The Manual Therapy and Strengthening for the Hip (MASH) Trial: Protocol for a Multisite Randomized Trial of a Subgroup of Older Adults With Chronic Back and Hip Pain.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a disabling and costly condition for older adults that is difficult to properly classify and treat. In a cohort study, a subgroup of older adults with CLBP who had elevated hip pain and hip muscle weakness was identified; this subgroup differentiated itself by being at higher risk for future mobility decline. The primary purpose of this clinical trial is to evaluate whether a hip-focused low back pain (LBP) treatment provides better disability and physical performance outcomes for this at-risk group compared with a spine-focused LBP treatment. METHODS: This study is a multisite, single-blinded, randomized controlled, parallel arm, Phase II trial conducted across 3 clinical research sites. A total of 180 people aged between 60 and 85 years with CLBP and hip pain are being recruited. Participants undergo a comprehensive baseline assessment and are randomized into 1 of 2 intervention arms: hip-focused or spine-focused. They are treated twice weekly by a licensed physical therapist for 8 weeks and undergo follow-up assessments at 8 weeks and 6 months after randomization. Primary outcome measures include the Quebec Low Back Disability Scale and the 10-Meter Walk Test, which are measures of self-report and performance-based physical function, respectively. IMPACT: This multicenter, randomized clinical trial will determine whether a hip-focused or spine-focused physical therapist intervention results in improved disability and physical performance for a subgroup of older adults with CLBP and hip pain who are at increased risk of mobility decline. This trial will help further the development of effective interventions for this subgroup of older adults with CLBP.

Stakeholder Engagement in Pragmatic Clinical Trials: Emphasizing Relationships to Improve Pain Management Delivery and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The NIH-DOD-VA Pain Management Collaboratory (PMC) supports 11 pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) on nonpharmacological approaches to management of pain and co-occurring conditions in U.S. military and veteran health organizations. The Stakeholder Engagement Work Group is supported by a separately funded Coordinating Center and was formed with the goal of developing respectful and productive partnerships that will maximize the ability to generate trustworthy, internally valid findings directly relevant to veterans and military service members with pain, front-line primary care clinicians and health care teams, and health system leaders. The Stakeholder Engagement Work Group provides a forum to promote success of the PCTs in which principal investigators and/or their designees discuss various stakeholder engagement strategies, address challenges, and share experiences. Herein, we communicate features of meaningful stakeholder engagement in the design and implementation of pain management pragmatic trials, across the PMC. DESIGN: Our collective experiences suggest that an optimal stakeholder-engaged research project involves understanding the following: i) Who are research stakeholders in PMC trials? ii) How do investigators ensure that stakeholders represent the interests of a study's target treatment population, including individuals from underrepresented groups?, and iii) How can sustained stakeholder relationships help overcome implementation challenges over the course of a PCT? SUMMARY: Our experiences outline the role of stakeholders in pain research and may inform future pragmatic trial researchers regarding methods to engage stakeholders effectively.

Unraveling the Mechanisms of Manual Therapy: Modeling an Approach.

Synopsis Manual therapy interventions are popular among individual health care providers and their patients; however, systematic reviews do not strongly support their effectiveness. Small treatment effect sizes of manual therapy interventions may result from a "one-size-fits-all" approach to treatment. Mechanistic-based treatment approaches to manual therapy offer an intriguing alternative for identifying patients likely to respond to manual therapy. However, the current lack of knowledge of the mechanisms through which manual therapy interventions inhibit pain limits such an approach. The nature of manual therapy interventions further confounds such an approach, as the related mechanisms are likely a complex interaction of factors related to the patient, the provider, and the environment in which the intervention occurs. Therefore, a model to guide both study design and the interpretation of findings is necessary. We have previously proposed a model suggesting that the mechanical force from a manual therapy intervention results in systemic neurophysiological responses leading to pain inhibition. In this clinical commentary, we provide a narrative appraisal of the model and recommendations to advance the study of manual therapy mechanisms. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(1):8-18. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7476.

Age Group Comparisons of TENS Response Among Individuals With Chronic Axial Low Back Pain.

UNLABELLED: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a highly prevalent and disabling musculoskeletal pain condition among older adults. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is commonly used to treat CLBP, however response to TENS in older adults compared with younger adults is untested. In a dose-response study stratified by age, 60 participants with axial CLBP (20 young, 20 middle-aged, 20 older) received four 20-minute sessions of high-frequency high-intensity TENS over a 2- to 3-week period in a laboratory-controlled setting. Experimental measures of pain sensitivity (mechanical pressure pain detection threshold) and central pain excitability (phasic heat temporal summation and heat aftersensations) were assessed before and after TENS. Episodic or immediate axial CLBP relief was assessed after TENS via measures of resting pain, movement-evoked-pain, and self-reported disability. Cumulative or prolonged axial CLBP relief was assessed by comparing daily pain reports across sessions. Independent of age, individuals experienced episodic increase in the pressure pain detection threshold and reduction in aftersensation after TENS application. Similarly, all groups, on average, experienced episodic axial CLBP relief via improved resting pain, movement-evoked pain, and disability report. Under this design, no cumulative effect was observed as daily pain did not improve for any age group across the 4 sessions. However, older adults received higher TENS amplitude across all sessions to achieve TENS responses similar to those in younger adults. These findings suggest that older adults experience similar episodic axial CLBP relief to that of younger individuals after high-frequency, high-intensity TENS when higher dose parameters are used. PERSPECTIVE: This study examined age group differences in experimental and axial CLBP response to TENS, delivered under the current recommended parameters of strong, but tolerable amplitude. Older adults had comparable TENS response although at higher TENS amplitude than younger adults, which may have important mechanistic and clinical implications.

Basis for spinal manipulative therapy: a physical therapist perspective.

Physical therapists internationally provide spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) to patients with musculoskeletal pain complaints. SMT has been a part of physical therapist practice since the profession's beginning. Early physical therapist clinical decision making for SMT was influenced by the approaches of osteopathic and orthopedic physicians at the time. Currently a segmental clinical decision making approach and a responder clinical decision making approach are two of the more common models through which physical therapist clinical use of SMT is directed. The focus of segmental clinical decision making is upon identifying a dysfunctional vertebral segment with the application of SMT to restore mobility and/or alleviate pain. The responder clinical decision making approach attempts to categorize individuals based on a pattern of signs and symptoms suggesting a likely positive response to SMT. The present manuscript provides an overview of common physical therapist clinical decision making approaches to SMT and presents areas requiring further study in order to optimize patient response.