Feasibility of return to sports assessment 6 months after patellar instability surgery.

BACKGROUND: The evidence regarding the usefulness of assessment tools to support decisions of return-to-sport after surgery for patellar instability is scarce. The purpose of this study was therefore to explore the feasibility of functional tests assessing readiness for return-to-sport six months after patellar stabilizing surgery. However, there is little evidence on what a functional assessment should include to support these decisions following surgery for patellar instability. Therefore the purpose of this study was to explore the feasibility of functional tests assessing readiness for return-to-sport six months after patellar stabilizing surgery. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study a prospective cohort of 78 patients were subjected to a range of return-to-sport readiness tests at six months after surgery for patellar instability with an "a la carte" approach. Lower Quarter Y-Balance Test (YBT-LQ), single-legged hop tests and isokinetic strength tests were performed. In addition, self-reported function was measured with the Banff Patellofemoral Instability Instrument 2.0 (BPII) and Norwich Patellar Instability score (NPI). Return-to-sport clearance criteria were defined as: ≤4 cm YBT-LQ anterior reach difference between legs, leg-symmetry-index (LSI) ≥ 95% in the YBT-LQ composite score, mean sum score LSI ≥ 85% of all single-leg hop tests and LSI ≥ 90% in isokinetic quadriceps strength. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients (82%) were able to complete all functional tests, while only eleven (14%) patients were deemed ready for return-to-sport, passing all return-to-sport clearance criteria. Patients with bilateral problems demonstrated worse performance in the contralateral leg, which resulted in higher LSI scores compared to individuals with unilateral instability. A supplementary finding was that the extent of surgery (MPFL-R only versus combined surgery) did not predict and mainly did not affect self-reported function or functional performance at the follow-up. CONCLUSION: The functional assessment used in the current study seems feasible to conduct at six months after patellar stabilizing surgery. However, current suggested clearance standards and the use of leg-symmetry-index seems inappropriate for patients with patellar instability. Therefore, further exploration of appropriate tests and return-to-sport clearance criteria is justified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrial.gov, NCT05119088. Registered 12.11.2021 - Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05119088 .

Efficacy of intergrating vestibular rehabilitation and cognitive behaviour therapy in persons with persistent dizziness in primary care- a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Dizziness is a common complaint, and the symptom often persists, together with additional complaints. A treatment combining Vestibular Rehabilitation (VR) and Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) is suggested. However, further research is necessary to evaluate the efficacy of such an intervention. The objective of this paper is to present the design of a randomised controlled trial aiming at evaluating the efficacy of an integrated treatment of VR and CBT on dizziness, physical function, psychological complaints and quality of life in persons with persistent dizziness. METHODS/DESIGN: The randomised controlled trial is an assessor-blinded, block-randomised, parallel-group design, with a 6- and 12-month follow-up. The study includes 125 participants from Bergen (Norway) and surrounding areas. Included participants present with persistent dizziness lasting for at least 3 months, triggered or exacerbated by movement. All participants receive a one-session treatment (Brief Intervention Vestibular Rehabilitation; BI-VR) with VR before being randomised into a control group or an intervention group. The intervention group will further be offered an eight-session treatment integrating VR and CBT. The primary outcomes in the study are the Dizziness Handicap Inventory and preferred gait velocity. DISCUSSION: Previous studies combining these treatments have been of varying methodological quality, with small samples, and long-term effects have not been maintained. In addition, only the CBT has been administered in supervised sessions, with VR offered as home exercises. The current study focusses on the integrated treatment, a sufficiently powered sample size, and a standardised treatment programme evaluated by validated outcomes using a standardised assessment protocol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT02655575 . Registered on 14 January 2016.

Feasibility of integrating vestibular rehabilitation and cognitive behaviour therapy for people with persistent dizziness.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of integrating vestibular rehabilitation and cognitive behaviour therapy (VR-CBT) for people with persistent dizziness in primary care. DESIGN: Prospective single-group pre- and post-test study. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (aged 18-70) with acute onset of dizziness and symptoms lasting a minimum 3 months, recruited from Bergen municipality. METHODS: Participants attended eight weekly group sessions of VR-CBT intervention. Feasibility outcomes consisted of recruitment and testing procedures, intervention adherence, and participant feedback, besides change in primary outcomes. The primary outcomes were Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) and preferred gait velocity. RESULTS: Seven participants were recruited for the study. All participants completed the pre-treatment tests, five participants completed the intervention and answered post-treatment questionnaires, and three completed post-treatment testing. Of the five participants, three attended at least 75% of the VR-CBT sessions, and two 50% of the sessions. Participants reported that the VR-CBT was relevant and led to improvement in function. DHI scores improved beyond minimal important change in two out of five participants, and preferred gait velocity increased beyond minimal important change in two out of three participants. CONCLUSION: The current tests and VR-CBT treatment protocols were feasible. Some changes are suggested to optimise the protocols, before conducting a randomised controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02655575. Registered 14 January 2016-retrospectively registered.

Systematic review of active workplace interventions to reduce sickness absence.

BACKGROUND: The workplace is used as a setting for interventions to prevent and reduce sickness absence, regardless of the specific medical conditions and diagnoses. AIMS: To give an overview of the general effectiveness of active workplace interventions aimed at preventing and reducing sickness absence. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Psych-info, and ISI web of knowledge on 27 December 2011. Inclusion criteria were (i) participants over 18 years old with an active role in the intervention, (ii) intervention done partly or fully at the workplace or at the initiative of the workplace and (iii) sickness absence reported. Two reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. A narrative synthesis was used. RESULTS: We identified 2036 articles of which, 93 were assessed in full text. Seventeen articles were included (2 with low and 15 with medium risk of bias), with a total of 24 comparisons. Five interventions from four articles significantly reduced sickness absence. We found moderate evidence that graded activity reduced sickness absence and limited evidence that the Sheerbrooke model (a comprehensive multidisciplinary intervention) and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) reduced sickness absence. There was moderate evidence that workplace education and physical exercise did not reduce sickness absence. For other interventions, the evidence was insufficient to draw conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: The review found limited evidence that active workplace interventions were not generally effective in reducing sickness absence, but there was moderate evidence of effect for graded activity and limited evidence for the effectiveness of the Sheerbrooke model and CBT.

The predictive validity of the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Questionnaire and the clinicians' prognostic assessment following manual therapy treatment of patients with LBP and neck pain.

The purpose of this study was to compare the predictive ability of the standardised screening tool Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Questionnaire (ÖMPQ) and the clinicians' prognostic assessment in identifying patients with low back pain (LBP) and neck pain at risk for persistent pain and disability at eight weeks follow-up. Patients seeking care for LBP or neck pain were recruited by 19 manual therapists in Norway. Patients completed the ÖMPQ and the low back- or neck specific Oswestry Disability Index/Neck Disability Index at baseline and 8 weeks after first consultation. The manual therapists filled in their assessment of patient's prognosis immediately after the first consultation, blinded for patient's answers to the questionnaire. A total of 157 patients (81with neck pain and 76 with LBP) were included. The best odds for predicting the outcome for LBP patients was found for the clinicians' assessment of prognosis (LR+ = 2.1 and LR- = 0.55), whereas the likelihood ratios were similar for the two tools in the neck group. For LBP patients, both the clinicians' assessment and the ÖMPQ contributed significantly in the separate regression models (p = 0.02 and p = 0.002, resp), whereas none of the tools where significant contributors for neck patients (p = 0.67 and 0.07). Neither of the two methods showed high precision in their predictions of follow-up at eight weeks. However, for LBP patients, the ÖMPQ and the clinicians' prognostic assessment contributed significantly in the prediction of functional outcome 8 weeks after the initial assessment of manual therapist, whereas the prediction for neck patients was unsure.