Overview of Cochrane Systematic Reviews for Rehabilitation Interventions in Individuals with Upper Limb Fractures: A Mapping Synthesis.

Background and Objectives. This overview of Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs) reports on current evidence on the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions for persons with upper limb fractures (ULFs), and the quality of the evidence. Materials and Methods. Following the inclusion criteria defined by the World Health Organization, all CSRs tagged in the Cochrane Rehabilitation database that were relevant for persons with ULFs were included. A mapping synthesis was used to group outcomes and comparisons of included CSRs, indicating the effect of rehabilitation interventions and the certainty of evidence. Results. A total of three CSRs were included in the evidence map. The certainty of evidence was judged as low to very low. Early occupational and hand therapy, cyclic pneumatic soft tissue compression, and cross-education, when started during immobilization, may improve grip strength and wrist range of motion, with results maintained up to 12 weeks from the cast removal, compared to no intervention. Approaches such as occupational therapy and passive mobilisation, started post-immobilization, are probably safe in terms of secondary complications. However, the overall evidence of rehabilitative interventions related to proximal humeral fractures has been judged insufficient for all the outcomes considered. A paucity of primary studies and CSRs for elbow fractures was noted. Conclusions. This overview provided the effect and the certainty of evidence of rehabilitation interventions available after ULFs using a mapping synthesis. To date, there is a need to further the effectiveness and safety of these interventions for persons with ULFs, improving methodological quality of the research in the field.

Overview of Cochrane systematic reviews for rehabilitation interventions in individuals with cerebral palsy: A mapping synthesis.

AIM: This overview of Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs) reports on current evidence on the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions for individuals with cerebral palsy (CP) and the quality of the evidence. METHOD: Following the inclusion criteria defined by the World Health Organization, all CSRs tagged in the Cochrane Rehabilitation database that were relevant for individuals with CP were included. A mapping synthesis was used to group outcomes and comparisons of included CSRs indicating the effect of rehabilitation interventions and the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: A total of eight CSRs were included in the evidence map. The effect of interventions varied across comparisons and the certainty of evidence was inconsistent, ranging from high to very low. The best evidence was found for botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT-A) combined with occupational therapy in the management of spasticity. However, the effect of BoNT-A on drooling and salivation remains unclear. A paucity of randomized controlled trials studying treatments for both dystonia and postural deformities was noted. INTERPRETATION: This review emphasizes the need to further investigate the effectiveness and cost-benefit of rehabilitation interventions for individuals with CP. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: The quality and quantity of evidence on rehabilitation interventions for cerebral palsy is limited worldwide. Botulinum neurotoxin A plus occupational therapy showed robust efficacy for the management of upper-limb spasticity. Evidence on sleep-positioning systems for hip migration and trihexyphenidyl for dystonia is scarce.

Overview of Cochrane Systematic Reviews for Rehabilitation Interventions in Persons With Spinal Cord Injury: A Mapping Synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: This article aims to describe the evidence on rehabilitation interventions for persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) identified in Cochrane Systematic Reviews (CSRs) selected for inclusion in the World Health Organization Rehabilitation Programme-Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation. DATA SOURCES: The CSRs search was led by the Cochrane Rehabilitation team, using the tagging process, using the terms "spinal cord injury" and "rehabilitation" in the Cochrane Library. STUDY SELECTION: We performed an overview of all the CSRs according to the inclusion criteria defined with the World Health Organization: rehabilitation interventions in persons with SCI. DATA EXTRACTION: The CSRs identified after the screening process were summarized using an evidence map, grouping outcomes, and comparisons of included CSRs indicating the effect and the quality of evidence to provide a comprehensive view of what is known. DATA SYNTHESIS: Out of 248 CSRs from the past 10 years tagged in the Cochrane Rehabilitation database, 3 were related to SCI. They provide data on 13 outcomes analyzed within 11 comparisons for a total of 64 primary studies, including 2024 participants with SCI. Of these, 7 outcomes and 1 comparison focused on people with cervical SCI. Rehabilitation interventions might improve respiratory outcomes and pain relief in people with SCI. There is uncertainty whether bodyweight-supported treadmill training, robotic-assisted training, and functional electrostimulation affect walking speed and capacity. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence needs to be confirmed by better quality research. Therefore, future priorities are the improvement of methodological quality of the studies in people with SCI, particularly considering the complexity of this health condition. Further, there is a need for more CSRs in the field.

Machine learning methods for functional recovery prediction and prognosis in post-stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Rehabilitation medicine is facing a new development phase thanks to a recent wave of rigorous clinical trials aimed at improving the scientific evidence of protocols. This phenomenon, combined with new trends in personalised medical therapies, is expected to change clinical practice dramatically. The emerging field of Rehabilomics is only possible if methodologies are based on biomedical data collection and analysis. In this framework, the objective of this work is to develop a systematic review of machine learning algorithms as solutions to predict motor functional recovery of post-stroke patients after treatment. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search of five electronic databases using the Patient, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome (PICO) format. We extracted health conditions, population characteristics, outcome assessed, the method for feature extraction and selection, the algorithm used, and the validation approach. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST). A qualitative description of the characteristics of the included studies as well as a narrative data synthesis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 19 primary studies were included. The predictors most frequently used belonged to the areas of demographic characteristics and stroke assessment through clinical examination. Regarding the methods, linear and logistic regressions were the most frequently used and cross-validation was the preferred validation approach. CONCLUSIONS: We identified several methodological limitations: small sample sizes, a limited number of external validation approaches, and high heterogeneity among input and output variables. Although these elements prevented a quantitative comparison across models, we defined the most frequently used models given a specific outcome, providing useful indications for the application of more complex machine learning algorithms in rehabilitation medicine.

Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Individuals With Amputation: Identification of Best Evidence for Rehabilitation to Develop the WHO's Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVES: To report the results of the systematic search performed to identify interventions and related evidence for rehabilitation of individuals with amputation based on the current evidence from clinical practice guidelines (CPG). DATA SOURCES: Pubmed, Pedro, CINAHL, Embase, Google Scholar, and multiple guideline databases (date restriction, 2008-2018). STUDY SELECTION: Exclusion criteria were no CPG, not reporting on rehabilitation, published before 2008, developed for health conditions other than amputation, presence of conflict of interest (financial or nonfinancial), lack of information on the strength of the recommendation, and lack of quality assessed by the "Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation." DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction was done using a standardized form, which comprised information on the recommendation, the strength of recommendation and the quality of the evidence used to inform the recommendation. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 4 guidelines, providing a total of 217 recommendations (20 on assessments, 131 on interventions, and 66 on service provision). Most recommendations concerned pain management, education, pre- and postoperative management, and residual limb care. The strength of recommendation was generally weak to intermediate. The level of evidence mostly compromised expert opinions, with only 6.9% (15 of 217) being provided by randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, or meta-analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The field of amputation is well covered for recommended interventions, but the level of evidence is generally low and is based mostly on expert opinion. Some important domains are not covered (eg, vocation and education, sexual and/or intimate relationships, activities of daily living or leisure activities, education concerning socket/liner fitting). There is also a lack of description of the contents of training and rehabilitation programs. This should be taken into account for the development of future guidelines.

Methodological Issues in Rehabilitation Research: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify, synthesize, and categorize the methodological issues faced by the rehabilitation field. DATA SOURCES: A scoping review was conducted using studies identified in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and Google Scholar up to August 2018. STUDY SELECTION: We included all type of publications describing methodological issues in rehabilitation research where rehabilitation is described as a multimodal process. The methodological issues have been categorized and classified. DATA EXTRACTION: The synthesis included qualitative and quantitative analysis. To focus the attention on rehabilitation, we post hoc divided in "specific issues" (highly related to, even if not exclusive of, rehabilitation research) and "generic issues" (common in biomedical research). DATA SYNTHESIS: Seventy-one publications were included: 68% were narrative reviews, 15% systematic reviews, 7% editorials, 4% meta-epidemiologic studies, and 5% others. Specific methodological issues include the following: problematic application of randomized controlled trials (32%), absent definition of core outcome sets (28%), poor interventions description (22%), weak methodological (conducting) and reporting quality (21%), scarce clinical practice applicability (14%), lack of blinding assessor (10%), inadequate randomization methods or inadequate allocation concealment (8%), and inadequate participants description and recruitment (8%). "Generic" issues included the following: data and statistical description (31%), authors' methodological training (7%), peer review process (6%, n=4), funding declaration (6%), ethical statement (3%), protocol registration (3%), and conflict of interest declaration (1%). CONCLUSIONS: Methodological and reporting issues might influence the quality of the evidence produced in rehabilitation research. The next steps to move forward in the field of rehabilitation could be to evaluate the influence of all these issues on the validity of trial results through meta-epidemiologic studies and to develop specific checklists to provide guidance to authors to improve the reporting and conduct of trials in this field.

Tools to Assess the Risk of Bias and Reporting Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials in Rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To determine whether new tools and items have been developed to evaluate the risk of bias (RoB) and reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in rehabilitation; (2) to determine which items are included in the existing reporting guidelines, and to create a matrix of items to report and conduct trials in rehabilitation as the first step for a starting a rigorous validation process. DATA SOURCES: Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health databases. STUDY SELECTION: Studies should describe a newly developed tool to evaluate the RoB or quality of reporting for RCTs in the area of rehabilitation. DATA EXTRACTION: (1) First, we extracted items from new tools identified by the electronic search strategies and then (2) we looked at the items provided by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement and its relevant extensions. We determined whether these items were already included in our matrix of items. Items were classified based on methodological domains they accomplish, biases they were able to target, and whether they guide reporting or conduct. DATA SYNTHESIS: Among the 1596 citations found, 23 articles were potentially relevant. From these, only 3 new scales (National Institute for Complementary Medicine Acupuncture Network, Quality of reports on spa and balneotherapy [SPAC], Assessment of Study Quality and Reporting in Exercise) were found. In addition, the newly updated Cochrane RoB tool (RoB 2.0) was included. Our matrix contained 122 unique items for any rehabilitation area, 46 items (37.7%) were related to conduct, and 58 (47.5%) were related to the reporting; 18 (14.8%) were related to both. Overall, 76 new items were added among all domains. CONCLUSIONS: Many individual and diverse items have been used to guide the reporting and conduct of rehabilitation trials. This indicates a great variability in number of items and an apparent lack of consensus on a core set of items to be used in rehabilitation. Future research should look into developing a core set of items for the rehabilitation field.

Mortality and characteristics of older people dying with COVID-19 in Lombardy nursing homes, Italy: An observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to describe the epidemiological characteristics of Nursing Homes (NHs) residents infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and to compute the related case-fatality rate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The outcomes were mortality and case-fatality rate with related epidemiological characteristics (age, sex, comorbidity, and frailty). RESULTS: During the COVID-19 outbreak lasted from March 1 to May 7, 2020, 330 residents died in Fondazione Don Gnocchi NHs bringing the mortality rate to 27% with a dramatic increase compared to the same period of 2019, when it was 7.5%. Naso/oropharyngeal swabs resulted positive for COVID-19 in 315 (71%) of the 441of the symptomatic/exposed residents tested. The COVID-19 population was 75% female, with a 17% overall fatality rate and sex-specific fatality rates of 19% and 13% for females and males, respectively. Fifty-six percent of deaths presented SARS-CoV-2-associated pneumonia, 15% cardiovascular, and 29% miscellaneous pathologies. CONCLUSION: Patients' complexity and frailty might influence SARS-CoV-2 infection case-fatality rate estimates. A COVID-19 register is needed to study COVID-19 frail patients' epidemiology and characteristics.

Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for adults with fractures: identification of best evidence for rehabilitation to develop the WHO's Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: The identification of existing rehabilitation interventions and related evidence represents a crucial step along the development of the World Health Organization's (WHO) Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation (PIR). The methods for such identification have been developed by the WHO Rehabilitation Programme and Cochrane Rehabilitation under the guidance of the WHO's Guideline Review Committee secretariat. The aim of this paper is to report on the results of the systematic search for clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) relevant to the rehabilitation of adults with fractures and to present the current state of evidence available from the identified CPGs. METHODS: This paper is part of the Best Evidence for Rehabilitation (be4rehab) series, developed according to the methodology presented in the World Health Organization's (WHO) Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation (PIR) introductory paper. It is a systematic review of existing CPGs on fractures in adult population published from 2009 to 2019. RESULTS: We identified 23 relevant CPGs after title and abstract screening. According to inclusion/exclusion criteria, we selected 13 CPGs. After checking for quality, publication time, multiprofessionality, and comprehensiveness, we finally included five CPGs dealing with rehabilitative management of fractures in adult population, two CPGs addressing treatment of distal radius fracture and three the treatment of femoral/hip fracture. CONCLUSION: The selected CPGs on management of distal radius and femoral/hip fracture include few recommendations regarding rehabilitation, with overall low to very low quality of evidence and weak/conditional strength of recommendation. Moreover, several gaps in specific rehabilitative topics occur. Further high-quality trials are required to upgrade the quality of the available evidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1.

An overview of Cochrane systematic reviews for pulmonary rehabilitation interventions in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a mapping synthesis.

INTRODUCTION: There is a global unmet need for rehabilitation to meet which the World Health Organization, in collaboration with Cochrane Rehabilitation, is developing the Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation with the aim of identifying rehabilitation interventions relevant to a range of key health conditions, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The purpose of this paper is to describe the best available evidence on pulmonary rehabilitation interventions for people with COPD. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: An Overview of Cochrane Systematic Reviews (CSRs). Through the search strategy, COPD-related systematic reviews published from January 2009 to November 2021 were identified. Data were extracted on each reported outcome related to an intervention and judgements about the quality of evidence were made, using the GRADE approach. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Seventeen reviews were analyzed, for a total of 314 primary studies that included 22,206 participants. CSRs provided information on the effectiveness of rehabilitation on functioning, activity, quality of life, anxiety, depression, mortality, and health care resource utilization. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings report that comprehensive pulmonary rehabilitation programs and water exercises improve the exercise capacity and quality of life (QoL) in people with COPD. Different exercise modalities, intensities, and settings for different muscle groups, breathing exercises, and counseling can improve exercise capacity, QoL, dyspnea, hospitalizations, and physical activity. It is uncertain whether breathing exercise, low-intensity exercise, neuromuscular electrical stimulation, and psychological intervention have an effect on exercise capacity, dyspnea, QoL, and physical activity. The protocol was registered on OSF (registration DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/8A26Q).

Overview of Cochrane Systematic Reviews of Rehabilitation Interventions for Persons with Traumatic Brain Injury: A Mapping Synthesis.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization has identified an unmet global need for rehabilitation interventions concerning 20 non-communicable diseases, traumatic brain injury included. This overview compiles and synthesizes the quality and quantity of available evidence on the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions for traumatic brain injury from Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs). The results will be used to develop the Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation. METHODS: All CSRs on TBI tagged in the Cochrane Rehabilitation database published between August 2009 and September 2021 were included. Evidence mapping was implemented to extract study characteristics and evidence from the CSRs. RESULTS: Six CSRs (42 studies; n = 3983) examined the effectiveness of either non-pharmacological or pharmacological interventions after TBI. Among 19 comparisons, 3% were rated as high in quality of evidence, 9% moderate, 54% low, and 34% very low. Non-pharmacological interventions with moderate quality, hospital-based cognitive rehabilitation and cognitive didactic therapy, likely produced minimal to no changes in the return-to-work rate. Anti-epileptic drugs and neuroprotective agents resulted in a minimal difference to the frequency of late seizure episodes in post-traumatic epilepsy. CONCLUSIONS: No prominent advances in treatment options were reported in any of the CSRs. The high rate of low and very low quality of evidence makes it difficult to ascertain the effectiveness of several recommended non-pharmacological interventions.

Predicting SARS-CoV-2 infection duration at hospital admission:a deep learning solution.

COVID-19 cases are increasing around the globe with almost 5 million of deaths. We propose here a deep learning model capable of predicting the duration of the infection by means of information available at hospital admission. A total of 222 patients were enrolled in our observational study. Anagraphical and anamnestic data, COVID-19 signs and symptoms, COVID-19 therapy, hematochemical test results, and prior therapies administered to patients are used as predictors. A set of 55 features, all of which can be taken in the first hours of the patient's hospitalization, was considered. Different solutions were compared achieving the best performance with a sequential convolutional neural network-based model merged in an ensemble with two different meta-learners linked in cascade. We obtained a median absolute error of 2.7 days (IQR = 3.0) in predicting the duration of the infection; the error was equally distributed in the infection duration range. This tool could preemptively give an outlook of the COVID-19 patients' expected path and the associated hospitalization effort. The proposed solution could be viable in tackling the huge burden and the logistics complexity of hospitals or rehabilitation centers during the pandemic waves. With data taken ad admission, entering a PCA-based feature selection, a k-fold cross-validated CNN-based model was implemented. After external texting, a median absolute error of 2.7 days [IQR = 3 days].

A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for persons with osteoarthritis. A "Best Evidence for Rehabilitation" (be4rehab) paper to develop the WHO's Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation: A systematic review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for persons with osteoarthritis for the identification of best evidence for rehabilitation.

AIM: Identifying existing interventions for rehabilitation and related evidence presents a crucial step in developing the World Health Organization's (WHO) Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation. This paper reports the results of a systematic search that aimed to identify clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) relevant to the rehabilitation of people with osteoarthritis and presents the CPG recommendations and the current state of evidence available for the interventions in the CPGs. METHODS: This paper is part of the "Best Evidence for Rehabilitation" (be4rehab) series, developed according to the methodology presented in the WHO's Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation introductory paper by Rauch et al, published in 2019. It is a systematic review of the existing CPGs on osteoarthritis published between 2009 and 2019. Identified CPGs were screened taking into consideration conflict of interest, the provision of information regarding the strength of recommendation(s), and quality to be selected. Quality of CPGs was assessed using the AGREE II tool. RESULTS: After title and abstract screening, 51 CPGs were identified. Considering the inclusion/exclusion criteria, 26 CPGs were selected. After checking for quality, comprehensiveness, multi-professionality, and publication date, five CPGs were finally included in the review. The strong recommendations for people with knee and hip osteoarthritis consistently included in all the selected CPGs, sometimes called "core treatments", were patient education, exercise training, and weight reduction if overweight or obese. Generally, recommendations overlap in the CPGs. CONCLUSION: The systematic search revealed high-quality CPGs on osteoarthritis for the identification of "Best Evidence for Rehabilitation (be4rehab)" regarding interventions for rehabilitation of people with osteoarthritis.

The methodology of a "living" COVID-19 registry development in a clinical context.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe an innovative methodology of a registry development, constantly updated for the scientific assessment and analysis of the health status of the population with COVID-19. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A methodological study design to develop a multi-site, Living COVID-19 Registry of COVID-19 patients admitted in Fondazione Don Gnocchi centres started in March 2020. RESULTS: The integration of the living systematic reviews and focus group methodologies led to a development of a registry which includes 520 fields filled in for 748 COVID-19 patients recruited from 17 Fondazione Don Gnocchi centres. The result is an evidence and experience-based registry, according to the evolution of a new pathology which was not known before outbreak of March 2020 and with the aim of building knowledge to provide a better quality of care for COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSION: A Living COVID-19 Registry is an open, living and up to date access to large-scale patient-level data sets that could help identifying important factors and modulating variable for recognising risk profiles and predicting treatment success in COVID-19 patients hospitalized. This innovative methodology might be used for other registries, to be sure which the data collected is an appropriate means of accomplishing the scientific objectives planned. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: not applicable.

Effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions in adults with multi-organ dysfunction syndrome: A rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, defined as altered organ function in critically ill patients, is a possible consequence of COVID-19. Investigating the current evidence is therefore crucial in this pandemic, as early rehabilitation could be effective for the functioning of patients with multiple organ failure. This rapid review assesses the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions in adults with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. METHODS: A rapid review was conducted including only randomised control trials, published until 30 November 2020. All databases were investigated and the results synthesized narratively, evaluating the risk of bias and quality of evidence in all included studies. RESULTS: A total of 404 records were identified through database searches. After removal of duplicates 346 articles remained. After screening, 3 studies (90 participants) met the inclusion criteria. All studies reported positive effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation on muscle mass preservation compared with no treatment or standard physio-therapy. CONCLUSION: The lack of evidence on the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions does not allow any firm conclusion to be drawn. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation might be a possible rehabilitation intervention to prevent muscle volume loss and improve function in patients with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. However, further studies are needed to support these preliminary findings.

Cochrane collaborates with the World Health Organization to establish a Package of Rehabilitation Interventions based on the best available evidence.

The World Health Organization (WHO) and Cochrane have been collaborating for a long time. As a part of "Rehabilitation 2030: a call for action", WHO's Department of Noncommunicable Diseases is developing a Package of Rehabilitation Interventions (PRI) which provides a set of prioritized evidence-based interventions, along with resource requirements for their delivery. Cochrane Rehabilitation were asked to contribute to the methodological development of the PRI, with particular involvement in the initial phases of the evidence selection and extraction. The whole project comprises six phases of development: 1) definition of the 20 health relevant conditions; 2) selection and extraction of the current best evidence and expertise; 3) identification of the interventions to be included by expert consensus and (4) definition of the resources needed for their provision; 5) external review of the preliminary PRI and (6) dissemination of the final version of PRI. This joint WHO-Cochrane project is a major contribution to the Cochrane Knowledge Translation Strategy. PIR will be provided by WHO to all countries, particularly to help health policy makers in planning and implementing rehabilitation into Healthcare Systems.

Rehabilitation and COVID-19: a rapid living systematic review by Cochrane Rehabilitation Field updated as of December 31st, 2020 and synthesis of the scientific literature of 2020.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 infection significantly increased mortality risk and the burden of disability in most survivors, regardless of symptom severity at onset. The rehabilitation needs of people infected are receiving growing attention, as evidenced by the increasing number of publications, including those addressing the chronic consequences of infection. This rapid living systematic review reports the evidence published in November and December 2020 and summarises the entire body of literature on rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients published in 2020. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: This update was performed using the methodology reported by the second edition conducted by Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER Action. We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Pedro databases. Papers related to COVID-19 and rehabilitation were retrieved and summarised descriptively. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The search retrieved 4441 studies. After the removal of duplicates and the screening for title and abstract, we retained 105 studies. Of these, we included 54 in the qualitative synthesis of this update. According to OCEBM 2011 levels of evidence table, most studies (64.8%) fall within the category of level 4 evidence. Up to 40.7% of papers included COVID-19 patients in the postacute phase. In 2020, our rapid living systematic review included 230 studies; most of these (73.9%) were level 4 studies, 25.7% were level 3, and only one study was level 2. The evidence level improved over time. While most studies (44.8%) included patients with acute COVID-19, we observed a gradual increase in the number of reports about chronic symptoms and the long-term consequences of the infection. CONCLUSIONS: The update of the rapid living systematic review by Cochrane Rehabilitation Field demonstrates an increase in the level of evidence of studies addressing the rehabilitation needs associated with COVID-19 infection. Although most studies are still case reports/series, there is a trend towards conducting prospective investigations of the early natural history of the disease (first months post onset). High-quality-level studies on the efficacy of rehabilitation, and long-term monitoring of the disease and its sequelae are yet to emerge.

Rehabilitation and COVID-19: a rapid living systematic review 2020 by Cochrane Rehabilitation Field. Update as of October 31st, 2020.

INTRODUCTION: This living systematic review presents the monthly update of the second edition of the rapid living systematic review 2020 conducted by Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER Action Steering Committee. The aim of this study was to update the monthly COVID-19 and rehabilitation literature research up to October 31st, 2020. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Methodology described in the second edition of the rapid living systematic review 2020 conducted by Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER action was applied. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and PEDro databases were searched, and papers related to COVID-19 and rehabilitation were retrieved and summarized descriptively. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The database search retrieved 2704 publications. Duplicates were removed, and 1185 unique records were screened for inclusion. After screening titles, abstracts and full-texts, 22 papers were included in the present review. According to OCEBM 2011 Levels of Evidence table, 17 studies (77%) fall within the level of evidence 4 category, while the remainder (23%) are categorized as level of evidence 3. Most studies (N.=19; 86%) provided epidemiological data about the disease natural history/determining factor or the clinical presentation of COVID-19 infection, while only two studies focused on health service organization and intervention efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: The most recent published COVID-19 research relevant to rehabilitation primarily provides data on the clinical course and the clinical presentation of the pathology, rather than on rehabilitation interventions or service delivery. Studies with high levels of evidence regarding the efficacy of interventions, long-term monitoring, or new health service organization models are lacking.

The Structure of Research Questions in Randomized Controlled Trials in the Rehabilitation Field: A Methodological Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess whether and how the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcomes) format is described to frame research questions in randomized controlled trials looking at effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions. DESIGN: A methodological study was conducted. Randomized controlled trials in the rehabilitation field, published between July 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019, were included. The framing of the primary research question from each trial was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 97 randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis. The most frequent framing of the primary research question was as an "objective" statement (55%), and in 33% of the articles, this was stated as an "objective" together with a "hypothesis" description. All PICO elements were present in 55% of research questions, but only 49% have used the statement suggested by Cochrane. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that a specific item about the "research question" and the rationale that drove the proposed design following the form suggested by Cochrane should be included in the RCT Rehabilitation Checklist.