower limb pain 0.11, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.24) but was significantly greater in the KOA group than in the pain free ( P < 0.001) and non-KOA lower limb pain ( P = 0.004) groups. Correlations between implicit and self-reported measures were nonsignificant or weak (rho = -0.29 to 0.19, P < 0.001 to P = 0.767). People with painful KOA hold heightened implicit threat-activity associations, capturing information unique to that from self-report questionnaires. Evaluating links between implicit threat-activity associations and real-world behaviour, including physical activity levels, is warranted.

Co-development and evaluation of the Musculoskeletal Telehealth Toolkit for physiotherapists.

INTRODUCTION: In-person physiotherapy services are not readily available to all individuals with musculoskeletal conditions, especially those in rural regions or with time-intensive responsibilities. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted that telehealth may facilitate access to, and continuity of care, yet many physiotherapists lack telehealth confidence and training. This project co-developed and evaluated a web-based professional development toolkit supporting physiotherapists to provide telehealth services for musculoskeletal conditions. METHODS: A mixed-methods exploratory sequential design applied modified experience-based co-design methods (physiotherapists [n = 13], clinic administrators [n = 2], and people with musculoskeletal conditions [n = 7]) to develop an evidence-informed toolkit. Semi-structured workshops were conducted, recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed, refining the toolkit prototype. Subsequently, the toolkit was promoted via webinars and social media. The usability of the toolkit was examined with pre-post surveys examining changes in confidence, knowledge, and perceived telehealth competence (19 statements modelled from the theoretical domains framework) between toolkit users (>30 min) and non-users (0 min) using chi-squared tests for independence. Website analytics were summarised. RESULTS: Twenty-two participants engaged in co-design workshops. Feedback led to the inclusion of more patient-facing resources, increased assessment-related visual content, streamlined toolkit organisation, and simplified, downloadable infographics. Three hundred and twenty-nine physiotherapists from 21 countries completed the baseline survey, with 172 (52%) completing the 3-month survey. Toolkit users had greater improvement in knowledge, confidence, and competence than non-users in 42% of statements. Seventy-two percentage of toolkit users said it changed their practice, and 95% would recommend the toolkit to colleagues. During the evaluation period, the toolkit received 5486 total views. DISCUSSION: The co-designed web-based Musculoskeletal Telehealth Toolkit is a professional development resource that may increase physiotherapist's confidence, knowledge, and competence in telehealth.

Process of change for people with knee osteoarthritis undergoing cognitive functional therapy: a replicated single-case experimental design study.

PURPOSE: To examine the applicability and process of change of Cognitive Functional Therapy (CFT) in the management of pain and disability in people with knee osteoarthritis who were offered knee replacement surgery and had risk factors for poor response to surgery. METHODS: Single-case experimental design with a mixed-methods, repeated measures approach was used to investigate the process of change through CFT in four participants. Qualitative interviews investigated beliefs, behaviours and coping responses, and self-reported measures assessed pain, disability, psychological factors, and function at 25 timepoints. Study registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619001491156). RESULTS: Qualitative data indicate that CFT promoted helpful changes in all participants, with two responses observed. One reflected a clear shift to a biopsychosocial conceptualisation of osteoarthritis, behavioural re-engagement and the view that a knee replacement was no longer necessary. The other response reflected a mixed conceptualisation with dissonant beliefs about osteoarthritis and its management. Psychological and social factors were identified as potential treatment barriers. Overall, quantitative measures supported the qualitative findings. CONCLUSION: The process of change varies between and within individuals over time. Psychological and social barriers to treatment have implications for future intervention studies for the management of knee osteoarthritis.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONCognitive Functional Therapy is applicable in the management of knee osteoarthritis.Reconceptualisation of osteoarthritis reflected a helpful change.Psychological and social factors emerged as barriers to recovery.

Broken Machines or Active Bodies? Part 3. Five Recommendations to Shift the Way Clinicians Communicate With People Who Are Seeking Care for Osteoarthritis.

SYNOPSIS: In parts 1 and 2 of this series, we highlighted the dominant impairment way of talking about osteoarthritis: talking that frames osteoarthritis as a disease of cartilage worsened by physical activity that can only be "cured" by replacing the joint. An alternative understanding that counters common misconceptions about osteoarthritis, and links physical activity and healthy lifestyles to improvements in symptoms is likely a prerequisite for sustainable behavior change. It is insufficient to tell people with osteoarthritis that regular physical activity is important; people need to understand and experience how physical activity can help. Here, we offer suggestions for how clinicians can shift from focusing on what people cannot do because of osteoarthritis, toward focusing on what people can do to improve their health and maintain "active bodies." J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(7):1-6. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11881.

Broken Machines or Active Bodies? Part 2. How People Talk About Osteoarthritis and Why Clinicians Need to Change the Conversation.

SYNOPSIS: How people talk about osteoarthritis may impact outcomes, including uptake of guideline recommendations related to activity-based lifestyles and interventions. In this editorial, we describe 2 key ways of talking, based on findings from our systematic review of 62 qualitative studies exploring the perceptions of people with knee osteoarthritis (n = 1208), their carers (n = 28), and clinicians (n = 2403). Among raw quotes extracted from the studies, we observed a dominant impairment-based way of talking and a participatory based way of talking. These ways of talking form a novel framework to help clinicians understand what people think and do about osteoarthritis. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(6):325-330. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11880.

Cognitive functional therapy with or without movement sensor biofeedback versus usual care for chronic, disabling low back pain (RESTORE): a randomised, controlled, three-arm, parallel group, phase 3, clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain is the leading cause of years lived with disability globally, but most interventions have only short-lasting, small to moderate effects. Cognitive functional therapy (CFT) is an individualised approach that targets unhelpful pain-related cognitions, emotions, and behaviours that contribute to pain and disability. Movement sensor biofeedback might enhance treatment effects. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and economic efficiency of CFT, delivered with or without movement sensor biofeedback, with usual care for patients with chronic, disabling low back pain. METHODS: RESTORE was a randomised, controlled, three-arm, parallel group, phase 3 trial, done in 20 primary care physiotherapy clinics in Australia. We recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with low back pain lasting more than 3 months with at least moderate pain-related physical activity limitation. Exclusion criteria were serious spinal pathology (eg, fracture, infection, or cancer), any medical condition that prevented being physically active, being pregnant or having given birth within the previous 3 months, inadequate English literacy for the study's questionnaires and instructions, a skin allergy to hypoallergenic tape adhesives, surgery scheduled within 3 months, or an unwillingness to travel to trial sites. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via a centralised adaptive schedule to usual care, CFT only, or CFT plus biofeedback. The primary clinical outcome was activity limitation at 13 weeks, self-reported by participants using the 24-point Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire. The primary economic outcome was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Participants in both interventions received up to seven treatment sessions over 12 weeks plus a booster session at 26 weeks. Physiotherapists and patients were not masked. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12618001396213. FINDINGS: Between Oct 23, 2018 and Aug 3, 2020, we assessed 1011 patients for eligibility. After excluding 519 (51·3%) ineligible patients, we randomly assigned 492 (48·7%) participants; 164 (33%) to CFT only, 163 (33%) to CFT plus biofeedback, and 165 (34%) to usual care. Both interventions were more effective than usual care (CFT only mean difference -4·6 [95% CI -5·9 to -3·4] and CFT plus biofeedback mean difference -4·6 [-5·8 to -3·3]) for activity limitation at 13 weeks (primary endpoint). Effect sizes were similar at 52 weeks. Both interventions were also more effective than usual care for QALYs, and much less costly in terms of societal costs (direct and indirect costs and productivity losses; -AU$5276 [-10 529 to -24) and -8211 (-12 923 to -3500). INTERPRETATION: CFT can produce large and sustained improvements for people with chronic disabling low back pain at considerably lower societal cost than that of usual care. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and Curtin University.

Broken Machines or Active Bodies? Part 1. Ways of Talking About Health and Why It Matters.

SYNOPSIS: This editorial series raises awareness among clinicians about how ways of talking about orthopaedic conditions can influence what people who are seeking health care (1) think about their health and (2) what they do to manage their health. In part 1, we introduce you to ways of talking about health, using osteoarthritis as a case study. In part 2, we describe 2 contrasting ways of talking about osteoarthritis and how changing the way you share information and ideas with people seeking care may impact clinical decisions. In part 3, we offer strategies to help you shift the way you communicate with people with osteoarthritis to promote uptake of best practice recommendations and support healthy, active lifestyles. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(5):1-3. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11879.

Understanding Discrepancies in a Person's Fear of Movement and Avoidance Behavior: A Guide for Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Clinicians Who Support People With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain.

BACKGROUND: Generic self-report measures do not reflect the complexity of a person's pain-related behavior. Since variations in a person's fear of movement and avoidance behavior may arise from contextual and motivational factors, a person-centered evaluation is required-addressing the cognitions, emotions, motivation, and actual behavior of the person. CLINICAL QUESTION: Most musculoskeletal rehabilitation clinicians will recognize that different people with chronic pain have very different patterns of fear and avoidance behavior. However, an important remaining question for clinicians is "How can I identify and reconcile discrepancies in fear of movement and avoidance behavior observed in the same person, and adapt my management accordingly?" KEY RESULTS: We frame a clinical case of a patient with persistent low back pain to illustrate the key pieces of information that clinicians may consider in a person-centered evaluation (ie, patient interview, self-report measures, and behavioral assessment) when working with patients to manage fear of movement and avoidance behavior. CLINICAL APPLICATION: Understanding the discrepancies in a person's fear of movement and avoidance behavior is essential for musculoskeletal rehabilitation clinicians, as they work in partnership with patients to guide tailored approaches to changing behaviors. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(5):1-10. Epub: 9 March 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11420.

Person-centered care for musculoskeletal pain: Putting principles into practice.

Person-centered care specifically focuses on the whole person and is an important component of contemporary care for people with musculoskeletal pain conditions. Evidence suggests however, that some clinicians experience difficulties with integrating person-centered care principles into their clinical practice. Therefore, the purpose of this masterclass is to provide a framework that enables clinicians to incorporate person-centered principles in their management of people with musculoskeletal pain conditions. To support clinicians in overcoming some of the reported obstacles, we provide practical recommendations aimed at putting principles of person-centered care into practice. The framework supporting clinicians' delivery of person-centered care in practice consists of three key-principles: A) a biopsychosocial understanding of the person's experience; B) person-focused communication; and C) supported self-management. The framework includes three phases: 1) identification and goal setting, 2) coaching to self-management, and 3) evaluation. Building a therapeutic relationship underpins these phases and is an overarching element that weaves through the key-principles and phases of the framework. We use a clinical case to illustrate the practical implementation of these recommendations.

What Are the Mechanisms of Action of Cognitive-Behavioral, Mind-Body, and Exercise-based Interventions for Pain and Disability in People With Chronic Primary Musculoskeletal Pain?: A Systematic Review of Mediation Studies From Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review examined studies that used mediation analysis to investigate the mechanisms of action of cognitive-behavioral, mind-body, and exercise-based interventions for pain and disability in people with chronic primary musculoskeletal pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched 5 electronic databases for articles that conducted mediation analyses of randomized controlled trials to either test or estimate indirect effects. RESULTS: We found 17 studies (n=4423), including 90 mediation models examining the role of 22 putative mediators on pain or disability, of which 4 had partially mediated treatment effect; 8 had mixed results, and 10 did not mediate treatment effect. The conditions studied were chronic whiplash-associated pain, chronic low back pain, chronic knee pain, and mixed group of chronic primary musculoskeletal pain. DISCUSSION: We observed that several of the studies included in our systematic review identified similar mechanisms of action, even between different interventions and conditions. However, methodological limitations were common. In conclusion, there are still substantial gaps with respect to understanding how cognitive-behavioral, mind-body, and exercise-based interventions work to reduce pain and disability in people with chronic primary musculoskeletal pain.

"There's definitely something wrong but we just don't know what it is": A qualitative study exploring rowers' understanding of low back pain.

OBJECTIVES: Low back pain is highly prevalent in rowing and can be associated with significant disability and premature retirement. A previous qualitative study in rowers revealed a culture of concealment of pain and injury due to fear of judgement by coaches or teammates. The aim of this study was to explore rowers' perspectives in relation to diagnosis, contributory factors, and management of low back pain. DESIGN: Qualitative secondary analysis. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of interview data previously collected from 25 rowers (12 in Australia and 13 in Ireland). A reflexive thematic analysis approach was used. RESULTS: We identified three themes: 1) Rowers attribute low back pain to structural/physical factors. Most rowers referred to structural pathologies or physical impairments when asked about their diagnosis. Some participants were reassured if imaging results helped to explain their pain, but others were frustrated if findings on imaging did not correlate with their symptoms. 2) Rowing is viewed as a risky sport for low back pain. Risk factors proposed by the rowers were primarily physical and included ergometer training, individual technique, and repetitive loading. 3) Rowers focus on physical strategies for the management and prevention of low back pain. In particular, rowers considered stretching and core-strengthening exercise to be important components of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Rowers' understanding of low back pain was predominantly biomedical and focused on physical impairments. Further education of rowers, coaches and healthcare professionals in relation to the contribution of psychosocial factors may be helpful for rowers experiencing low back pain.

Predicting Knee Joint Kinematics from Wearable Sensor Data in People with Knee Osteoarthritis and Clinical Considerations for Future Machine Learning Models.

Deep learning models developed to predict knee joint kinematics are usually trained on inertial measurement unit (IMU) data from healthy people and only for the activity of walking. Yet, people with knee osteoarthritis have difficulties with other activities and there are a lack of studies using IMU training data from this population. Our objective was to conduct a proof-of-concept study to determine the feasibility of using IMU training data from people with knee osteoarthritis performing multiple clinically important activities to predict knee joint sagittal plane kinematics using a deep learning approach. We trained a bidirectional long short-term memory model on IMU data from 17 participants with knee osteoarthritis to estimate knee joint flexion kinematics for phases of walking, transitioning to and from a chair, and negotiating stairs. We tested two models, a double-leg model (four IMUs) and a single-leg model (two IMUs). The single-leg model demonstrated less prediction error compared to the double-leg model. Across the different activity phases, RMSE (SD) ranged from 7.04° (2.6) to 11.78° (6.04), MAE (SD) from 5.99° (2.34) to 10.37° (5.44), and Pearson's R from 0.85 to 0.99 using leave-one-subject-out cross-validation. This study demonstrates the feasibility of using IMU training data from people who have knee osteoarthritis for the prediction of kinematics for multiple clinically relevant activities.

An investigation of implicit bias about bending and lifting.

OBJECTIVES: Previous studies in a high-income country have demonstrated that people with and without low back pain (LBP) have an implicit bias that bending and lifting with a flexed lumbar spine is dangerous. These studies present two key limitations: use of a single group per study; people who recovered from back pain were not studied. Our aims were to evaluate: implicit biases between back posture and safety related to bending and lifting in people who are pain-free, have a history of LBP or have current LBP in a middle-income country, and to explore correlations between implicit and explicit measures within groups. METHODS: Exploratory cross-sectional study including 174 participants (63 pain-free, 57 with history of LBP and 54 with current LBP). Implicit biases between back posture and safety related to bending and lifting were assessed with the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Participants completed paper-based (Bending Safety Belief [BSB]) and online questionnaires (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia; Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaire). RESULTS: Participants displayed significant implicit bias between images of round-back bending and lifting and words representing "danger" (IATD-SCORE: Pain-free group: 0.56 (IQR=0.31-0.91; 95% CI [0.47, 0.68]); history of LBP group: 0.57 (IQR=0.34-0.84; 95% CI [0.47, 0.67]); current LBP group: 0.56 (IQR=0.24-0.80; 95% CI [0.39, 0.64])). Explicit measures revealed participants hold unhelpful beliefs about the back, perceiving round-back bending and lifting as dangerous (BSBthermometer: Pain-free group: 8 (IQR=7-10; 95% CI [7.5, 8.5]); history of LBP group: 8 (IQR=7-10; 95% CI [7.5, 9.0]); current LBP group: 8.5 (IQR=6.75-10; [7.5, 9.0])). There was no correlation between implicit and explicit measures within the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a middle-income country, people with and without LBP, and those who recovered from LBP have an implicit bias that round-back bending and lifting is dangerous.

From Fear to Safety: A Roadmap to Recovery From Musculoskeletal Pain.

Contemporary conceptualizations of pain emphasize its protective function. The meaning assigned to pain drives cognitive, emotional, and behavioral responses. When pain is threatening and a person lacks control over their pain experience, it can become distressing, self-perpetuating, and disabling. Although the pathway to disability is well established, the pathway to recovery is less researched and understood. This Perspective draws on recent data on the lived experience of people with pain-related fear to discuss both fear and safety-learning processes and their implications for recovery for people living with pain. Recovery is here defined as achievement of control over pain as well as improvement in functional capacity and quality of life. Based on the common-sense model, this Perspective proposes a framework utilizing Cognitive Functional Therapy to promote safety learning. A process is described in which experiential learning combined with "sense making" disrupts a person's unhelpful cognitive representation and behavioral and emotional response to pain, leading them on a journey to recovery. This framework incorporates principles of inhibitory processing that are fundamental to pain-related fear and safety learning.

Patient-centered care in musculoskeletal practice: Key elements to support clinicians to focus on the person.

Musculoskeletal rehabilitation, including physiotherapy, needs to move towards a broader biopsychosocial understanding of musculoskeletal conditions and the delivery of high-value care for people with persistent pain conditions, in which a patient-centered approach is a key feature. However, it has been reported that clinicians experience difficulties with integrating patient-centered care principles into their clinical practice. Based on a focused symposium about patient-centered care for patients with musculoskeletal conditions, held during the online 2021 World Physiotherapy Congress, the purpose of this article is to share key elements of the content of this symposium with a wider audience, aimed at enabling clinicians to enhance patient-centeredness in their current practice. These key elements include establishing meaningful connections, deciding together and self-management support. Moreover, challenges on patient-centered care in low/middle income countries will be discussed and recommendations to implement patient-centered care in clinical practice will be provided.

Shoulder pain across more movements is not related to more rotator cuff tendon findings in people with chronic shoulder pain diagnosed with subacromial pain syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: People with chronic shoulder pain commonly report pain during arm movements in daily-life activities. Pain related to movement is commonly viewed as an accurate representation of tissue damage. Thus, when a person reports pain across a variety of movements, this is often understood as indicative of greater damage. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to investigate if movement-related pain that occurs across a wider variety of movements was associated with the number or severity of rotator cuff tendons reported as abnormal on a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). To answer this question, this study was designed in 3 phases. METHODS: We recruited 130 individuals with chronic shoulder pain diagnosed with subacromial pain syndrome. First, a list of daily functional activities commonly reported as painful by people with chronic shoulder pain was generated from 3 well-established outcome measures with 30 individuals and a measurement tool was developed with data from further 100 individuals, which demonstrated to have acceptable content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, interrater reliability, and structural validity. Multiple linear regression was then used to evaluate the hypotheses of the study. A direct acyclic graph was used to select variables for linear regression modelling. RESULTS: There was no association between movement-related pain occurrence across movements and the MRI findings. CONCLUSION: Our study provides evidence that neither the number of rotator cuff tendons reported as abnormal nor the severity of each tendon imaging finding were associated with pain occurrence across movements and activities commonly perceived as painful by people with chronic shoulder pain.

The Relationship Between Changes in Movement and Activity Limitation or Pain in People With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To report whether changes in knee joint movement parameters recorded during functional activities relate to change in activity limitation or pain after an exercise intervention in people with knee osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: Etiology systematic review. LITERATURE SEARCH: Four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and AMED) were searched up to January 22, 2021. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials or cohort studies of exercise interventions for people with knee OA that assessed change in knee joint movement parameters (moments, kinematics, or muscle activity) and clinical outcomes (activity limitation or pain). DATA SYNTHESIS: A descriptive synthesis of functional activities, movement parameters, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: From 3182 articles, 22 studies met the inclusion criteria, and almost all were of low quality. Gait was the only investigated functional activity. After exercise, gait parameters changed 26% of the time, and clinical outcomes improved 90% of the time. A relationship between group-level changes in gait parameters and clinical outcomes occurred 24.5% of the time. Two studies directly investigated an individual-level relationship, reporting only 1 significant association out of 8 correlations tested. CONCLUSION: Most studies reported no change in gait-related movement parameters despite improvement in clinical outcomes, challenging the belief that changing movement parameters is always clinically important in people with knee OA. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(10):492-502. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10418.

Human Activity Recognition for People with Knee Osteoarthritis-A Proof-of-Concept.

Clinicians lack objective means for monitoring if their knee osteoarthritis patients are improving outside of the clinic (e.g., at home). Previous human activity recognition (HAR) models using wearable sensor data have only used data from healthy people and such models are typically imprecise for people who have medical conditions affecting movement. HAR models designed for people with knee osteoarthritis have classified rehabilitation exercises but not the clinically relevant activities of transitioning from a chair, negotiating stairs and walking, which are commonly monitored for improvement during therapy for this condition. Therefore, it is unknown if a HAR model trained on data from people who have knee osteoarthritis can be accurate in classifying these three clinically relevant activities. Therefore, we collected inertial measurement unit (IMU) data from 18 participants with knee osteoarthritis and trained convolutional neural network models to identify chair, stairs and walking activities, and phases. The model accuracy was 85% at the first level of classification (activity), 89-97% at the second (direction of movement) and 60-67% at the third level (phase). This study is the first proof-of-concept that an accurate HAR system can be developed using IMU data from people with knee osteoarthritis to classify activities and phases of activities.

2021 consensus statement for preventing and managing low back pain in elite and subelite adult rowers.

PURPOSE: To synthesise evidence on low back pain (LBP) in adult rowers and to create a consensus statement to inform clinical practice. METHODS: There were four synthesis steps that informed the consensus statement. In step one, seven expert clinicians and researchers established the scope of the consensus statement and conducted a survey of experienced and expert clinicians to explore current practice. In step two, working groups examined current evidence relating to key scope questions and summarised key issues. In step three, we synthesised evidence for each group and used a modified Delphi process to aid in the creation of the overall consensus statements. Finally, in step four, we combined information from step three with the findings of the clinician survey (and with athlete and coach input) to produce recommendations for clinical practice. RESULTS: The scope of the consensus statement included epidemiology; biomechanics; management; the athlete's voice and clinical expertise. Prevention and management of LBP in rowers should include education on risk factors, rowing biomechanics and training load. If treatment is needed, non-invasive management, including early unloading from aggravating activities, effective pain control and exercise therapy should be considered. Fitness should be maintained with load management and progression to full training and competition. The role of surgery is unclear. Management should be athlete focused and a culture of openness within the team encouraged. CONCLUSION: Recommendations are based on current evidence and consensus and aligned with international LBP guidelines in non-athletic populations, but with advice aimed specifically at rowers. We recommend that research in relation to all aspects of prevention and management of LBP in rowers be intensified.