Electrotherapy for neck pain.

BACKGROUND: Neck pain is common, disabling and costly. The effectiveness of electrotherapy as a physiotherapeutic option remains unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2005 and previously updated in 2009. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review assessed the short, intermediate and long-term effects of electrotherapy on pain, function, disability, patient satisfaction, global perceived effect, and quality of life in adults with neck pain with and without radiculopathy or cervicogenic headache. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, MANTIS, CINAHL, and ICL, without language restrictions, from their beginning to August 2012; handsearched relevant conference proceedings; and consulted content experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), in any language, investigating the effects of electrotherapy used primarily as unimodal treatment for neck pain. Quasi-RCTs and controlled clinical trials were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. We were unable to statistically pool any of the results, but we assessed the quality of the evidence using an adapted GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty small trials (1239 people with neck pain) containing 38 comparisons were included. Analysis was limited by trials of varied quality, heterogeneous treatment subtypes and conflicting results. The main findings for reduction of neck pain by treatment with electrotherapeutic modalities were as follows.Very low quality evidence determined that pulsed electromagnetic field therapy (PEMF) and repetitive magnetic stimulation (rMS) were more effective than placebo, while transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) showed inconsistent results.Very low quality evidence determined that PEMF, rMS and TENS were more effective than placebo.Low quality evidence (1 trial, 52 participants) determined that permanent magnets (necklace) were no more effective than placebo (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.27, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.82, random-effects model).Very low quality evidence showed that modulated galvanic current, iontophoresis and electric muscle stimulation (EMS) were not more effective than placebo.There were four trials that reported on other outcomes such as function and global perceived effects, but none of the effects were of clinical importance. When TENS, iontophoresis and PEMF were compared to another treatment, very low quality evidence prevented us from suggesting any recommendations. No adverse side effects were reported in any of the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We cannot make any definite statements on the efficacy and clinical usefulness of electrotherapy modalities for neck pain. Since the evidence is of low or very low quality, we are uncertain about the estimate of the effect. Further research is very likely to change both the estimate of effect and our confidence in the results. Current evidence for PEMF, rMS, and TENS shows that these modalities might be more effective than placebo. When compared to other interventions the quality of evidence was very low thus preventing further recommendations.Funding bias should be considered, especially in PEMF studies. Galvanic current, iontophoresis, EMS, and a static magnetic field did not reduce pain or disability. Future trials on these interventions should have larger patient samples, include more precise standardization, and detail treatment characteristics.

Increasing sharp safety device use in healthcare: a semi-structured interview study.

The use of sharp safety devices in healthcare is considered the most important means of preventing occupational percutaneous injuries and has been mandated for use in most hospitals in industrialized countries including in Canada. However, clinical personnel's perceptions on the use of safety devices needs further characterization to improve compliance. This study's objective was to identify healthcare provider perspectives on different aspects of sharp safety device use and on how use could be increased. Using a constant comparison approach, data from semi-structured interviews with 39 nurses, physicians and phlebotomists providing direct patient care, and six nurses acting as the interface between clinical personnel and purchasing departments, were analyzed. Study participants were from three of the six health authorities in British Columbia. The four major categories that emerged from the data were: selection processes; identification and replacement; training; and multi-level barriers and facilitators. Findings highlighted the importance of including personnel regularly using safety devices at each stage of their selection including when they are being considered for replacement with superior devices, as well as the need for appropriate initial and refresher training, and how practices at the hospital, ward and individual level facilitate safety device use.

Choosing a survey sample when data on the population are limited: a method using Global Positioning Systems and aerial and satellite photographs.

BACKGROUND: Various methods have been proposed for sampling when data on the population are limited. However, these methods are often biased. We propose a new method to draw a population sample using Global Positioning Systems and aerial or satellite photographs. RESULTS: We randomly sampled Global Positioning System locations in designated areas. A circle was drawn around each location with radius representing 20 m. Buildings in the circle were identified from satellite photographs; one was randomly chosen. Interviewers selected one household from the building, and interviews were conducted with eligible household members. CONCLUSIONS: Participants had known selection probabilities, allowing proper estimation of parameters of interest and their variances. The approach was made possible by recent technological developments and access to satellite photographs.

Patient education for neck pain.

BACKGROUND: Neck disorders are common, disabling, and costly. The effectiveness of patient education strategies is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess the short- to long-term effects of therapeutic patient education (TPE) strategies on pain, function, disability, quality of life, global perceived effect, patient satisfaction, knowledge transfer, or behaviour change in adults with neck pain associated with whiplash or non-specific and specific mechanical neck pain with or without radiculopathy or cervicogenic headache. SEARCH METHODS: We searched computerised bibliographic databases (inception to 11 July 2010). SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of TPE for acute to chronic neck pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Paired independent review authors conducted selection, data abstraction, and 'Risk of bias' assessment. We calculated risk ratio (RR) and standardised mean differences (SMD). Heterogeneity was assessed; no studies were pooled. MAIN RESULTS: Of the 15 selected trials, three were rated low risk of bias. Three TPE themes emerged.Advice focusing on activation: There is moderate quality evidence (one trial, 348 participants) that an educational video of advice focusing on activation was more beneficial for acute whiplash-related pain when compared with no treatment at intermediate-term [RR 0.79 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.06)] but not long-term follow-up [0.89 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.21)]. There is low quality evidence (one trial, 102 participants) that a whiplash pamphlet on advice focusing on activation is less beneficial for pain reduction, or no different in improving function and global perceived improvement from generic information given out in emergency care (control) for acute whiplash at short- or intermediate-term follow-up. Low to very low quality evidence (nine trials using diverse educational approaches) showed either no evidence of benefit or difference for varied outcomes. Advice focusing on pain & stress coping skills and workplace ergonomics: Very low quality evidence (three trials, 243 participants) favoured other treatment or showed no difference spanning numerous follow-up periods and disorder subtypes.  Low quality evidence (one trial, 192 participants) favoured specific exercise training for chronic neck pain at short-term follow-up.Self-care strategies: Very low quality evidence (one trial, 58 participants) indicated that self-care strategies did not relieve pain for acute to chronic neck pain at short-term follow-up. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: With the exception of one trial, this review has not shown effectiveness for educational interventions, including advice to activate, advice on stress-coping skills, workplace ergonomics and self-care strategies. Future research should be founded on sound adult learning theory and learning skill acquisition.

Botulinum toxin for subacute/chronic neck pain.

BACKGROUND: Neck disorders are common, disabling and costly. Botulinum toxin (BoNT) intramuscular injections are often used with the intention of treating neck pain. OBJECTIVES: To systematically evaluate the literature on the treatment effectiveness of BoNT for neck pain, disability, global perceived effect and quality of life in adults with neck pain with or without associated cervicogenic headache, but excluding cervical radiculopathy and whiplash associated disorder. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, AMED, Index to Chiropractic Literature, CINAHL, LILACS, and EMBASE from their origin to 20 September 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials in which BoNT injections were used to treat subacute or chronic neck pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A minimum of two review authors independently selected articles, abstracted data, and assessed risk of bias, using the Cochrane Back Review Group criteria. In the absence of clinical heterogeneity, we calculated standardized mean differences (SMD) and relative risks, and performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model. The quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations were assigned an overall grade for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine trials (503 participants). Only BoNT type A (BoNT-A) was used in these studies.High quality evidence suggests there was little or no difference in pain between BoNT-A and saline injections at four weeks (five trials; 252 participants; SMD pooled -0.07 (95% confidence intervals (CI) -0.36 to 0.21)) and six months for chronic neck pain. Very low quality evidence indicated little or no difference in pain between BoNT-A combined with physiotherapeutic exercise and analgesics and saline injection with physiotherapeutic exercise and analgesics for patients with chronic neck pain at four weeks (two trials; 95 participants; SMD pooled 0.09 (95% CI -0.55 to 0.73)) and six months (one trial; 24 participants; SMD -0.56 (95% CI -1.39 to 0.27)). Very low quality evidence from one trial (32 participants) showed little or no difference between BoNT-A and placebo at four weeks (SMD 0.16 (95% CI -0.53 to 0.86)) and six months (SMD 0.00 (95% CI -0.69 to 0.69)) for chronic cervicogenic headache. Very low quality evidence from one trial (31 participants), showed a difference in global perceived effect favouring BoNT-A in chronic neck pain at four weeks (SMD -1.12 (95% CI: -1.89 to -0.36)). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence fails to confirm either a clinically important or a statistically significant benefit of BoNT-A injection for chronic neck pain associated with or without associated cervicogenic headache. Likewise, there was no benefit seen for disability and quality of life at four week and six months.

Surgeons' and residents' double-gloving practices at 2 teaching hospitals in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons and residents are at increased risk of exposure to blood-borne pathogens owing to percutaneous injury (PI) and contamination. One method known to reduce risk is double-gloving (DG) during surgery. METHODS: All surgeons and residents affiliated with the University of Western Ontario (UWO) and McMaster University in 2005 were asked to participate in a Web-based survey. The survey asked respondents their specialty, the number of operations they participated in per week, their age and sex, the proportion of surgeries in which they double-gloved (DG in ≥75% surgeries was considered to be routine), and the average number of PIs they sustained per year and whether or not they reported them to an employee health service. RESULTS: In total, 155 of 331 (47%) eligible surgeons and residents responded; response rates for UWO and McMaster surgeons were 50% and 39%, respectively, and for UWO and McMaster residents, they were 52% and 47%, respectively. A total of 43% of surgeons and residents reported routine DG; 50% from McMaster and 36% from UWO. Using logistic regression to simultaneously adjust for participant characteristics, we confirmed that DG was more frequent at McMaster than at UWO, with an odds ratio of 3.32 (95% confidence interval 1.35-8.17). Surgeons and residents reported an average of 3.3 surgical PIs per year (2.2 among McMaster participants and 4.5 among UWO participants). Of the 77% who reported at least 1 injury/year, 67% stated that they had not reported it to an employee health service. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous injuries occur frequently during surgery, yet routine DG, an effective means of reducing risk, was carried out by less than half of the surgeons and residents participating in this study. This highlights the need for a more concerted and broad-based approach to increase the use of a measure that is effective, inexpensive and easily carried out.

Ongoing use of conventional devices and safety device activation rates in hospitals in Ontario, Canada.

This study assessed voluntary compliance with the use of sharp safety devices in lieu of conventional ones and the activation status of these safety devices: VanishPoint syringes, Terumo Surshield butterflies, and Insyte Autoguard IV catheters. Sharps disposal containers from various wards in three private, not-for profit, university-affiliated Ontario hospitals were audited during 9 days in August 2007. In the 149 audited sharps containers, 55% of all syringes found were conventional compared with 45% that were safety syringes. In the three hospitals, the percentages of conventional (non-safety) vs. safety syringes found in used sharps containers were as follows, respectively: (i) 72% conventional and 28% safety, (ii) 55% conventional and 45% safety, and (iii) 65% conventional and 35% safety. In addition, it was found that 77% of 2131 Terumo butterflies, 97% of 1117 Insyte Autoguard IV catheters, and 87% of 4897 VanishPoint syringes in the containers had been activated. This study, carried out approximately 1 year before it was legally required to use safety instead of sharp conventional devices, found that most devices in use were conventional ones. It was also found that only the activation rate for the safety IV device was acceptable.

Complexity of food preparation and food security status in low-income young women.

PURPOSE: This study was conducted to explore whether preparing more complex meals was associated with higher food security status. METHODS: This mixed-methods, community-based study involved the use of semistructured interviews to examine the cooking practices of a group of young, low-income women in Montreal. Fifty participants aged 18 to 35 were recruited at 10 locations in five low-income neighbourhoods. Food security status was the main outcome measure and the main exposure variable, "complex food preparation," combined the preparation of three specific food types (soups, sauces, and baked goods) using basic ingredients. RESULTS: Low-income women preparing a variety of meals using basic ingredients at least three times a week were more than twice as likely to be food secure as were women preparing more complex meals less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Women who prepared more complex meals more frequently had higher food security. Whether this means that preparing more complex foods results in greater food security remains unclear, as this was an exploratory study.

Manipulation or mobilisation for neck pain.

BACKGROUND: Manipulation and mobilisation are often used, either alone or combined with other treatment approaches, to treat neck pain. OBJECTIVES: To assess if manipulation or mobilisation improves pain, function/disability, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and global perceived effect in adults with acute/subacute/chronic neck pain with or without cervicogenic headache or radicular findings. SEARCH STRATEGY: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, issue 3) and MEDLINE, EMBASE, Manual Alternative and Natural Therapy, CINAHL, and Index to Chiropractic Literature were updated to July 2009. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials on manipulation or mobilisation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, abstracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Pooled relative risk and standardised mean differences (SMD) were calculated. MAIN RESULTS: We included 27 trials (1522 participants).Cervical Manipulation for subacute/chronic neck pain : Moderate quality evidence suggested manipulation and mobilisation produced similar effects on pain, function and patient satisfaction at intermediate-term follow-up. Low quality evidence showed manipulation alone compared to a control may provide short- term relief following one to four sessions (SMD pooled -0.90 (95%CI: -1.78 to -0.02)) and that nine or 12 sessions were superior to three for pain and disability in cervicogenic headache. Optimal technique and dose need to be determined.Thoracic Manipulation for acute/chronic neck pain : Low quality evidence supported thoracic manipulation as an additional therapy for pain reduction (NNT 7; 46.6% treatment advantage) and increased function (NNT 5; 40.6% treatment advantage) in acute pain and favoured a single session of thoracic manipulation for immediate pain reduction compared to placebo for chronic neck pain (NNT 5, 29% treatment advantage).Mobilisation for subacute/chronic neck pain: In addition to the evidence noted above, low quality evidence for subacute and chronic neck pain indicated that 1) a combination of Maitland mobilisation techniques was similar to acupuncture for immediate pain relief and increased function; 2) there was no difference between mobilisation and acupuncture as additional treatments for immediate pain relief and improved function; and 3) neural dynamic mobilisations may produce clinically important reduction of pain immediately post-treatment. Certain mobilisation techniques were superior. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Cervical manipulation and mobilisation produced similar changes. Either may provide immediate- or short-term change; no long-term data are available. Thoracic manipulation may improve pain and function. Optimal techniques and dose are unresolved. Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.

Patient education for neck pain with or without radiculopathy.

BACKGROUND: Neck disorders are common, disabling, and costly. The effectiveness of patient education strategies is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether patient education strategies, either alone or in combination with other treatments, are of benefit for pain, function, global perceived effect, quality of life, or patient satisfaction, in adults with neck pain with and without radiculopathy. SEARCH STRATEGY: Computerized bibliographic databases were searched from their start up to May 31, 2008. SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible studies were quasi or randomized trials (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of patient education strategies for neck disorder. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Paired independent review authors carried out study selection, data abstraction, and methodological quality assessment. Relative risk and standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated. The appropriateness of combining studies was assessed on clinical and statistical grounds. Because of differences in intervention type or disorder, no studies were considered appropriate to pool. MAIN RESULTS: Of the 10 selected trials, two (20%) were rated high quality. Advice was assessed as follows:Eight trials of advice focusing on activation compared to no treatment or to various active treatments, including therapeutic exercise, manual therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy, showed either inferiority or no difference for pain, spanning a full range of follow-up periods and disorder types. When compared to rest, two trials that assessed acute whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) showed moderate evidence of no difference for various forms of advice focusing on activation. Two trials studying advice focusing on pain & stress coping skills found moderate evidence of no benefit for pain in chronic mechanical neck disorder (MND) at intermediate/long-term follow-up. One trial compared the effects of ' traditional neck school ' to no treatment, yielding limited evidence of no benefit for pain at intermediate-term follow-up in mixed acute/subacute/chronic neck pain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review has not shown effectiveness for educational interventions in various disorder types and follow-up periods, including advice to activate, advice on stress coping skills, and 'neck school'. In future research, further attention to methodological quality is necessary. Studies of multimodal interventions should consider study designs, such as factorial designs, that permit discrimination of the specific educational components.

Electrotherapy for neck pain.

BACKGROUND: Neck pain is common, disabling and costly. The effectiveness of electrotherapy as a physiotherapeutic option remains unclear. This update replaces our 2005 Cochrane review on this topic. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether electrotherapy improves pain, disability, patient satisfaction, and global perceived effect in adults with neck pain. SEARCH STRATEGY: Computer-assisted searches of: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, MANTIS, CINAHL, and ICL, without language restrictions, from their beginning to December 2008; handsearched relevant conference proceedings; consulted content experts. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in any language, investigating the effects of electrotherapy, used primarily as unimodal treatment for neck pain. Quasi-RCTs and controlled clinical trials were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two authors independently conducted citation identification, study selection, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessment. We were unable to statistically pool any of the results, but assessed the quality of the evidence using an adapted GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: Eighteen small trials (1043 people with neck pain) with 23 comparisons were included. Analysis was limited by trials of varied quality, heterogeneous treatment subtypes and conflicting results. The main findings for reduction of neck pain by treatment with electrotherapeutic modalities are:Very low quality evidence that pulsed electromagnetic field therapy (PEMF), repetitive magnetic stimulation (rMS) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) are more effective than placebo.Low quality evidence that permanent magnets (necklace) are not more effective than placebo.Very low quality evidence that modulated galvanic current, iontophoresis and electric muscle stimulation (EMS) are not more effective than placebo.There were only four trials that reported on other outcomes such as function and global perceived effects, but none were of clinical importance. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We cannot make any definite statements on the efficacy and clinical usefulness of electrotherapy modalities for neck pain. Since the quality of evidence is low or very low, we are uncertain about the estimate of the effect. Further research is very likely to change both the estimate of effect and our confidence in the results. Current evidence for PEMF, rMS, and TENS shows that these modalities might be more effective than placebo but not other interventions. Funding bias should be considered, especially in PEMF studies. Galvanic current, iontophoresis, electric muscle stimulation(EMS), and static magnetic field did not reduce pain or disability. Future trials on these interventions should have larger patient samples and include more precise standardization and description of all treatment characteristics.

Hands-free technique in the operating room: reduction in body fluid exposure and the value of a training video.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine if (1) using a hands-free technique (HFT)--whereby no two surgical team members touch the same sharp item simultaneously--> or = 75% of the time reduced the rate of percutaneous injury, glove tear, and contamination (incidents); and (2) if a video-based intervention increased HFT use to > or = 75%, immediately and over time. METHODS: During three and four periods, in three intervention and three control hospitals, respectively, nurses recorded incidents, percentage of HFT use, and other information in 10,596 surgeries. The video was shown in intervention hospitals between Periods 1 and 2, and in control hospitals between Periods 3 and 4. HFT, considered used when > or = 75% passes were done hands-free, was practiced in 35% of all surgeries. We applied logistic regression to (1) estimate the rate reduction for incidents in surgeries when the HFT was used and not used, while adjusting for potential risk factors, and (2) estimate HFT use of about 75% and 100%, in intervention compared with control hospitals, in Period 2 compared with Period 1, and Period 3 compared with Period 2. RESULTS: A total of 202 incidents (49 injuries, 125 glove tears, and 28 contaminations) were reported. Adjusted for differences in surgical type, length, emergency status, blood loss, time of day, and number of personnel present for > or = 75% of the surgery, the HFT-associated reduction in rate was 35%. An increase in use of HFT of > or = 75% was significantly greater in intervention hospitals, during the first post-intervention period, and was sustained five months later. CONCLUSION: The use of HFT and the HFT video were both found to be effective.

Bone manganese as a biomarker of manganese exposure: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for a diagnostic tool with the ability to measure cumulative exposure to manganese (Mn) in the workplace. Measuring bone Mn levels with in vivo neutron activation analysis (IVNAA) could serve as a biomarker of past exposure. Bone Mn levels of welders were measured and compared to the levels found in subjects without exposure to the element. METHOD: Forty subjects (30 welders and 10 controls) were recruited. An occupational history was obtained and subjects underwent IVNAA bone Mn measurements. RESULTS: The mean bone Mn levels were (2.9 +/- 0.4) and (0.1 +/- 0.7) microg Mn/g Ca for welders and controls, respectively (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This project, the first of its kind, reports differences in bone Mn between Mn-exposed welders and non-occupationally exposed subjects. It appears that bone Mn levels do reflect differences in the occupational exposure of welders.

Knowledge to action: a challenge for neck pain treatment.

SYNOPSIS: For clinicians, systematic reviews can enhance incorporation into practice of the large volumes of information emerging from research on effectiveness and risks. But we believe that these reviews are most useful with simplified tools to facilitate translation of this knowledge into practice. We provide a "Neck Care Tool Kit" that gives a diagrammatic approach to prioritizing intervention. The evidence from a series of 11 systematic reviews by the Cervical Overview Group is depicted in decision flow-charts and tables to enhance clinical interpretation of the overview findings. On simple visual inspection of symbols in a table, the reader can establish where there is evidence of benefit or no benefit, the strength of the recommendation, and if these data represent short- or long-term findings. Where possible, we guide clinicians to dosage of specific treatment methods. There is no consensus as to which outcome measures to prioritize among the large number in use. This clinical commentary guides clinicians to view the evidence in enough detail to integrate it into their clinical practice environment. We conclude by delineating research gaps and proposing future research directions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 5.

Patient education for neck pain with or without radiculopathy.

BACKGROUND: Neck disorders are common, disabling, and costly. The effectiveness of patient education strategies is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether patient education strategies, either alone or in combination with other treatments, are of benefit for pain, function, global perceived effect, quality of life, or patient satisfaction, in adults with neck pain with and without radiculopathy. SEARCH STRATEGY: Computerized bibliographic databases were searched from their start up to May 31, 2008. SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible studies were quasi or randomized trials (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of patient education strategies for neck disorder. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Paired independent review authors carried out study selection, data abstraction, and methodological quality assessment. Relative risk and standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated. The appropriateness of combining studies was assessed on clinical and statistical grounds. Because of differences in intervention type or disorder, no studies were considered appropriate to pool. MAIN RESULTS: Of the 10 selected trials, two (20%) were rated high quality. Advice was assessed as follows:Eight trials of advice focusing on activation compared to no treatment or to various active treatments, including therapeutic exercise, manual therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy, showed either inferiority or no difference for pain, spanning a full range of follow-up periods and disorder types. When compared to rest, two trials that assessed acute whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) showed moderate evidence of no difference for various forms of advice focusing on activation.Two trials studying advice focusing on pain & stress coping skills found moderate evidence of no benefit for pain in chronic mechanical neck disorder (MND) at intermediate/long-term follow-up.One trial compared the effects of 'traditional neck school' to no treatment, yielding limited evidence of no benefit for pain at intermediate-term follow-up in mixed acute/subacute/chronic neck pain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review has not shown effectiveness for educational interventions in various disorder types and follow-up periods, including advice to activate, advice on stress coping skills, and 'neck school'. In future research, further attention to methodological quality is necessary. Studies of multimodal interventions should consider study designs, such as factorial designs, that permit discrimination of the specific educational components.

Mechanical traction for neck pain with or without radiculopathy.

BACKGROUND: Neck pain is a frequently reported complaint of the musculoskeletal system which can be disabling and costly to society. Mechanical traction is often used as an adjunct therapy in outpatient rehabilitation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of mechanical traction for neck disorders. SEARCH STRATEGY: A research librarian searched computerized bibliographic databases without language restrictions up to March 2008 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the medical, chiropractic, and allied health literature. SELECTION CRITERIA: The RCTs we selected examined adults with neck disorders who received mechanical traction alone or in combination with other treatments compared to a placebo or another treatment. Our outcomes of interest were pain, function, disability, global perceived effect, patient satisfaction, and quality of life measures. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors with different backgrounds in medicine, physiotherapy, massage therapy and chiropractics independently conducted study selection, risk of bias assessment and data abstraction using pre-piloted forms. We resolved disagreement through consensus. MAIN RESULTS: Of the seven selected RCTs (total participants = 958), only one (N = 100) had a low risk of bias. It found no statistically significant difference (SMD -0.16: 95%CI: -0.59 to 0.27) between continuous traction and placebo traction in reducing pain or improving function for chronic neck disorders with radicular symptoms. Our review found no evidence from RCTs with a low potential for bias that clearly supports or refutes the use of either continuous or intermittent traction for neck disorders. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current literature does not support or refute the efficacy or effectiveness of continuous or intermittent traction for pain reduction, improved function or global perceived effect when compared to placebo traction, tablet or heat or other conservative treatments in patients with chronic neck disorders. Large, well conducted RCTs are needed to first determine the efficacy of traction, then the effectiveness, for individuals with neck disorders with radicular symptoms.

Could the death of a BC or nurse have been prevented by using the hands-free technique?

In 1991, Bernadette Stringer, a long time BC Nurses' Union health and safety representative, learned about the death of a 48 year old Victoria, B.C., OR nurse who had sustained a hepatitis C contaminated needlestick. This incident led to a study evaluating the hands-free technique's ability to decrease the risk of percutaneous injury, glove tear and mucocutaneous contamination during surgery that Ms. Stringer carried out in partial fulfillment of her Ph.D. (granted in 1998, by McGill University's Joint Departments of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, in the Faculty of Medicine). That study's main findings were published in 2002 in one of the British Medical Journal's publications, Occupational and Environmental Medicine. The following article will discuss aspects of Bev Holmwood's case, review the literature on the hands-free technique, and describe a new study that has again evaluated the hands-free technique's effectiveness.