A systematic review of change in symptoms, well-being and quality of life with group singing in people with cancer and their caregivers.

PURPOSE: This systematic review aimed to assess the impact of group singing on physical function, cancer-related symptoms, well-being (emotional, physical, social, spiritual), and health-related quality of life in individuals with cancer and their caregivers. METHODS: A search was performed using Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science from inception to April 2023; key words included cancer, choir, and group singing. Observational cohort, prospective or retrospective studies, randomized controlled studies, and crossover studies were included. Two teams of independent reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the Downs and Black Tool. RESULTS: A total of 6 studies (6 reports) met the inclusion criteria for this review, with a mix of study designs. The overall quality of the studies was poor. Group singing significantly reduced anxiety levels in those with cancer and their caregivers, while the effects on depression were variable and there was no impact on fatigue. Caregivers reported improved well-being, self-efficacy and self-esteem. Both those with cancer and their caregivers had reductions in fear, anger, confusion; and reported improvement in energy, relaxation and connectedness at longer term follow-up compared to no treatment. Those with cancer reported improvements in health-related quality of life domains of bodily pain, vitality and mental health with group singing, though the effects on caregivers were mixed. CONCLUSIONS: Group singing may have favourable effects on selected symptoms, aspects of well-being, and domains of health-related quality of life specific to vitality, bodily pain, and mental health in individuals with cancer and their caregivers.

Using SUpported Motivational InTerviewing (SUMIT) to increase physical activity for people with knee osteoarthritis: a pilot, feasibility randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of using SUpported Motivational InTerviewing (SUMIT) to increase physical activity in people with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: We recruited people who had completed Good Life with osteoArthritis Denmark (GLA:D) from private, public and community settings in Victoria, Australia. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised participants to receive SUMIT or usual care. SUMIT comprised five motivational interviewing sessions targeting physical activity over 10 weeks, and access to a multimedia web-based platform. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-two participants were recruited (17 SUMIT, 15 control) including 22 females (69%). OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility outcomes included recruitment rate, adherence to motivational interviewing, ActivPAL wear and drop-out rate. Effect sizes (ESs) were calculated for daily steps, stepping time, time with cadence >100 steps per minute, time in bouts >1 min; 6 min walk distance, Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales (pain, symptoms, function, sport and recreation, and quality of life (QoL)), Euroqual, systolic blood pressure, body mass index, waist circumference, 30 s chair stand test and walking speed during 40 m walk test. RESULTS: All feasibility criteria were achieved, with 32/63 eligible participants recruited over seven months; with all participants adhering to all motivational interviewing calls and achieving sufficient ActivPAL wear time, and only two drop-outs (6%).12/15 outcome measures showed at least a small effect (ES>0.2) favouring the SUMIT group, including daily time with cadence >100 steps per minute (ES=0.43). Two outcomes, walking speed (ES= 0.97) and KOOS QoL (ES=0.81), showed a large effect (ES>0.8). CONCLUSION: SUMIT is feasible in people with knee osteoarthritis. Potential benefits included more time spent walking at moderate intensity, faster walking speeds and better QoL. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621000267853.

A survey of patient and medical professional perspectives on implementing osteoarthritis management programs for hip and knee osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Strategies are needed to improve referral into, and uptake of, osteoarthritis (OA) management programs. This survey investigated and compared patients' and medical professionals' views around hip and knee OA management and factors impacting implementation of an osteoarthritis management program. METHODS: As part of a mixed-methods program of research, patients with hip or knee OA and medical professionals routinely involved in the management of OA, were invited to complete a comprehensive online survey. All data were analysed descriptively or using chi squared tests. Survey findings for factors perceived to impact implementation of an OA management programme were triangulated with previously reported qualitative data. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients (38 females, 15 males) and 32 medical professionals (orthopaedic surgeons, sports physicians, rehabilitation physicians, rheumatologists and general practitioners) completed the survey. Twenty-eight patients (53%) had prior participation in the OA management programme (GLA:D® ) and 19 medical professionals (59%) had previously referred patients to the programme. Of the participants with prior exposure, 21 patients (75%) and 15 medical professionals (79%) agreed the programme was beneficial. A higher proportion of medical professionals, compared to patients, believed weight loss (100% vs. 67%), injection therapy (50% vs. 21%), hip replacement (100% vs. 62%) and knee replacement (97% vs. 62%) were effective treatments, with no differences for all other treatments. The barriers and enablers identified for referral into, and participation in, an OA management programme mostly aligned to factors identified in previous related qualitative research. Divergent factors in the survey included patients concerns about doing exercise-therapy with 81% (higher than expected) not reporting any concerns about exercising, and 19% (lower than expected) concerned about their OA joint, such as making their pain worse. CONCLUSIONS: This study has extended our understanding of barriers and enablers for referral into, and participation in, an OA management programme with a lower than expected number of patients being concerned about exercising due to their OA joint. Patients and medical professionals had positive views relating to the quality of the programme delivery, patient satisfaction and programme effectiveness. Medical professionals were more likely than patients to consider weight loss, injections and joint replacement as effective treatment options.

A review of physiotherapy practice for people with bronchiectasis.

A combination of airway clearance techniques are applied for people with bronchiectasis, together with recommendations for exercise and suggestions for management of common comorbidities https://bit.ly/2U3c99H.

Exploring views of orthopaedic surgeons, rheumatologists and general practitioners about osteoarthritis management.

BACKGROUND: Delivery of recommended treatments for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) is known to be discordant with guideline recommendations. However, professional views related to OA management across medical and surgical disciplines are not well understood. The aim of this study was to explore the views of medical professionals about management of hip and knee OA. METHODS: Qualitative study. Semistructured individual interviews were conducted with orthopaedic surgeons, rheumatologists and general practitioners routinely involved in the management of OA. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, member-checked, coded and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Fifteen medical professionals were interviewed. Three main themes were: (i) recognition of the importance of nonsurgical management of hip and knee OA, focussed on self-management, exercise-therapy, weight management and analgesia; (ii) joint replacement being considered the 'last resort' for end stage disease not responding to nonsurgical management; and (iii) determination of management 'success' through patient perceptions was more common than the use of validated instruments. Views on management broadly converged across disciplines, except for the role of joint replacement, considered an adjunct in the overall management of OA by rheumatologists and as a definitive cure by orthopaedic surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: Aligning with current guidelines, medical professionals recognised the importance of nonsurgical management focussed on exercise-therapy for hip and knee OA, and concurred that joint replacement surgery should be a last resort. A focus on patient education was less prominent, which along with implementation of validated outcome measures in routine medical practice, may require greater health system support.

Barriers and enablers to uptake of a contemporary guideline-based management program for hip and knee osteoarthritis: A qualitative study.

Objective: To explore barriers and enablers for referral to, and participation in, a contemporary guideline-based osteoarthritis management program - Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D Australia). Design: A qualitative design was used, involving semi-structured interviews with patients with osteoarthritis and medical professionals. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, coded and thematically analysed. Barrier and enabler themes were mapped to the theoretical domains framework and used to inform the development of recommendations for improving uptake of guideline-based osteoarthritis management programs. Results: Twenty patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis and 15 medical professionals (5 general practitioners, 4 rheumatologists, 6 orthopaedic surgeons) were included. Across both groups, three themes emerged as barriers (program access; misinformation about osteoarthritis; patient and program factors), one theme emerged as a barrier and enabler (health professional trust, feedback and advice), and two themes emerged as enablers (opportunity to achieve positive outcomes and potentially avoid joint replacement surgery; better program promotion, patient and health professional education, and efficient referral processes). Conclusions: Optimising uptake of guideline-based osteoarthritis management programs requires improved reimbursement models, and better promotion and educational initiatives for patients and medical professionals. A particular focus of education should include dispelling misinformation about osteoarthritis, and highlighting the safety and value of physiotherapist delivered exercise-therapy.

The patient-specific functional scale: psychometrics, clinimetrics, and application as a clinical outcome measure.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of the literature. OBJECTIVE: To summarize peer-reviewed literature on the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), and to identify its use as an outcome measure. METHODS: Searches were performed of several electronic databases from 1995 to May 2010. Studies included were published articles containing (1) primary research investigating the psychometric and clinimetrics of the PSFS or (2) the implementation of the PSFS as an outcome measure. We assessed the methodological quality of studies included in the first category. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-two articles published from 1994 to May 2010 were identified. Of these, 66 met the inclusion criteria for this review, with 13 reporting the measurement properties of the PSFS, 55 implementing the PSFS as an outcome measure, and 2 doing both of the above. The PSFS was reported to be valid, reliable, and responsive in populations with knee dysfunction, cervical radiculopathy, acute low back pain, mechanical low back pain, and neck dysfunction. The PSFS was found to be reliable and responsive in populations with chronic low back pain. The PSFS was also reported to be valid, reliable, or responsive in individuals with a limited number of acute, subacute, and chronic conditions. This review found that the PSFS is also being used as an outcome measure in many other conditions, despite a lack of published evidence supporting its validity in these conditions. CONCLUSION: Although the use of the PSFS as an outcome measure is increasing in physiotherapy practice, there are gaps in the research literature regarding its validity, reliability, and responsiveness in many health conditions.