Effectiveness and safety of manual therapy when compared with oral pain medications in patients with neck pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to investigate the effectiveness and safety of manual therapy (MT) interventions compared to oral pain medication in the management of neck pain. METHODS: We searched from inception to March 2023, in Cochrane Central Register of Controller Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; EBSCO) for randomized controlled trials that examined the effect of manual therapy interventions for neck pain when compared to medication in adults with self-reported neck pain, irrespective of radicular findings, specific cause, and associated cervicogenic headaches. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool to assess the potential risk of bias in the included studies, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach to grade the quality of the evidence. RESULTS: Nine trials (779 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. We found low certainty of evidence that MT interventions may be more effective than oral pain medication in pain reduction in the short-term (Standardized Mean Difference: -0.39; 95% CI -0.66 to -0.11; 8 trials, 676 participants), and moderate certainty of evidence that MT interventions may be more effective than oral pain medication in pain reduction in the long-term (Standardized Mean Difference: - 0.36; 95% CI - 0.55 to - 0.17; 6 trials, 567 participants). We found low certainty evidence that the risk of adverse events may be lower for patients that received MT compared to the ones that received oral pain medication (Risk Ratio: 0.59; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.79; 5 trials, 426 participants). CONCLUSIONS: MT may be more effective for people with neck pain in both short and long-term with a better safety profile regarding adverse events when compared to patients receiving oral pain medications. However, we advise caution when interpreting our safety results due to the different level of reporting strategies in place for MT and medication-induced adverse events. Future MT trials should create and adhere to strict reporting strategies with regards to adverse events to help gain a better understanding on the nature of potential MT-induced adverse events and to ensure patient safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023421147.

Which Remote Rehabilitation Interventions Work Best for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain and Depression? A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of remote rehabilitation interventions for people living with chronic musculoskeletal pain and depression. DESIGN: A systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized control trials. LITERATURE SEARCH: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, PSYNDEX and PsycINFO until May 2023. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effectiveness of remote rehabilitation interventions in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain and depression. DATA SYNTHESIS: We used Bayesian random-effects models for the NMA. Effect estimates were comparisons between rehabilitation interventions and waitlist. We performed a sensitivity analysis based on bias in the randomisation process, large trials (>100 patient per arm) and musculoskeletal condition. RESULTS: Fifty-eight randomized controlled trials involving 10,278 participants (median sample size: 137 (IQR: 77 to 236) were included. Interactive-voice-response cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) (SMD -0.66, 95%CrI -1.17 to -0.16), CBT in person (SMD -0.50, 95%CrI -0.97 to -0.04) and mobile-app CBT plus exercise (SMD -0.37, 95% CrI -0.69 to -0.02) were superior to waitlist at 12-weeks follow-up for reducing pain (> 98% probability of superiority). For depression outcomes, Internet-delivered CBT & tele-care was superior to waitlist at 12-weeks follow-up (SMD -0.51, 95% CrI -0.87 to -0.13) (> 99% probability of superiority). For pain outcomes, the certainty of evidence ranged from low to moderate. For depression outcomes, the certainty of evidence ranged from very low to moderate. The proportion of dropouts attributed to adverse events was unclear. No intervention was associated with higher odds of dropout. CONCLUSION: Interactive-voice-response CBT, and mobile-app CBT plus exercise showed similar treatment effects with in-person CBT on pain reduction among people living with chronic musculoskeletal pain and had over 98% probability of superiority than waitlist control at 12-weeks follow-up. Internet-delivered CBT & tele-care had over 99% probability of superiority than waitlist control for improving depression outcomes at 12-weeks follow-up.

Rehabilitation Interventions for Physical Capacity and Quality of Life in Adults With Post-COVID-19 Condition: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Current rehabilitation guidelines for patients with post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) are primarily based on expert opinions and observational data, and there is an urgent need for evidence-based rehabilitation interventions to support patients with PCC. Objective: To synthesize the findings of existing studies that report on physical capacity (including functional exercise capacity, muscle function, dyspnea, and respiratory function) and quality of life outcomes following rehabilitation interventions in patients with PCC. Data Sources: A systematic electronic search was performed from January 2020 until February 2023, in MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and the Clinical Trials Registry. Key terms that were used to identify potentially relevant studies included long-covid, post-covid, sequelae, exercise therapy, rehabilitation, physical activity, physical therapy, and randomized controlled trial. Study Selection: This study included randomized clinical trials that compared respiratory training and exercise-based rehabilitation interventions with either placebo, usual care, waiting list, or control in patients with PCC. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. A pairwise bayesian random-effects meta-analysis was performed using vague prior distributions. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool version 2, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE system by 2 independent researchers. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was functional exercise capacity, measured at the closest postintervention time point by the 6-minute walking test. Secondary outcomes were fatigue, lower limb muscle function, dyspnea, respiratory function, and quality of life. All outcomes were defined a priori. Continuous outcomes were reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) and binary outcomes were summarized as odds ratios with 95% CrIs. The between-trial heterogeneity was quantified using the between-study variance, τ2, and 95% CrIs. Results: Of 1834 identified records, 1193 were screened, and 14 trials (1244 patients; 45% female participants; median [IQR] age, 50 [47 to 56] years) were included in the analyses. Rehabilitation interventions were associated with improvements in functional exercise capacity (SMD, -0.56; 95% CrI, -0.87 to -0.22) with moderate certainty in 7 trials (389 participants). These improvements had a 99% posterior probability of superiority when compared with current standard care. The value of τ2 (0.04; 95% CrI, 0.00 to 0.60) indicated low statistical heterogeneity. However, there was significant uncertainty and imprecision regarding the probability of experiencing exercise-induced adverse events (odds ratio, 1.68; 95% CrI, 0.32 to 9.94). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that rehabilitation interventions are associated with improvements in functional exercise capacity, dyspnea, and quality of life, with a high probability of improvement compared with the current standard care; the certainty of evidence was moderate for functional exercise capacity and quality of life and low for other outcomes. Given the uncertainty surrounding the safety outcomes, additional trials with enhanced monitoring of adverse events are necessary.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of measurement properties of objective structured clinical examinations used in physical therapy licensure and a structured review of licensure practices in countries with well-developed regulation systems.

BACKGROUND: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is a commonly used tool internationally to assess clinical competency. Physical therapy (PT) licensure processes vary internationally. The OSCE is the tool used in Canada to assess clinical competency for PT graduates seeking licensure. Previous studies that examined the measurement properties of OSCEs present contradictory results. OBJECTIVES: The first objective was to investigate the reliability and validity of OSCEs when administered to PTs during their education or as part of a licensure process. The second objective was to conduct a structured review to report PT educational and licensing components and policies in 17 countries with well-developed PT regulation systems. METHODS: An electronic search was performed in four databases from inception to 31st March 2021 to identify relevant articles. Two reviewers performed the critical appraisal of the included studies using a validated quality assessment tool. We deployed a random effects meta-analysis on reliability and validity estimates of OSCEs and examined sources of heterogeneity with univariate meta-regressions. We searched websites of professional regulatory bodies and associations for data on educational and licencing components and policies. Educational and licensing components across countries were synthesized descriptively. RESULTS: A pooled estimate of Cronbach's alpha of 0.55, (95% CI: 0.41, 0.67) was determined for OSCEs. The pooled estimate of Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) between assessors was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.70, 0.83). The pooled estimate of Pearson Correlation between multiple OSCE stations' scores was 0.27 (95% CI: 0.15, 0.39); and between each station score and the total score was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.61, 0.79). The pooled estimates for kappa Coefficients were 0.75 (95% CI: 0.58, 0.86) and 0.84, (95% CI: 0.72, 0.91) for intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the standardised patient respectively. From the 17 included countries, Canada (excluding Quebec) was the only country that required both a clinical and written competency exam following graduation from an accredited PT program. Two countries (USA, UAE) required a written competency exam. The remaining 14 countries did not require an additional competency examination after completion of degree requirements from an accredited program. CONCLUSIONS: We found weak evidence that OSCE examinations items are internally consistent when used to assess PTs. Canada (excluding Quebec) is the only country out of 17 implementing a national clinical competency examination for their PT graduates to achieve licensure after completing professional degree requirements.