Description of massage interventions in randomised clinical trials for neck pain; a review using the TIDieR checklist.

OBJECTIVE: How interventions are reported can impact the ability to implement these intervention in clinical practice. Therefore, our aim is to assess the reporting of massage interventions in randomised controlled trials for patients with neck pain. DATA SOURCES: This manuscript concerns a secondary analysis of trials evaluating massage for neck pain selected for a scoping review. An updated literature search was completed using four databases to 31 July 2023. REVIEW METHODS: Trials were selected that evaluate massage interventions. Two independent assessors extracted descriptive information, methodological quality (PEDro-scale) and assessed completeness of reporting of the intervention using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDier-checklist). We present frequencies of the extracted data. RESULTS: We included 35 trials (2840 patients) with neck pain. Most trials (n = 23) included patients with chronic non-specific neck pain. We found a wide variety of massage interventions from Chinese massage, Swedish massage to myofascial release. In addition, the dose, number of sessions and the duration of the intervention varied widely. The methodological quality overall was fair to good (varied between 4-8/10), and we found a moderate completeness of reporting. All trials provided the name of the intervention, 30 (86%) provided a rationale and 26 (74%) trials described details of the massage intervention. CONCLUSION: The massage interventions were moderately described in trials in patients with neck pain, but provided enough information to guide the decision making for designing future Network Meta-analysis as to what trials need to be considered when grouping massage interventions in a clinically relevant way.

The Effect of a Personalized Newsletter to Physical Therapists on Patient Recruitment: A Cluster Randomized Trial in Primary Physiotherapy Care.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a personalized newsletter compared with a standard newsletter on patient recruitment in physiotherapy research. METHODS: We performed a cluster-randomized trial including 120 physiotherapists who recruited patients for a prospective cohort and were randomly assigned to either receiving personalized feedback in a newsletter (intervention group) or a standard newsletter (control group). We calculated the difference in the number of patients included in the study corrected for inclusion time between both groups. RESULTS: The physiotherapists in the control group (n = 59) included 110 patients (35.4% of the total number of patients included) compared with an inclusion of 200 patients (64.6% of the total number of patients included) by the physiotherapists in the intervention group (n = 61), a difference of 90 patients in favor of the intervention group. However, when corrected for inclusion time and a cluster effect, we found no statistically significant difference between both groups. In addition, therapists who did not include a single patient (inactive therapists) were evenly divided between the 2 groups (n = 29 [49%] in the control group; n = 30 [49%] in the intervention group). CONCLUSIONS: A personalized newsletter does not significantly increase the number of recruited patients by physiotherapists. However, therapists receiving personalized feedback recruited nearly double the number of patients compared with the ones receiving standard feedback.

Differences in Patient Characteristics, Number of Treatments, and Recovery Rates Between Referred and Self-referred Patients With Nonspecific Neck Pain in Manual Therapy: A Secondary Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: In various countries, patients can visit a physiotherapist via self-referral. The aims of this study were to evaluate whether there are differences between individuals with nonspecific neck pain who consult a manual therapist via self-referral and those who do so via referral by a physician concerning patient characteristics, number of treatments, and recovery; and whether (self-)referral is associated with recovery. METHODS: This study is part of a prospective cohort study with posttreatment and 12-month follow-up in a Dutch manual-therapy setting. Adult patients with nonspecific neck pain were eligible for participation. Baseline measurements included demographic data and data concerning neck pain. At follow-up, number of treatments, recovery, and satisfaction were assessed. To evaluate differences between the groups, we used the χ2 test and the independent t test. A logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between referral status and recovery. RESULTS: In total, 272 manual therapists participated and 1311 patients were included. Of 831 patients whose referral data are available, about half patients consulted a manual therapist by self-referral. The mean number of treatments was 5.4, which did not differ between the 2 groups. We found no differences between the groups concerning age, sex, pain intensity at baseline, or recovery rate. Patients in the self-referral group experienced acute neck pain more frequently, had recurrent complaints more often, and reported less disability compared to the referred group. Referral status was not associated with recovery. CONCLUSION: We found several small differences between self-referred and referred patients.

Prospective Cohort Study of Patients With Neck Pain in a Manual Therapy Setting: Design and Baseline Measures.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to describe the design and baseline measurements of a prospective multicenter cohort study in patients with neck pain treated by Dutch manual therapists. Objectives of the study were to determine which patients seek help from a manual therapist, to describe usual care manual therapy in patients with neck pain, to examine the occurrence of nonserious adverse events after treatment, to describe predictors of adverse events, and to determine whether the occurrence of nonserious adverse events affect outcome after manual therapy care. METHODS: During a 3-month inclusion period, consecutive patients aged between 18 and 80 years presenting with neck pain in manual therapy practices in The Netherlands were included in the study. Baseline questionnaires included the Numeric Rating Scale, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire, Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), and Patient Expectancy List. Within the treatment episode, manual therapist clinical reasoning and applied interventions were registered and patients reported on adverse events. At the end of the treatment episode and at 12-month follow-up, pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale), functional outcomes (NDI, Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire), personal factors (FABQ), and global perceived effect were measured. RESULTS: During the 3-month inclusion period, 263 participating manual therapists collected data on 1193 patients with neck pain. Most patients (69.4%) were female. The mean age was 44.7 (±13.7) years. The NDI showed overall mild disability (mean score 26%). Mean scores in pain intensity were moderate (4.8), and there was low risk of prolonged disability owing to personal factors (FABQ). CONCLUSION: This study provides information on baseline characteristics of patients visiting manual therapists for neck pain. In The Netherlands, patients seeking care of manual therapists are comparable to patients in other countries regarding demographics and neck pain characteristics.

Does the outcome of diagnostic ultrasound influence the treatment modalities and recovery in patients with shoulder pain in physiotherapy practice? Results from a prospective cohort study.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study including patients with shoulder pain in primary care physiotherapy. BACKGROUND: There is an increased tendency to use diagnostic ultrasound to aid the diagnostic strategy and target treatment. It is a relatively cheap and accessible imaging technique but the implications for practice and patients are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To study the influence of diagnostic ultrasound (DUS) on diagnostic work-up, treatment modalities and recovery. METHODS: Participants (n = 389) with a new episode of shoulder pain were assessed at baseline and followed for 6, 12 and 26 weeks. Diagnostic work-up, including the use of DUS, and treatment strategies were reported by the therapists at 3, 6 and 12 weeks. RESULTS: Most patients (41%) were diagnosed with subacromial impingement/pain syndrome after physical examination or DUS. DUS was used in 31% of the participants. Tendinopathy was the most found abnormality in this sub-population. Patients who underwent DUS were more frequently treated using exercise therapy. Patients that not had DUS were more likely to receive massage therapy, trigger point therapy or mobilisation techniques. Logistic regression analyses did not show a significant association between DUS and recovery after 26 weeks (0.88, 95%CI:0.50-1.57). Correcting for the therapist as a confounder using a multilevel binary logistic regression did not show a significant cluster effect. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic US as a work-up component does not seem to influence diagnosis or recovery but does influence the choice of treatment modality. Conclusions are limited to observational data. High quality randomized trials should study the effect of DUS on recovery.

Clinical Practice Guideline for Physical Therapy Assessment and Treatment in Patients With Nonspecific Neck Pain.

The Royal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy (KNGF) issued a clinical practice guideline for physical therapists that addresses the assessment and treatment of patients with nonspecific neck pain, including cervical radiculopathy, in Dutch primary care. Recommendations were based on a review of published systematic reviews.During the intake, the patient is screened for serious pathologies and corresponding patterns. Patients with cervical radiculopathy can be included or excluded through corresponding signs and symptoms and possibly diagnostic tests (Spurling test, traction/distraction test, and Upper Limb Tension Test). History taking is done to gather information about patients' limitations, course of pain, and prognostic factors (eg, coping style) and answers to health-related questions.In case of a normal recovery (treatment profile A), management should be hands-off, and patients should receive advice from the physical therapist and possibly some simple exercises to supplement "acting as usual."In case of a delayed/deviant recovery (treatment profile B), the physical therapist is advised to use, in addition to the recommendations for treatment profile A, forms of mobilization and/or manipulation in combination with exercise therapy. Other interventions may also be considered. The physical therapist is advised not to use dry needling, low-level laser, electrotherapy, ultrasound, traction, and/or a cervical collar.In case of a delayed/deviant recovery with clear and/or dominant psychosocial prognostic factors (treatment profile C), these factors should first be addressed by the physical therapist, when possible, or the patient should be referred to a specialist, when necessary.In case of neck pain grade III (treatment profile D), the therapy resembles that for profile B, but the use of a cervical collar for pain reduction may be considered. The advice is to use it sparingly: only for a short period per day and only for a few weeks.

Massage therapy has short-term benefits for people with common musculoskeletal disorders compared to no treatment: a systematic review.

QUESTION: Is massage therapy effective for people with musculoskeletal disorders compared to any other treatment or no treatment? DESIGN: Systematic review of randomised clinical trials. PARTICIPANTS: People with musculoskeletal disorders. INTERVENTIONS: Massage therapy (manual manipulation of the soft tissues) as a stand-alone intervention. OUTCOME: The primary outcomes were pain and function. RESULTS: The 26 eligible randomised trials involved 2565 participants. The mean sample size was 95 participants (range 16 to 579) per study; 10 studies were considered to be at low risk of bias. Overall, low-to-moderate-level evidence indicated that massage reduces pain in the short term compared to no treatment in people with shoulder pain and osteoarthritis of the knee, but not in those with low back pain or neck pain. Furthermore, low-to-moderate-level evidence indicated that massage improves function in the short term compared to no treatment in people with low back pain, knee arthritis or shoulder pain. Low-to-very-low-level evidence from single studies indicated no clear benefits of massage over acupuncture, joint mobilisation, manipulation or relaxation therapy in people with fibromyalgia, low back pain and general musculoskeletal pain. CONCLUSIONS: Massage therapy, as a stand-alone treatment, reduces pain and improves function compared to no treatment in some musculoskeletal conditions. When massage is compared to another active treatment, no clear benefit was evident.

Balneotherapy (or spa therapy) for rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: No cure for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is known at present, so treatment often focuses on management of symptoms such as pain, stiffness and mobility. Treatment options include pharmacological interventions, physical therapy treatments and balneotherapy. Balneotherapy is defined as bathing in natural mineral or thermal waters (e.g. mineral baths, sulphur baths, Dead Sea baths), using mudpacks or doing both. Despite its popularity, reported scientific evidence for the effectiveness or efficacy of balneotherapy is sparse. This review, which evaluates the effects of balneotherapy in patients with RA, is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003 and updated in 2008. OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review on the benefits and harms of balneotherapy in patients with RA in terms of pain, improvement, disability, tender joints, swollen joints and adverse events. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane 'Rehabilitation and Related Therapies' Field Register (to December 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2014, Issue 1), MEDLIINE (1950 to December 2014), EMBASE (1988 to December 2014), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982 to December 2014), the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) (1985 to December 2014), PsycINFO (1806 to December 2014) and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). We applied no language restrictions; however, studies not reported in English, Dutch, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, German or French are awaiting assessment. We also searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing and recently completed trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were eligible if they were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) consisting of participants with definitive or classical RA as defined by the American Rheumatism Association (ARA) criteria of 1958, the ARA/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria of 1988 or the ACR/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria of 2010, or by studies using the criteria of Steinbrocker.Balneotherapy had to be the intervention under study, and had to be compared with another intervention or with no intervention.The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International League Against Rheumatism (ILAR) determined in 1992 a core set of eight endpoints in clinical trials concerning patients with RA. We considered pain, improvement, disability, tender joints, swollen joints and adverse events among the main outcome measures. We excluded studies when only laboratory variables were reported as outcome measures. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, performed data extraction and assessed risk of bias. We resolved disagreements by consensus and, if necessary, by third party adjudication. MAIN RESULTS: This review includes two new studies and a total of nine studies involving 579 participants. Unfortunately, most studies showed an unclear risk of bias in most domains. Four out of nine studies did not contribute to the analysis, as they presented no data.One study involving 45 participants with hand RA compared mudpacks versus placebo. We found no statistically significant differences in terms of pain on a 0 to 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) (mean difference (MD) 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.84 to 1.84), improvement (risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.70) or number of swollen joints on a scale from 0 to 28 (MD 0.60, 95% CI -0.90 to 2.10) (very low level of evidence). We found a very low level of evidence of reduction in the number of tender joints on a scale from 0 to 28 (MD -4.60, 95% CI -8.72 to -0.48; 16% absolute difference). We reported no physical disability and presented no data on withdrawals due to adverse events or on serious adverse events.Two studies involving 194 participants with RA evaluated the effectiveness of additional radon in carbon dioxide baths. We found no statistically significant differences between groups for all outcomes at three-month follow-up (low to moderate level of evidence). We noted some benefit of additional radon at six months in terms of pain frequency (RR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4 to 0.9; 31% reduction; improvement in one or more points (categories) on a 4-point scale; moderate level of evidence) and 9.6% reduction in pain intensity on a 0 to 100-mm VAS (MD 9.6 mm, 95% CI 1.6 to 17.6; moderate level of evidence). We also observed some benefit in one study including 60 participants in terms of improvement in one or more categories based on a 4-point scale (RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1 to 4.7; 30% absolute difference; low level of evidence). Study authors did not report physical disability, tender joints, swollen joints, withdrawals due to adverse events or serious adverse events.One study involving 148 participants with RA compared balneotherapy (seated immersion) versus hydrotherapy (exercises in water), land exercises or relaxation therapy. We found no statistically significant differences in pain on the McGill Questionnaire or in physical disability (very low level of evidence) between balneotherapy and the other interventions. No data on improvement, tender joints, swollen joints, withdrawals due to adverse events or serious adverse events were presented.One study involving 57 participants with RA evaluated the effectiveness of mineral baths (balneotherapy) versus Cyclosporin A. We found no statistically significant differences in pain intensity on a 0 to 100-mm VAS (MD 9.64, 95% CI -1.66 to 20.94; low level of evidence) at 8 weeks (absolute difference 10%). We found some benefit of balneotherapy in overall improvement on a 5-point scale at eight weeks of 54% (RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.44 to 3.83). We found no statistically significant differences (low level of evidence) in the number of swollen joints, but some benefit of Cyclosporin A in the number of tender joints (MD 8.9, 95% CI 3.8 to 14; very low level of evidence). Physical disability, withdrawals due to adverse events and serious adverse events were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall evidence is insufficient to show that balneotherapy is more effective than no treatment, that one type of bath is more effective than another or that one type of bath is more effective than mudpacks, exercise or relaxation therapy.

Conservative interventions for treating work-related complaints of the arm, neck or shoulder in adults.

BACKGROUND: Work-related upper limb disorder (WRULD), repetitive strain injury (RSI), occupational overuse syndrome (OOS) and work-related complaints of the arm, neck or shoulder (CANS) are the most frequently used umbrella terms for disorders that develop as a result of repetitive movements, awkward postures and impact of external forces such as those associated with operating vibrating tools. Work-related CANS, which is the term we use in this review, severely hampers the working population. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of conservative interventions for work-related complaints of the arm, neck or shoulder (CANS) in adults on pain, function and work-related outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, 31 May 2013), MEDLINE (1950 to 31 May 2013), EMBASE (1988 to 31 May 2013), CINAHL (1982 to 31 May 2013), AMED (1985 to 31 May 2013), PsycINFO (1806 to 31 May 2013), the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro; inception to 31 May 2013) and the Occupational Therapy Systematic Evaluation of Evidence Database (OTseeker; inception to 31 May 2013). We did not apply any language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised controlled trials evaluating conservative interventions for work-related complaints of the arm, neck or shoulder in adults. We excluded trials undertaken to test injections and surgery. We included studies that evaluated effects on pain, functional status or work ability. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of the included studies. When studies were sufficiently similar, we performed statistical pooling of reported results. MAIN RESULTS: We included 44 studies (62 publications) with 6,580 participants that evaluated 25 different interventions. We categorised these interventions according to their working mechanisms into exercises, ergonomics, behavioural and other interventions.Overall, we judged 35 studies as having a high risk of bias mainly because of an unknown randomisation procedure, lack of a concealed allocation procedure, unblinded trial participants or lack of an intention-to-treat analysis.We found very low-quality evidence showing that exercises did not improve pain in comparison with no treatment (five studies, standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.08 to 0.03), or minor intervention controls (three studies, SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.87 to 0.37) or when provided as additional treatment (two studies, inconsistent results) at short-term follow-up or at long-term follow-up. Results were similar for recovery, disability and sick leave. Specific exercises led to increased pain at short-term follow-up when compared with general exercises (four studies, SMD 0.45, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.75)We found very low-quality evidence indicating that ergonomic interventions did not lead to a decrease in pain when compared with no intervention at short-term follow-up (three studies, SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.22) but did decrease pain at long-term follow-up (four studies, SMD -0.76, 95% CI -1.35 to -0.16). There was no effect on disability but sick leave decreased in two studies (risk ratio (RR) 0.48, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.76). None of the ergonomic interventions was more beneficial for any outcome measures when compared with another treatment or with no treatment or with placebo.Behavioural interventions had inconsistent effects on pain and disability, with some subgroups showing benefit and others showing no significant improvement when compared with no treatment, minor intervention controls or other behavioural interventions.In the eight studies that evaluated various other interventions, there was no evidence of a clear beneficial effect of any of the interventions provided. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found very low-quality evidence indicating that pain, recovery, disability and sick leave are similar after exercises when compared with no treatment, with minor intervention controls or with exercises provided as additional treatment to people with work-related complaints of the arm, neck or shoulder. Low-quality evidence also showed that ergonomic interventions did not decrease pain at short-term follow-up but did decrease pain at long-term follow-up. There was no evidence of an effect on other outcomes. For behavioural and other interventions, there was no evidence of a consistent effect on any of the outcomes.Studies are needed that include more participants, that are clear about the diagnosis of work-relatedness and that report findings according to current guidelines.

Aquatic exercise & balneotherapy in musculoskeletal conditions.

This is a best-evidence synthesis providing an evidence-based summary on the effectiveness of aquatic exercises and balneotherapy in the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions. The most prevalent musculoskeletal conditions addressed in this review include: low back pain, osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia and rheumatoid arthritis. Over 30 years of research demonstrates that exercises in general, and specifically aquatic exercises, are beneficial for reducing pain and disability in many musculoskeletal conditions demonstrating small to moderate effect sizes ranging between 0.19 and 0.32. Balneotherapy might be beneficial, but the evidence is yet insufficient to make a definitive statement about its use. High-quality trials are needed on balneotherapy and aquatic exercises research especially in specific patient categories that might benefit most.

Headache: the placebo effects in the control groups in randomized clinical trials; an analysis of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to describe the effects in the placebo and "no treatment" arms in trials with headache patients. METHOD: This is a secondary analysis of randomized controlled trials from 8 systematic reviews and selected trials with a "no treatment" or placebo control group. The different types of "no treatment" and placebo interventions were assessed and classified into 6 subgroups. The analyses were carried out according to type of outcome variable. RESULTS: In total, 119 studies were included (7119 participants). The mean recovery rate in all control groups was 35.7%. Significantly more participants recovered in control groups of pharmacological studies than in nonpharmacological studies: 38.5% vs 15.0%, respectively. Adults were more likely to recover in nonpharmacological studies and children in pharmacological studies. CONCLUSIONS: The mean recovery rate in the control groups was 36%. The recovery rate varied substantially between type of intervention and patients.

Methodological quality of studies on the measurement properties of neck pain and disability questionnaires: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to obtain an overview of the methodological quality of studies on the measurement properties of neck pain and disability questionnaires and to describe how well various aspects of the design and statistical analyses of studies on measurement properties are performed. METHODS: A systematic review was performed of published studies on the measurement properties of neck pain and disability questionnaires. Two reviewers independently rated the quality of the studies using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. This checklist was developed in an international Delphi consensus study. RESULTS: A total of 47 articles were included on the measurement properties of 8 different questionnaires. The methodological quality of the included studies was adequate on some aspects (often, adequate statistical analyses are used for assessing reliability, measurement error, and construct validity) but can be improved on other aspects. The most important methodological aspects that need to be improved are as follows: assessing unidimensionality in internal consistency analysis, stable patients and similar test conditions in studies on reliability and measurement error, and more emphasis on the relevance and comprehensiveness of the items in content validity studies. Furthermore, it is recommended that studies on construct validity and responsiveness should be based on predefined hypotheses and that better statistical methods should be used in responsiveness studies. CONCLUSION: Considering the importance of adequate measurement properties, it is concluded that, in the field of measuring neck pain and disability, there is room for improvement in the methodological quality of studies measurement properties.

Explaining the ineffectiveness of a Tai Chi fall prevention training for community-living older people: a process evaluation alongside a randomized clinical trial (RCT).

The results of a randomized clinical trial (RCT) on the effects of a Tai Chi fall prevention in community-living older people with a high risk of falling in the Netherlands showed no beneficial effects on falls and secondary outcomes (e.g., balance, fear of falling). The aim of this study is to provide insight in process-related factors that may have influenced the effectiveness of the intervention. The intervention consisted of Tai Chi Chuan (TCC) training for 1 h twice a week for 13 weeks. We used self-administered questionnaires and registration forms to collect data from participants and instructors. We analyzed quantitative data by means of descriptive statistics and categorized qualitative data based on the content of the answers given. Of the participants, that started the program 89 (79%) completed the intervention, but a minority of 47% attended 80% of more of the lessons. All participants and instructors were positive about the program and most participants reported benefits from the intervention. Suggestions for improvements mainly relate to adjustments of training aspects. The main process-related factors that may be have influenced the lack of beneficial effects on falls and secondary outcomes are the relatively high withdrawal and the low adherence rates.

The effects of Tai Chi on fall prevention, fear of falling and balance in older people: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Tai Chi (TC) is an exercise training that is becoming increasingly popular as an intervention for single fall prevention. This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of TC on fall rate, fear of falling and balance in older people. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials published between 1988 and January 2009 were included. In the Netherlands (2009) we used random effects models for the analyses, with data reported as incidence rate ratios (IRR) for falls and standardized mean differences (SMD) for fear of falling and balance. RESULTS: Nine trials (representing 2203 participants) were included in the analyses. Compared with exercise controls, TC participants showed significant improvements in fall rates (2 trials included, IRR: 0.51, 95% CI 0.38-0.68) and static balance (2 trials included, SMD: 0.47, 95% CI 0.23-0.72). Compared with non-exercise controls, no improvement was found for TC participants in fall rates (5 trials, IRR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.60-1.03) or static balance (2 trials, SMD: 0.30, 95% CI -0.50-1.10), but a significant improvement was found for fear of falling (SMD: 0.37, 95% CI=0.03-0.70). CONCLUSIONS: Currently there is insufficient evidence to conclude whether TC is effective in fall prevention, decreasing fear of falling and improving balance in people over age 50 years.

A systematic review on the effectiveness of complementary and alternative medicine for chronic non-specific low-back pain.

The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the effects of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT), acupuncture and herbal medicine for chronic non-specific LBP. A comprehensive search was conducted by an experienced librarian from the Cochrane Back Review Group (CBRG) in multiple databases up to December 22, 2008. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with chronic non-specific LBP, which evaluated at least one clinically relevant, patient-centred outcome measure were included. Two authors working independently from one another assessed the risk of bias using the criteria recommended by the CBRG and extracted the data. The data were pooled when clinically homogeneous and statistically possible or were otherwise qualitatively described. GRADE was used to determine the quality of the evidence. In total, 35 RCTs (8 SMT, 20 acupuncture, 7 herbal medicine), which examined 8,298 patients, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Approximately half of these (2 SMT, 8 acupuncture, 7 herbal medicine) were thought to have a low risk of bias. In general, the pooled effects for the studied interventions demonstrated short-term relief or improvement only. The lack of studies with a low-risk of bias, especially in regard to SMT precludes any strong conclusions; however, the principal findings, which are based upon low- to very-low-quality evidence, suggest that SMT does not provide a more clinically beneficial effect compared with sham, passive modalities or any other intervention for treatment of chronic low-back pain. There is evidence, however, that acupuncture provides a short-term clinically relevant effect when compared with a waiting list control or when acupuncture is added to another intervention. Although there are some good results for individual herbal medicines in short-term individual trials, the lack of homogeneity across studies did not allow for a pooled estimate of the effect. In general, these results are in agreement with other recent systematic reviews on SMT, but in contrast with others. These results are also in agreement with recent reviews on acupuncture and herbal medicine. Randomized trials with a low risk of bias and adequate sample sizes are directly needed.

WITHDRAWN: Ergonomic and physiotherapeutic interventions for treating work-related complaints of the arm, neck or shoulder in adults.

BACKGROUND: Conservative interventions such as physiotherapy and ergonomic adjustments (such as keyboard adjustments or ergonomic advice) play a major role in the treatment of most work-related complaints of the arm, neck or shoulder (CANS). OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aims to determine whether conservative interventions have a significant impact on outcomes for work-related CANS in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (March 2005) and Cochrane Rehabilitation and Related Therapies Field Specialised Register (March 2005), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2005), PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and reference lists of articles. The date of the last search was March 2005. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials studying conservative interventions (e.g. exercises, relaxation, physical applications, biofeedback, myofeedback and work-place adjustments) for adults suffering CANS. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected trials from the search yield, assessed the methodological quality using the Delphi list, and extracted relevant data. We pooled data or, in the event of clinical heterogeneity or lack of data, we used a rating system to assess levels of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: For this update we included six additional studies; 21 trials in total. Seventeen trials included people with chronic non-specific neck or shoulder complaints, or non-specific upper extremity disorders. Over 25 interventions were evaluated; five main subgroups of interventions could be determined: exercises, manual therapy, massage, ergonomics, and energised splint. Overall, the quality of the studies was poor.In 14 studies a form of exercise was evaluated, and contrary to the previous review we now found limited evidence about the effectiveness of exercises when compared to massage and conflicting evidence when exercises are compared to no treatment. In this update there is limited evidence for adding breaks during computer work; massage as add-on treatment on manual therapy, manual therapy as add-on treatment on exercises; and some keyboard designs when compared to other keyboards or placebo in participants with carpal tunnel syndrome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence for the effectiveness of keyboards with an alternative force-displacement of the keys or an alternative geometry, and limited evidence for the effectiveness of exercises compared to massage; breaks during computer work compared to no breaks; massage as an add-on treatment to manual therapy; and manual therapy as an add-on treatment to exercises.

Behavioral treatments of chronic tension-type headache in adults: are they beneficial?

To assess the efficacy of behavioral treatments in patients with tension headache. Medline, Cinahl, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library were searched from inception to October 2007 and reference lists were checked. We selected randomized trials evaluating behavioral treatments (e.g., relaxation, electromyographic [EMG] biofeedback, and cognitive behavioral training) in patients with tension-type headache (TTH). We assessed the risk of bias using the Delphi list and extracted data from the original reports. A qualitative analysis was carried out. We found 44 trials (2618 patients), which were included in this review, of which only 5 studies (11.4%) were considered to have low risk of bias. Most trials lacked adequate power to show statistical significant differences, but frequently, recovery/improvement rates did not reach clinical relevance. In 8 studies, relaxation treatment was compared with waiting list conditions, and in 11 studies, biofeedback was compared with waiting list conditions, both showing inconsistent results. On the basis of the available literature, we found no indications that relaxation, EMG biofeedback, or cognitive behavioral treatment is better than no treatment, waiting list, or placebo controls.

The ability of the Acute Low Back Pain Screening Questionnaire to predict sick leave in patients with acute neck pain.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the use of the Acute Low Back Pain Screening Questionnaire (ALBPSQ) in patients with acute neck pain in general practice. The ALBPSQ is a biopsychosocial screening questionnaire containing 20 items concerning mainly psychosocial variables. Although originally developed for patients with low back pain, it may also be applicable for patients with neck pain. We evaluated its reliability and determined an optimal cutoff point for predicting future sick leave. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted on consecutive patients with acute neck pain in general practice with a follow-up period of 1 year. Reliability was determined by means of a test-retest procedure with a 1-week interval. The total number of days on sick leave was added up based on self-reported questionnaires. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-seven patients were included in the study, of which 180 patients were included in the analysis. Almost half of the patients were better or much improved within the first week. Test-retest reliability was high (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.92). Almost 40% of the patients reported sick leave because of neck pain during the follow-up period. An optimal cutoff score of 72 was calculated for predicting future sick leave, with a sensitivity of 77% and a specificity of 62%. The area under the curve of the receiver operator characteristics curve was regarded doubtful (0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-0.76). CONCLUSION: The ALBPSQ has shown to be a reliable instrument and potentially useful in a screening procedure for future sick leave in patients with acute neck pain in general practice.