THE RELIABILITY OF CLINICAL BALANCE TESTS UNDER SINGLE-TASK AND DUAL-TASK TESTING PARADIGMS IN UNINJURED ACTIVE YOUTH AND YOUNG ADULTS.

BACKGROUND: Previous researchers have suggested that balance control deficits are detected more accurately with dual-task testing than single-task testing. However, it is necessary to examine the clinimetric properties of dual-task testing before employing it in clinical and research settings. OBJECTIVE: To examine and compare the relative and absolute reliability of the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS), Tandem Gait Test (TGT), and Clinical Reaction Time (CRT) under single and dual-task conditions in uninjured active youth and young adults.Study Design: Single-group, repeated-measures study. METHODS: Twenty-three individuals [9 female; median age 17 years] completed three trials of the BESS, TGT, and CRT under single and dual-task testing conditions during testing session one. Two raters assessed participants to assess inter-rater reliability. Either later on the same day or the following day, the protocol was repeated by one rater to assess intra-rater reliability. The average of three trials was used to calculate intra-rater (between-session) and inter-rater (within-session) intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC), and Cohen's Kappa coefficient for tests as appropriate under both conditions. Bland-Altman plots (mean difference and 95% limits of agreement) were used to assess for a systematic error associated with a learning effect. RESULTS: Only one participant attended the second session on the following day, while 22 participants (95%) attended the second session within four hours after testing session one. Under single-task testing, estimated ICCs, SEMs, MDCs, and Kappa coefficients ranged from 0.24 to 0.99, 0.3 to 23, 0.8 to 64, and 0.03 to 0.64, respectively. Under dual-task testing, estimated ICCs, SEMs, MDCs, and Kappa coefficients ranged from 0.70 to 0.99, 0.4 to 17, 1.1 to 47, and 0.39 to 0.83, respectively. A learning effect was identified for all tests under all conditions. CONCLUSION: The BESS is the only clinical test that demonstrated acceptable reliability for clinical use under single-task testing conditions. The BESS, TGT, and CRT all demonstrated acceptable reliability for clinical use under dual-task testing conditions. A practice session should be used to reduce the possible learning effect seen. Further studies examining sources of the systematic error observed are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.

Model of Human Occupation as a framework for implementation of Motivational Interviewing in occupational rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: A conceptual framework is needed to understand injured workers' decision-making and inform evidence-based interventions to address behavior change regarding return-to-work (RTW). The Model of Human Occupation (MOHO) can help with understanding how an injured worker's characteristics can generate behavior change while Motivational Interviewing (MI) can help facilitate behavior change. OBJECTIVE: This theoretical paper provides an overview of how MOHO and MI can be applied and integrated in occupational rehabilitation. The objectives of this paper are to: (1) evaluate MOHO as a framework for supporting occupational therapists (OTs) in occupational rehabilitation; (2) describe MI as a suitable approach for OTs in occupational rehabilitation; and (3) compare and integrate MOHO and MI. METHOD: Several important works and reviews were used to integrate MOHO and MI with occupational rehabilitation. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The identification of a model and approach to support OT practice in occupational rehabilitation can assist OTs to determine the most appropriate interventions and contribute to standards of best practice. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating MOHO and MI provides a comprehensive framework for understanding impairment and RTW change processes with the potential to reduce work disability and improve RTW outcomes.

Additional appointments and discomfort associated with compliance-free fixed Class II corrector treatment: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: A critical analysis of the literature to determine the prevalence and type of emergency/additional appointments, and discomfort levels associated with fixed Class II correctors. METHODS: Studies examining patient's sources of discomfort or emergency appointments associated with compliance-free Class II correctors were included. Comprehensive searches up to July 2018 were conducted using the following databases: MEDLINE (OvidSP), PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. A partial grey literature search was taken using Google Scholar and OpenGrey. Two reviewers independently performed the selection process and risk of bias assessment. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cross-sectional studies were used. A summary of the overall strength of evidence was presented using 'Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) tool. Included studies were evaluated according to their design, study quality, consistency, and directness. RESULTS: The selected studies were published between 2001 and 2018, and the number of patients per studied group ranged from 8 to 182. One thousand five hundred forty-two patients were evaluated in total. The patients' mean age at start of treatment ranged from 10 to 16.9 years and the fixed Class II corrector treatment duration ranged from 4 to 12 months. The included studies in this systematic review were too clinically heterogeneous (different appliances, different data recollection processes) to justify a meta-analysis. LIMITATIONS: This review was not previously registered. A low level of evidence was observed among the two randomized trials, the 10 cohorts and three cross-sectional studies identified. CONCLUSIONS: The main source of discomfort from Forsus-type appliances appears to be soreness in the cheeks (low level of evidence with a weak recommendation strength). Most evaluated patients treated with a Herbst appliance, regardless of design, will experience complications (fractures and/or dislodging) requiring emergency appointments (low level of evidence with a weak recommendation strength). REGISTRATION: The review protocol was not registered.

Validation of the Readiness for Return-To-Work Scale in Outpatient Occupational Rehabilitation in Canada.

Purpose To examine construct and concurrent validity of the Readiness for Return-To-Work (RRTW) Scale with injured workers participating in an outpatient occupational rehabilitation program. Methods Lost-time claimants (n = 389) with sub-acute or chronic musculoskeletal disorders completed the RRTW Scale on their first day of their occupational rehabilitation program. Statistical analysis included exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the readiness items, reliability analyses, and correlation with related scales and questionnaires. Results For claimants in the non-job attached/not working group (n = 165), three factors were found (1) Contemplation (2) Prepared for Action-Self-evaluative and (3) Prepared for Action-Behavioural. The precontemplation stage was not identified within this sample of injured workers. For claimants who were job attached/working group in some capacity (n = 224), two factors were identified (1) Uncertain Maintenance and (2) Proactive Maintenance. Expected relationships and statistically significant differences were found among the identified Return-To-Work (RTW) readiness factors and related constructs of pain, physical and mental health and RTW expectations. Conclusion Construct and concurrent validity of the RRTW Scale were supported in this study. The results of this study indicate the construct of readiness for RTW can vary by disability duration and occupational category. Physical health appears to be a significant barrier to RRTW for the job attached/working group while mental health significantly compromises RRTW with the non-job attached/not working group.

Causal or spurious? The relationship of knowledge and attitudes to trust in science and technology.

Survey data on 1217 adults living in Alberta, Canada were collected by Ipsos Reid Public Affairs and made available to us for analysis. The survey questioned participants on issues related to science including their perceived knowledge of science, attitudes toward science, and trust in science and technology. We developed a structural equation model to account for the causal relations implied by the correlations among the variables in the data set. Results show that trust in generalized science and technology is a large determiner of trust in specific technologies, but that trust in specific technologies is not a determinant of overall trust in science and technology. We also found that attitudes towards science have an effect on trust in generalized science and technology whereas perceived knowledge does not. Education and gender contribute to attitudes supporting an increased personal attachment to science, which was the strongest predictor of trust in our model.