Is there 'trustworthy' evidence for using manual therapy to treat patients with shoulder dysfunction?: A systematic review.

The primary objective of this review was to create a 'trustworthy,' living systematic review and meta-analysis for the application of manual therapy interventions in treating patients with shoulder dysfunction. Included studies were English-language randomized controlled trials published between 1/1/2010 and 8/3/2023, with searches performed in: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINHAL, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health, EBSCO Medline, and PEDro. The population of focus included adults 18 years and older with musculoskeletal impairments related to shoulder dysfunction. Our primary outcomes included pain and region-specific outcome measures. We excluded trials, including participants having shoulder dysfunction resulting from surgery, radicular pain, instability/dislocation, fracture, lymphedema, and radiation. Our screening methodology was based upon a previously published 'trustworthy' systematic review protocol. This included the application of our PICOTS criteria in addition to screening for prospective clinical trial registration and following of prospective intent, as well as assessment of PEDro scores, risk-of-bias ratings, GRADE scoring, and examination of confidence in estimated effects. Twenty-six randomized controlled trials met our PICOTS criteria; however, only 15 of these were registered. Only three were registered prospectively. Two of these did not have discussions and conclusions that aligned with their primary outcome. The remaining single study was found to have a high risk-of-bias, meaning the remainder of the protocol could not be employed and that no randomized controlled trials could undergo further assessment or meta-analysis. The results of this systematic review indicate there are no 'trustworthy' randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of manual therapy interventions for the treatment of patients with shoulder dysfunction, as defined by the prospectively established methodology. Therefore, these findings signal that creating a 'trustworthy,' living systematic review on this clinically relevant topic is not yet possible due to a lack of 'trustworthy' randomized controlled trials.

Does manual therapy meaningfully change quantitative sensory testing and patient reported outcome measures in patients with musculoskeletal impairments related to the spine?: A 'trustworthy' systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a 'trustworthy' systematic review (SR) with meta-analysis on the potential mechanisms of manual therapy used to treat spinal impairments. DESIGN: SR with meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH: Articles published between January 2010 and October 2022 from CENTRAL, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, ProQuest, and PEDro. METHODS: This SR included English-language randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving manual therapy to treat spinal impairments in adults. The primary outcome was pressure pain thresholds (PPTs). To synthesize RCTs with high confidence in estimated effects using the GRADE, RCTs with questionable prospective, external, and internal validity, and high risk of bias (RoB) were excluded. RESULTS: Following title and abstract screening, 89 full-text RCTs were reviewed. Twenty-two studies included the criteria of interest. Sixteen were not prospectively registered, two contained discussion/conclusions judged to be inconsistent with the registry, and one was rated as having a high RoB. Three studies met the inclusion criteria; heterogeneous interventions and locations for PPT testing prevented synthesis into practice recommendations. The two studies with high confidence in estimated effects had small effect sizes, and one study had confidence intervals that crossed zero for the outcome measures of interest. DISCUSSION: Standardized PPT testing, as a potential measure of centrally mediated pain, could provide clues regarding the mechanisms of manual therapy or help identify/refine research questions. CONCLUSION: High-quality RCTs could not be synthesized into strong conclusions secondary to the dissimilarity in research designs. Future research regarding quantitative sensory testing should develop RCTs with high confidence in estimated effects that can be translated into strong recommendations.

Manual therapy for non-radicular cervical spine related impairments: establishing a 'Trustworthy' living systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To establish a 'trustworthy' living systematic review (SR) with a meta-analysis of manual therapy for treating non-radicular cervical impairments. DESIGN: SR with meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH: Articles published between January 2010 and September 2022 were included from: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); CINAHL; MEDLINE; PubMed; PEDro, and ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health. METHODS: This SR included English-language randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of manual therapy involving adults used to treat non-radicular cervical impairments. The primary outcomes were pain and region-specific outcome measures. Cervicogenic headaches and whiplash were excluded to improve homogeneity. Two reviewers independently assessed RCTs. The prospective plan was to synthesize results with high confidence in estimated effects using GRADE. RESULTS: Thirty-five RCTs were screened for registration status. Twenty-eight were not registered or registered prospectively. In 5 studies, the discussion and conclusion did not match the registry, or this could not be determined. One study did not meet the external validity criterion, and another was rated as having a high risk of bias. One study met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, so practice recommendations could not be made. The remaining study did not identify any clinically meaningful group differences. DISCUSSION: Only one prospectively registered RCT met this SR's strict, high-quality standards. The single identified paper provides initial high-quality evidence on this topic. CONCLUSION: This SR establishes a foundation of trustworthiness and can be used to generate research agendas to determine the potential clinical utility of manual therapy directed at the cervical spine for non-radicular cervical complaints.

Protocol for the development of a 'trustworthy' living systematic review and meta analyses of manual therapy interventions to treat neuromusculoskeletal impairments.

BACKGROUND: Preprocessed research resources are believed to be highly 'trustworthy' when translating research to clinical practice. However, the overall 'trustworthiness' is unknown if this evidence contains randomized clinical trials (RCTs) where prospective has not been/cannot be verified, has low confidence in estimated effects, and if they are not up to date. OBJECTIVES: This protocol will be used to create a baseline benchmark for a series of trustworthy living systematic reviews (SRs) regarding manual therapy interventions. METHODS: Data will originate from RCTs related to manual therapy neuromusculoskeletal interventions, indexed in 6 search engines in English from 1 January 2010, to the present. Two blinded reviewers will identify the RCTs and extract data using Covidence. The data will be synthesized based on consensus and analyzed using the Cochrane collaboration's Review Manager. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: It is expected that there will be a shortage of RCTs with at least a moderate confidence in estimated effects that will allow for strong practice recommendations. DISCUSSION: Identifying evidence that can be translated into strong practice recommendations is essential to identify beneficial and harmful interventions, decrease practice variability, and identify neuromusculoskeletal manual therapy interventions that require further disciplined methodological focus.

The lateral neck flexor endurance test: Normative values in the young adult population.

BACKGROUND: Unilateral muscular deficits have been identified in individuals with neck pain, although no unilateral clinical tests have been described in the literature. Assessment of lateral neck flexor endurance may allow identification of abnormal unilateral muscle function. The lateral neck flexor (LNF) endurance test, where an individual holds their head parallel to the ground while side-lying, may be a clinical option. We sought to (1) determine inter-rater reliability of the LNF endurance test and (2) establish normative LNF values in healthy individuals. METHODS: Inter-rater reliability was assessed for four raters, working in pairs to assess a pilot sample of 20 individuals. Normative data was subsequently collected for 60 healthy adults, age 20-40. All participants completed the International Physical Activity Questionnaire to assess physical activity and the LNF endurance test was assessed once per side. RESULTS: The LNF endurance test demonstrated excellent inter-rater reliability: ICC(2,1) = 0.972 [0.941-0.987]. Left and right median LNF hold times were 122.0, 133.94 s for males and 97.42, 93.73 s for females, respectively. Individual median hold time ratios were 72.1% for males and 68.7% for females. There were no meaningful correlations between reported physical activity and LNF endurance. CONCLUSION: The LNF endurance test is a reliable measure. Males generally displayed greater LNF endurance than females, although variability within groups was high. Based on the observed values in this healthy population, 120 s for males and 90 s for females with a 70% side:side ratio appear to be useful normative benchmarks although further research is required including clinical populations.

Effects of Tibiofibular and Ankle Joint Manipulation on Hip Strength and Muscle Activation.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether high-velocity, low-amplitude ankle region manipulations could increase force output and muscle activation of hip musculature in individuals with a history of ankle sprain and unilateral tensor fascia latae (TFL) weakness during muscle testing. METHODS: This investigation used a single-arm repeated measures design. Twenty-five participants' force outputs were tested at three time points (before manipulation, immediately after manipulation, and 48 hours after manipulation), and muscle activation of the rectus femoris, gluteus medius, and TFL was measured before and immediately after manipulation. Manipulations were applied to the talocrural, subtalar, proximal, and distal tibiofibular joints of the weaker limb. No contralateral manipulations were applied. Two-way repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare maximal and average force production for each limb. In addition, paired t tests were used to compare muscle activation before and after manipulations. RESULTS: There was a significant limb × time interaction. The involved limb average force increased from before manipulation (65.7 N) to 48 hours after manipulation (77.8 N; P = .014), maximal force increased (76.9 N) 48 hours after manipulation (87.8 N; P = .030), and gluteus medius activation increased (9.8% maximum, 12.2% average) immediately after manipulation. No significant differences were found in the uninvolved limb. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that high-velocity, low-amplitude ankle region manipulations might improve hip abductor strength in individuals with a history of ankle sprain and unilateral weakness during a TFL muscle test.

The degenerative lumbar disc: not a disease, but still an important consideration for OMPT practice: a review of the history and science of discogenic instability.

BACKGROUND: A recent AAOMPT position paper was published that opposed the use of the term 'degenerative disc disease' (DDD), in large part because it appears to be a common age-related finding. While common, there are significant physiologic and biomechanical changes that occur as a result of discogenic degeneration, which are relevant to consider during the practice of manual therapy. METHODS: A narrative review provides an overview of these considerations, including a historical perspective of discogenic instability, the role of the disc as a pain generator, the basic science of a combined biomechanical and physiologic cycle of degeneration and subsequent discogenic instability, the influence of rotation on the degenerative segment, the implications of these factors for manual therapy practice, and a perspective on an evidence-based treatment approach to patients with concurrent low back pain and discogenic degeneration. CONCLUSIONS: As we consider the role of imaging findings such as DDD, we pose the following question: Do our manual interventions reflect the scientifically proven biomechanical aspects of DDD, or have we chosen to ignore the helpful science as we discard the harmful diagnostic label?

Reliability and diagnostic accuracy of cervicothoracic differentiation testing and regional unloading for identifying improvement after thoracic manipulation in individuals with neck pain.

BACKGROUND & PURPOSE: The cervicothoracic differentiation test (CTDT), cervical and thoracic unloading are used clinically to guide treatment. This study sought to determine the reliability and diagnostic accuracy of these tests. METHODS: A prospective diagnostic accuracy study was performed at two outpatient clinics and one university research center. A convenience sample of 48 individuals with neck pain was recruited. Cervical and thoracic unloading tests and CTDT were performed with symptom relief considered a positive test. Pain was assessed using a visual analog pain scale (VAS) at rest and during provocative movements. The reference standard was pain relief following thoracic manipulation. Change in pain was used to identify improvement at the MCID (15 mm) and 50% improvement thresholds. RESULTS: All three tests demonstrated high levels of inter-rater reliability, K = 0.90[0.77-1.00]. Of 48 individuals who completed the study, 39 (81.3%) were improved ≥ MCID; compared to 34 (70.8%) at the 50% threshold. As a single test, the CTDT yielded the strongest diagnostic utility (at MCID threshold) based on ROC curve: AUC 0.791 s.e. 0.078; with high specificity (0.89[51.75-99.72]); LR+ 6.23 [0.97-40]; LR- 0.35 [0.20-0.58]; and PPV 96.43. Unloading tests demonstrated high sensitivity, but poor specificity and likelihood ratios. Composite tests improved specificity, but with lower accuracy and minimal changes in ROC area compared to the CTDT in isolation. CONCLUSIONS: The CTDT is a specific test with significant diagnostic utility to identify individuals who will experience immediate pain relief following thoracic manipulation. The CTDT should be considered during the clinical decision making process when treating individuals with neck pain.