Manipulative therapy in addition to usual medical care accelerates recovery of shoulder complaints at higher costs: economic outcomes of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder complaints are common in primary care and have unfavourable long term prognosis. Our objective was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of manipulative therapy of the cervicothoracic spine and the adjacent ribs in addition to usual medical care (UMC) by the general practitioner in the treatment of shoulder complaints. METHODS: This economic evaluation was conducted alongside a randomized trial in primary care. Included were 150 patients with shoulder complaints and a dysfunction of the cervicothoracic spine and adjacent ribs. Patients were treated with UMC (NSAID's, corticosteroid injection or referral to physical therapy) and were allocated at random (yes/no) to manipulative therapy (manipulation and mobilization). Patient perceived recovery, severity of main complaint, shoulder pain, disability and general health were outcome measures. Data about direct and indirect costs were collected by means of a cost diary. RESULTS: Manipulative therapy as add-on to UMC accelerated recovery on all outcome measures included. At 26 weeks after randomization, both groups reported similar recovery rates (41% vs. 38%), but the difference between groups in improvement of severity of the main complaint, shoulder pain and disability sustained. Compared to the UMC group the total costs were higher in the manipulative group (€1167 vs. €555). This is explained mainly by the costs of the manipulative therapy itself and the higher costs due sick leave from work. The cost effectiveness ratio showed that additional manipulative treatment is more costly but also more effective than UMC alone. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve shows that a 50%-probability of recovery with AMT within 6 months after initiation of treatment is achieved at €2876. CONCLUSION: Manipulative therapy in addition to UMC accelerates recovery and is more effective than UMC alone on the long term, but is associated with higher costs. INTERNATIONAL STANDARD RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL NUMBER REGISTER: ISRCTN11216.

Efficacy of vitamin D3 supplementation in preventing fractures in elderly women: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of vitamin D(3) in preventing fractures and falls has been explored in a number of clinical trials. However, recent evidence revealed new questions about the adequate doses of vitamin D(3) supplementation and its efficacy in fracture prevention independent of calcium supplements for various types of fractures. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a meta-analysis to estimate the effectiveness of 800 IU daily vitamin D(3) supplementation for increasing bone mineral density (BMD) and preventing fractures in postmenopausal women. METHODS: Medline and EMBASE were searched for controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of cholecalciferol (vitamin D(3)) against placebo with or without background calcium supplementation in the treatment of postmenopausal women. RESULTS: Eight controlled trials evaluating the effect of vitamin D(3) supplementation with or without calcium were assessed. Of 12 658 women included in a Bayesian meta-analysis, 6089 received vitamin D(3) (with or without calcium) and 6569 received placebo (with or without calcium). Compared to placebo, vitamin D(3) with calcium supplementation showed beneficial effects on the incidence of non-vertebral (odds ratio [OR] 0.77, 95% credibility limit [CL] 0.6-0.93) and hip (OR 0.70, 95% CL 0.53-0.90) fractures, while the effects on non-vertebral-non-hip fractures (OR 0.84, 95% CL 0.67-1.04) % point increase) were associated with more uncertainty. Vitamin D(3) supplementation showed a 70% probability of being a better treatment than placebo for the prevention of non-vertebral fractures, hip fractures, and non-vertebral, non-hip fractures. Compared to calcium supplementation, vitamin D(3) plus calcium reduced non-vertebral fractures (OR 0.68, 95% CL 0.43-1.01) and non-vertebral, non-hip fractures (OR 0.64, 95% CL 0.38-0.99), but did not reduce hip fractures (OR 1.03, 95% CL 0.39-2.25). Key limitations to this analysis include a small number of studies and heterogeneity in the study populations. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis supports the use of vitamin D3 of 800 IU daily to reduce the incidence of osteoporotic non-vertebral, hip, and non-vertebral-non-hip fractures in elderly women. Vitamin D(3) with calcium appears to achieve benefits above those attained with calcium supplementation alone for non-vertebral and non-vertebral-non-hip fractures.

Manipulative therapy in addition to usual care for patients with shoulder complaints: results of physical examination outcomes in a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of manipulative therapy on the shoulder girdle, in addition to usual care provided by the general practitioner, on the outcomes of physical examination tests for the treatment of shoulder complaints. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial in a primary care setting in the Netherlands. A total of 150 participants were recruited from December 2000 until December 2002. All patients received usual care by the general practitioner. Usual care included one or more of the following depending on the needs of the patient: information/advice, oral analgesics or nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, corticosteroid injections, exercises, and massage. In addition to usual care, the intervention group received manipulative therapy, up to 6 treatment sessions in a 12-week period. Twenty-four physical examination tests were done at baseline and after 6, 12, and 26 weeks. Factor analysis was done to reduce the number of outcome measures. RESULTS: The factor analysis resulted in 4 factors: "shoulder pain," "neck pain," "shoulder mobility," and "neck mobility." At 6 weeks, no significant differences between groups were found. At 12 weeks, the mean changes of all 4 factors favored the intervention group; the factors "shoulder pain" and "neck pain" reached statistical significance (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-2.1). At 26 weeks, differences in the factors "shoulder pain" (95% CI, 0.0-2.6), "shoulder mobility" (95% CI, 0.2-1.7), and "mobility neck" (95% CI, 0.2-1.3) statistically favored the intervention group. CONCLUSION: In this pragmatic study, manipulative therapy, in addition to usual care by the general practitioner, diminished severity of shoulder pain and neck pain and improved shoulder and neck mobility.

Interobserver reliability of neck-mobility measurement by means of the flock-of-birds electromagnetic tracking system.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the interobserver reliability for measuring neck mobility in human subjects by means of an electromagnetic tracking device, the Flock-of-Birds system. METHODS: Two observers independently and in random order assessed the cervical range-of-motion in 30 subjects with a dysfunction in the neck and shoulder region (symptomatic subjects) and 30 subjects without known pathology (asymptomatic subjects). Measurements included rotation in neutral position, in flexed position and in extended position, flexion-extension, and lateral bending (all active and passive). Reliability was analyzed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and agreement by limits of agreement and percentage of paired observations within 5 degrees, 10 degrees, and 15 degrees. RESULTS: For asymptomatic subjects, the ICC varied from 0.57 to 0.85, and the limits of agreement varied between 14.5 degrees and 27.0 degrees. The percentage of paired observations within 5 degrees, 10 degrees, and 15 degrees ranged from 31% to 57%, 58% to 90%, and 78% to 93%, respectively. For symptomatic subjects, the ICC varied from 0.36 to 0.91, and the limits of agreement varied between 9.6 degrees and 37.8 degrees. The percentage of paired observations within 5 degrees, 10 degrees, and 15 degrees ranged from 17% to 60%, 33% to 93%, and 50% to 97%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the use of a standardized protocol and a sophisticated measurement system, the interobserver reliability of neck mobility was variable in quality, with reliability being good in rotation in neutral position, flexion-extension, and lateral bending.

Manipulative therapy in addition to usual medical care for patients with shoulder dysfunction and pain: a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Dysfunction of the cervicothoracic spine and the adjacent ribs (also called the shoulder girdle) is considered to predict occurrence and poor outcome of shoulder symptoms. It can be treated with manipulative therapy, but scientific evidence for the effectiveness of such therapy is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To study the effectiveness of manipulative therapy for the shoulder girdle in addition to usual medical care for relief of shoulder pain and dysfunction. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: General practices in Groningen, the Netherlands. PATIENTS: 150 patients with shoulder symptoms and dysfunction of the shoulder girdle. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received usual medical care from their general practitioners. Only the intervention group received additional manipulative therapy, up to 6 treatment sessions in a 12-week period. MEASUREMENTS: Patient-perceived recovery, severity of the main complaint, shoulder pain, shoulder disability, and general health. Data were collected during and at the end of the treatment period (at 6 and 12 weeks) and during the follow-up period (at 26 and 52 weeks). RESULTS: During treatment (6 weeks), no significant differences were found between study groups. After completion of treatment (12 weeks), 43% of the intervention group and 21% of the control group reported full recovery. After 52 weeks, approximately the same difference in recovery rate (17 percentage points) was seen between groups. During the intervention and follow-up periods, a consistent between-group difference in severity of the main complaint, shoulder pain and disability, and general health favored additional manipulative therapy. LIMITATIONS: The sample size was small, and assessment of end points was subjective. CONCLUSION: Manipulative therapy for the shoulder girdle in addition to usual medical care accelerates recovery of shoulder symptoms.

Groningen Manipulation Study. The effect of manipulation of the structures of the shoulder girdle as additional treatment for symptom relief and for prevention of chronicity or recurrence of shoulder symptoms. Design of a randomized controlled trial within a comprehensive prognostic cohort study.

BACKGROUND: We present the design of the Groningen Manipulation Study. This randomized controlled trial is part of the Dutch Shoulder Disability Study, a comprehensive prognostic cohort study on shoulder disorders, with randomized controlled interventions in subcohorts. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of manipulative treatment of the structures of the shoulder girdle, in addition to standard treatment by the general practitioner for relief of shoulder symptoms and prevention of persistent or recurrent shoulder symptoms. METHODS: A total of 250 patients with shoulder symptoms and a functional limitation of the shoulder girdle will be included from 30 general practices in Groningen, The Netherlands. All participating patients receive standard treatment by the general practitioner and will be randomly allocated to additional manipulative treatment. Evaluation measurements take place 6, 12, 26, and 52 weeks after randomization. CONCLUSION: The short-term primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients with relief of shoulder complaints and the long-term primary outcome is the proportion of patients without persistent or recurrent shoulder symptoms. Dependent and independent variables include a structured medical history, a physical examination of the shoulder and shoulder girdle, and a measure of the mobility of the cervico-thoracic spine with a 6-degree-of-freedom electromagnetic tracking device.