Spinal manipulation and mobilisation in paediatrics - an international evidence-based position statement for physiotherapists.

INTRODUCTION: An international taskforce of clinician-scientists was formed by specialty groups of World Physiotherapy - International Federation of Orthopaedic Manipulative Physical Therapists (IFOMPT) & International Organisation of Physiotherapists in Paediatrics (IOPTP) - to develop evidence-based practice position statements directing physiotherapists clinical reasoning for the safe and effective use of spinal manipulation and mobilisation for paediatric populations (<18 years) with varied musculoskeletal or non-musculoskeletal conditions. METHOD: A three-stage guideline process using validated methodology was completed: 1. Literature review stage (one scoping review, two reviews exploring psychometric properties); 2. Delphi stage (one 3-Round expert Delphi survey); and 3. Refinement stage (evidence-to-decision summative analysis, position statement development, evidence gap map analyses, and multilayer review processes). RESULTS: Evidence-based practice position statements were developed to guide the appropriate use of spinal manipulation and mobilisation for paediatric populations. All were predicated on clinicians using biopsychosocial clinical reasoning to determine when the intervention is appropriate.1. It is not recommended to perform:• Spinal manipulation and mobilisation on infants.• Cervical and lumbar spine manipulation on children.•Spinal manipulation and mobilisation on infants, children, and adolescents for non-musculoskeletal paediatric conditions including asthma, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism spectrum disorder, breastfeeding difficulties, cerebral palsy, infantile colic, nocturnal enuresis, and otitis media.2. It may be appropriate to treat musculoskeletal conditions including spinal mobility impairments associated with neck-back pain and neck pain with headache utilising:• Spinal mobilisation and manipulation on adolescents;• Spinal mobilisation on children; or• Thoracic manipulation on children for neck-back pain only.3. No high certainty evidence to recommend these interventions was available.Reports of mild to severe harms exist; however, risk rates could not be determined. CONCLUSION: Specific directives to guide physiotherapists' clinical reasoning on the appropriate use of spinal manipulation or mobilisation were identified. Future research should focus on trials for priority conditions (neck-back pain) in children and adolescents, psychometric properties of key outcome measures, knowledge translation, and harms.

Effects of Zilpaterol Hydrochloride Supplementation on Growth Performance, Carcass Characteristics and Meat Quality for Steers Differing in Breed Type.

To determine the effects of zilpaterol hydrochloride (ZH) on growth performance, carcass characteristics and meat quality for steers differing in breed type, steers with British (B; n = 76) or British × Continental (BC; n = 57) backgrounds were allocated to a randomized incomplete block design with a 2 × 2 treatment structure. Pens within each block × breed type were randomly assigned to either ZH (8.3 mg/kg of DM; fed for 20 d before slaughter, followed by a 3-day withdrawal) or control (CON; 0 mg/kg ZH). Steers were subjected to ultrasound immediately before ZH inclusion and following withdrawal to determine the influence of ZH on changes in longissimus muscle area (LMA), fat thickness and percent intramuscular fat (IMF). Carcass data were collected, and the longissimus lumborum was collected for analysis of tenderness, moisture percentage, crude fat content, collagen content, postmortem proteolysis and sensory attributes. The ZH × breed type interaction did not influence (p > 0.05) the feedlot performance, carcass or meat quality attribute traits evaluated, with the exception of moisture percentage. Responses among breed types were as expected for B vs. BC cattle types. Supplementation with ZH improved (p < 0.05) LMA and yield grade but increased Warner-Bratzler shear force.

Spinal manipulation and mobilisation among infants, children, and adolescents: an international Delphi survey of expert physiotherapists.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to establish international consensus regarding the use of spinal manipulation and mobilisation among infants, children, and adolescents among expert international physiotherapists. METHODS: Twenty-six international expert physiotherapists in manual therapy and paediatrics voluntarily participated in a 3-Round Delphi survey to reach a consensus via direct electronic mail solicitation using Qualtrics®. Consensus was defined a-priori as ≥75% agreement on all items with the same ranking of agreement or disagreement. Round 1 identified impairments and conditions where spinal mobilisation and manipulation might be utilised. In Rounds 2 and 3, panelists agreed or disagreed using a 4-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Eleven physiotherapists from seven countries representing five continents completed all three Delphi rounds. Consensus regarding spinal mobilisation or manipulation included:Manipulation is not recommended: (1) for infants across all conditions, impairments, and spinal levels; and (2) for children and adolescents across most conditions and spinal levels.Manipulation may be recommended for adolescents to treat spinal region-specific joint hypomobility (thoracic, lumbar), and pain (thoracic).Mobilisation may be recommended for children and adolescents with hypomobility, joint pain, muscle/myofascial pain, or stiffness at all spinal levels. CONCLUSION: Consensus revealed spinal manipulation should not be performed on infants regardless of condition, impairment, or spinal level. Additionally, the panel agreed that manipulation may be recommended only for adolescents to treat joint pain and joint hypomobility (limited to thoracic and/or lumbar levels). Spinal mobilisation may be recommended for joint hypomobility, joint pain, muscle/myofascial pain, and muscle/myofascial stiffness at all spinal levels among children and adolescents.

Reaction Mechanisms of H2S Oxidation by Naphthoquinones.

1,4-naphthoquinones (NQs) catalytically oxidize H2S to per- and polysufides and sulfoxides, reduce oxygen to superoxide and hydrogen peroxide, and can form NQ-SH adducts through Michael addition. Here, we measured oxygen consumption and used sulfur-specific fluorophores, liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and UV-Vis spectrometry to examine H2S oxidation by NQs with various substituent groups. In general, the order of H2S oxidization was DCNQ ~ juglone > 1,4-NQ > plumbagin >DMNQ ~ 2-MNQ > menadione, although this order varied somewhat depending on the experimental conditions. DMNQ does not form adducts with GSH or cysteine (Cys), yet it readily oxidizes H2S to polysulfides and sulfoxides. This suggests that H2S oxidation occurs at the carbonyl moiety and not at the quinoid 2 or 3 carbons, although the latter cannot be ruled out. We found little evidence from oxygen consumption studies or LC-MS/MS that NQs directly oxidize H2S2-4, and we propose that apparent reactions of NQs with inorganic polysulfides are due to H2S impurities in the polysulfides or an equilibrium between H2S and H2Sn. Collectively, NQ oxidation of H2S forms a variety of products that include hydropersulfides, hydropolysulfides, sulfenylpolysulfides, sulfite, and thiosulfate, and some of these reactions may proceed until an insoluble S8 colloid is formed.

Perceived factors and barriers affecting physiotherapists' decision to use spinal manipulation and mobilisation among infants, children, and adolescents: an international survey.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors and barriers, which affect the utilisation of spinal manipulation and mobilisation among infants, children, and adolescents. METHODS: Twenty-six international expert physiotherapists in manual therapy and paediatrics were invited to participate in a Delphi investigation using QualtricsⓇ. In Round-1 physiotherapists selected from a list of factors and barriers affecting their decision to use spinal manipulation and mobilisation in the paediatric population and had opportunity to add to the list. Round-2 asked respondents to select as many factors and barriers that they agreed with, resulting in a frequency count. The subset of responses to questions around barriers and facilitators are the focus of this study. RESULTS: Twelve physiotherapists completed both rounds of the survey. Medical diagnosis, mechanism of injury, patient presentation, tolerance to handling, and therapist's knowledge of techniques were the dominant deciding factors to use spinal manipulation and mobilisation among infants, children, and adolescents across spinal levels. More than 90% of the respondents selected manipulation as inappropriate among infants as their top barrier. Additional dominant barriers to using spinal manipulation among infants and children identified by ≥ 75% of the respondents included fear of injuring the patient, fear of litigation, lack of communication, lack of evidence, lack of guardian consent, and precision of the examination to inform clinical reasoning. CONCLUSION: This international survey provides much needed insight regarding the factors and barriers physiotherapists should consider when contemplating the utilisation of spinal mobilisation and manipulation in the paediatric population.