Factors Influencing Mobility During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and identify factors influencing mobility among older adults during the first 5 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: A cross-sectional telesurvey. SETTING: Community dwelling older adults, situated within the first 5 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, in Hamilton, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of 2343 older adults were approached to be in the study, of which 247 completed the survey (N=247). Eligible participants were aged ≥65 years. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mobility was measured using global rating of change items and the Late Life Function Instrument (LLFI). Multivariate linear regression models were used to examine the association between mobility and related factors based on Webber's model. RESULTS: 247 older adults (29% male, mean age 78±7.3 years) completed surveys between May and August 2020. Respectively, 26%, 10%, and 9%, rated their ability to engage in physical activity, housework, and move around their home as worse compared with the start of the pandemic. The mean LLFI score was 60.9±13.4. In the model, walking volume (ß=0.03 95% confidence interval 0.013, 0.047), fall history (ß=-0.04, 95% confidence interval -0.08, -0.04), male sex (ß=0.06, 95% confidence interval 0.02, 0.09), unpleasant neighborhood (ß=-0.06, 95% confidence interval -0.11, -0.02), musculoskeletal pain (ß=-0.07, 95% confidence interval -0.11, -0.03), and self-reported health (ß=0.08, 95% confidence interval 0.03, 0.13) had the strongest associations with LLFI scores and explained 64% of the variance in the LLFI score. CONCLUSIONS: Physical and environmental factors may help explain poorer mobility during lockdowns. Future research should examine these associations longitudinally to see if factors remain consistent over time and could be targeted for rehabilitation.

Diagnostic accuracy of sensory and motor tests for the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common entrapment mononeuropathy of the upper extremity. The previous systematic review of the diagnostic tests for CTS was outdated. The objective of this study was to compile and appraise the evidence on the accuracy of sensory and motor tests used for the diagnosis of CTS. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Embase databases were searched on January 20, 2020. Studies assessing at least one diagnostic accuracy property of the sensory or motor tests for CTS diagnosis were selected by two independent reviewers. Diagnostic test accuracy extension of the PRISMA guidelines was followed. Risk of bias and applicability concerns were rated using QUADAS-2 tool. Any reported diagnostic accuracy property was summarized. Study characteristics and any information on the accuracy of the sensory and motor tests for CTS diagnosis were extracted. RESULTS: We included sixteen clinical studies, assessing thirteen different sensory or motor tests. The most sensitive test for CTS diagnosis was the Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test (with 3.22 in any radial digit as the normal threshold) with sensitivity from 0.49 to 0.96. The tests with the highest specificity (Sp) were palmar grip strength (Sp = 0.94), pinch grip strength (Sp from 0.78 to 0.95), thenar atrophy (Sp from 0.96 to 1.00), and two-point discrimination (Sp from 0.81 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: The evidence was inconclusive on which sensory or motor test for CTS diagnosis had the highest diagnostic accuracy. The results suggest that clinicians should not use a single sensory or motor test when deciding on CTS diagnosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018109031 , on 20 December 2018.

Content validation of the Kamath and Stothard questionnaire for carpal tunnel syndrome diagnosis: a cognitive interviewing study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is essential for directing appropriate treatment; and for making decisions about work injury claims. The Kamath and Stothard Questionnaire (KSQ) is a self-reported tool used for the diagnosis of CTS. Comprehensibility and comprehensiveness of this questionnaire are critical to diagnostic performance and need to be established. The purpose of the study was to describe how potential respondents, clinicians, and measurement researchers interpret KSQ questions in order to identify and resolve potential sources of misclassification. METHODS: Hand therapists, measurement researchers, participants with CTS, and a control group were interviewed using cognitive interviewing techniques (talk aloud, semi-structured interview probes) in Hamilton, Canada. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A directed content analysis was done to analyze the interviews using a previously established framework. FINDINGS: Eighteen participants were interviewed. Areas, where questions were unclear to some participants, were recorded and categorized into five themes: Clarity and Comprehension (52%), Relativeness (38%), Inadequate Response Definition (4%), Perspective Modifiers (4%), and Reference Point (2%). Respondents also identified several symptoms of CTS that are not covered by the KSQ that might be of diagnostic value, e.g., weakness and dropping items. CONCLUSION: The content validity of the current iteration of the KSQ was not established. The problematic questions identified in the study have been reported to have low specificity and negative predictive values in a previous quantitative study. The content validity issues identified may explain the poor performance. Recommendations were made to modify the wording of the KSQ and the potential addition of three new questions. Future studies should determine whether the modified questionnaire can provide better diagnostic accuracy and psychometric properties. The results of this study may assist in ruling in or out CTS diagnosis to a wide variety of target audience, such as hand specialists, physical and occupational therapists, as well as family doctors.

A systematic review of the role of inflammatory biomarkers in acute, subacute and chronic non-specific low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the greatest contributors to disability in the world and there is growing interest on the role of biomarkers in LBP. To purpose of this review was to analyze available evidence on the relationship between inflammatory biomarkers, clinical presentation, and outcomes in patients with acute, subacute and chronic non-specific low back pain (NSLBP). METHODS: A search was performed in Medline, Embase, Cinahl and Amed databases. Studies which measured levels of inflammatory biomarkers in participants with NSLBP were included. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, full-texts, and extracted data from included studies. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Level of evidence was assessed using the modified GRADE approach for prognostic studies. RESULTS: Seven primary studies were included in this review. All results assessed using the modified GRADE demonstrated low to very low quality evidence given the small number of studies and small sample. Three studies examined C-reactive protein (CRP), one of which found significantly higher CRP levels in an acute NSLBP group than in controls and an association between high pain intensity and elevated CRP. Three studies examined tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), two of which found elevated TNF-α in chronic NSLBP participants compared to controls. Two studies examined interleukin 6 (IL-6), none of which found a significant difference in IL-6 levels between NSLBP groups and controls. Two studies examined interleukin 1 beta (IL-ß), none of which found a significant difference in IL-ß levels between NSLBP groups and controls. CONCLUSIONS: This review found evidence of elevated CRP in individuals with acute NSLBP and elevated TNF-Α in individuals with chronic NSLBP. There are a limited number of high-quality studies evaluating similar patient groups and similar biomarkers, which limits the conclusion of this review.

Exercise treatment effect modifiers in persistent low back pain: an individual participant data meta-analysis of 3514 participants from 27 randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Exercise therapy is widely recommended to treat persistent non-specific low back pain. While evidence suggests exercise is, on average, moderately effective, there remains uncertainty about which individuals might benefit the most from exercise. METHODS: In parallel with a Cochrane review update, we requested individual participant data (IPD) from high-quality randomised clinical trials of adults with our two primary outcomes of interest, pain and functional limitations, and calculated global recovery. We compiled a master data set including baseline participant characteristics, exercise and comparison characteristics, and outcomes at short-term, moderate-term and long-term follow-up. We conducted descriptive analyses and one-stage IPD meta-analysis using multilevel mixed-effects regression of the overall treatment effect and prespecified potential treatment effect modifiers. RESULTS: We received IPD for 27 trials (3514 participants). For studies included in this analysis, compared with no treatment/usual care, exercise therapy on average reduced pain (mean effect/100 (95% CI) -10.7 (-14.1 to -7.4)), a result compatible with a clinically important 20% smallest worthwhile effect. Exercise therapy reduced functional limitations with a clinically important 23% improvement (mean effect/100 (95% CI) -10.2 (-13.2 to -7.3)) at short-term follow-up. Not having heavy physical demands at work and medication use for low back pain were potential treatment effect modifiers-these were associated with superior exercise outcomes relative to non-exercise comparisons. Lower body mass index was also associated with better outcomes in exercise compared with no treatment/usual care. This study was limited by inconsistent availability and measurement of participant characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides potentially useful information to help treat patients and design future studies of exercise interventions that are better matched to specific subgroups. PROTOCOL PUBLICATION: https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-64.

The association between occupational loading and spine degeneration on imaging - a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are inconsistencies in findings regarding the relationship of occupational loading with spinal degeneration or structural damage. Thus, a systematic review was conducted to determine the current state of knowledge on the association of occupational loading and spine degeneration on imaging. METHODS: We performed electronic searches on MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE. We included cross-sectional, case control and cohort studies evaluating occupational loading as the exposure and lumbar spine structural findings on imaging as the outcomes. When possible, results were pooled. RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included in the review. Ten studies evaluated the association of occupational loading with disc degeneration (signal intensity), four of which were pooled into a meta-analysis. Of the 10 studies, only two did not identify a relationship between occupation loading and disc degeneration. A meta-analysis including four of the studies demonstrated an association between higher loading and degeneration for all spinal levels, with odds ratios between 1.6 and 3.3. Seven studies evaluated disc height narrowing and seven evaluate disc bulge, with six and five identifying an association of loading and with imaging findings respectively. Three studies evaluated modic changes and one identified and association with occupational load. CONCLUSIONS: There was moderate evidence suggesting a modest association between occupational loading and disc degeneration (signal intensity), and low-quality evidence of an association between occupational loading and disc narrowing and bulging.

Motor control exercise for acute non-specific low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Motor control exercise (MCE) is used by healthcare professionals worldwide as a common treatment for low back pain (LBP). However, the effectiveness of this intervention for acute LBP remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of MCE for patients with acute non-specific LBP. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), four other databases and two trial registers from their inception to April 2015, tracked citations and searched reference lists. We placed no limitations on language nor on publication status. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effectiveness of MCE for patients with acute non-specific LBP. We considered trials comparing MCE versus no treatment, versus another type of treatment or added as a supplement to other interventions. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. Secondary outcomes were function, quality of life and recurrence. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened for potentially eligible studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. A third independent review author resolved disagreements. We examined MCE in the following comparisons: (1) MCE versus spinal manipulative therapy; (2) MCE versus other exercises; and (3) MCE as a supplement to medical management. We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach to assess the quality of evidence. For missing or unclear information, we contacted study authors. We considered the following follow-up intervals: short term (less than three months after randomisation); intermediate term (at least three months but within 12 months after randomisation); and long term (12 months or longer after randomisation). MAIN RESULTS: We included three trials in this review (n = 197 participants). Study sample sizes ranged from 33 to 123 participants. Low-quality evidence indicates no clinically important differences between MCE and spinal manipulative therapy for pain at short term and for disability at short term and long term. Low-quality evidence also suggests no clinically important differences between MCE and other forms of exercise for pain at short or intermediate term and for disability at intermediate term or long term follow-up. Moderate-quality evidence shows no clinically important differences between MCE and other forms of exercise for disability at short term follow-up. Finally, very low-quality evidence indicates that addition of MCE to medical management does not provide clinically important improvement for pain or disability at short term follow-up. For recurrence at one year, very low-quality evidence suggests that MCE and medical management decrease the risk of recurrence by 64% compared with medical management alone. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We identified only three small trials that also evaluated different comparisons; therefore, no firm conclusions can be drawn on the effectiveness of MCE for acute LBP. Evidence of very low to moderate quality indicates that MCE showed no benefit over spinal manipulative therapy, other forms of exercise or medical treatment in decreasing pain and disability among patients with acute and subacute low back pain. Whether MCE can prevent recurrences of LBP remains uncertain.

Motor control exercise for chronic non-specific low-back pain.

BACKGROUND: Non-specific low back pain (LBP) is a common condition. It is reported to be a major health and socioeconomic problem associated with work absenteeism, disability and high costs for patients and society. Exercise is a modestly effective treatment for chronic LBP. However, current evidence suggests that no single form of exercise is superior to another. Among the most commonly used exercise interventions is motor control exercise (MCE). MCE intervention focuses on the activation of the deep trunk muscles and targets the restoration of control and co-ordination of these muscles, progressing to more complex and functional tasks integrating the activation of deep and global trunk muscles. While there are previous systematic reviews of the effectiveness of MCE, recently published trials justify an updated systematic review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of MCE in patients with chronic non-specific LBP. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted electronic searches in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, five other databases and two trials registers from their inception up to April 2015. We also performed citation tracking and searched the reference lists of reviews and eligible trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the effectiveness of MCE in patients with chronic non-specific LBP. We included trials comparing MCE with no treatment, another treatment or that added MCE as a supplement to other interventions. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. We considered function, quality of life, return to work or recurrence as secondary outcomes. All outcomes must have been measured with a valid and reliable instrument. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent review authors screened the search results, assessed risk of bias and extracted the data. A third independent review author resolved any disagreement. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Back and Neck (CBN) Review Group expanded 12-item criteria (Furlan 2009). We extracted mean scores, standard deviations and sample sizes from the included trials, and if this information was not provided we calculated or estimated them using methods recommended in the Cochrane Handbook. We also contacted the authors of the trials for any missing or unclear information. We considered the following time points: short-term (less than three months after randomisation); intermediate (at least three months but less than 12 months after randomisation); and long-term (12 months or more after randomisation) follow-up. We assessed heterogeneity by visual inspection of the forest plots, and by calculating the Chi(2) test and the I(2) statistic. We combined results in a meta-analysis expressed as mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed the overall quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 29 trials (n = 2431) in this review. The study sample sizes ranged from 20 to 323 participants. We considered a total of 76.6% of the included trials to have a low risk of bias, representing 86% of all participants. There is low to high quality evidence that MCE is not clinically more effective than other exercises for all follow-up periods and outcomes tested. When compared with minimal intervention, there is low to moderate quality evidence that MCE is effective for improving pain at short, intermediate and long-term follow-up with medium effect sizes (long-term, MD -12.97; 95% CI -18.51 to -7.42). There was also a clinically important difference for the outcomes function and global impression of recovery compared with minimal intervention. There is moderate to high quality evidence that there is no clinically important difference between MCE and manual therapy for all follow-up periods and outcomes tested. Finally, there is very low to low quality evidence that MCE is clinically more effective than exercise and electrophysical agents (EPA) for pain, disability, global impression of recovery and quality of life with medium to large effect sizes (pain at short term, MD -30.18; 95% CI -35.32 to -25.05). Minor or no adverse events were reported in the included trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is very low to moderate quality evidence that MCE has a clinically important effect compared with a minimal intervention for chronic low back pain. There is very low to low quality evidence that MCE has a clinically important effect compared with exercise plus EPA. There is moderate to high quality evidence that MCE provides similar outcomes to manual therapies and low to moderate quality evidence that it provides similar outcomes to other forms of exercises. Given the evidence that MCE is not superior to other forms of exercise, the choice of exercise for chronic LBP should probably depend on patient or therapist preferences, therapist training, costs and safety.

Immobilization protocols for the treatment of cervical spine fracture: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Current protocols on cervical immobilization postcervical spine fracture are widely accepted in the acute rehabilitation of older adults, however consensus on its overall effectiveness remains lacking. PURPOSE: Summarize information from original studies on available cervical immobilization protocols following a cervical fracture and to answer the questions; Which types of study designs have been used to assess the effectiveness of these protocols? What are the currently reported cervical immobilization protocols following cervical fracture in adults? What is the effectiveness of these protocols? What adverse events are associated with these protocols? STUDY DESIGN: Scoping review was performed. PATIENT SAMPLE: Searches were performed on the following online databases from inception to February 23, 2023: EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL. Databases were searched for articles pertaining to collar use post cervical spine fracture. OUTCOME MEASURES: Effectiveness of the cervical fracture immobilization protocols was the primary outcome, examined by various measures including union rates and disability indexes. METHODS: 4 databases were searched; EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) beginning on February 23, 2023, where 5,127 studies were yielded and 32 were extracted based on studies of adults (≥18 years) with a diagnosis of a cervical fracture (C0-C7) managed with a rigid external orthosis to prevent instability and surgery (collar, or cervicothoracic orthosis). Risk of bias was assessed using the guidelines set out by the Joanna Briggs Institute. RESULTS: This scoping review yielded low-level prospective (18%) and retrospective (69%) cohort studies, case-control studies (3%), and case series (6%) from 1987 to 2022, patient age ranged from 14 to 104 years. Findings were difficult to summarize based on the lack of randomized controlled trials, leading to no clear conclusions drawn on the presence of standardized cervical immobilization protocols with no information on the duration of treatment or transition in care. Most included articles were retrospective cohort studies of poor to moderate quality, which have significant risk of bias for intervention questions. The effectiveness of these protocols remains unclear as most studies evaluated heterogeneous outcomes and did not present between-group differences. Mortality, musculoskeletal (MSK) complications, and delayed surgery were common adverse events associated with cervical collar use. CONCLUSION: This scoping review highlights the need for higher levels of evidence as there is currently no standardized immobilization protocol for cervical spine fractures as a primary treatment, the effectiveness of cervical immobilization protocols is unclear, and mortality, MSK complications, and delayed surgery are common adverse events. No sources of funding were used for this scoping review.

Balance measures for fall risk screening in community-dwelling older adults with COPD: A longitudinal analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) increases fall risk, but consensus is lacking on suitable balance measures for fall risk screening in this group. We aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of balance measures for fall risk screening in community-dwelling older adults with COPD. METHODS: In a secondary analysis of two studies, participants, aged ≥60 years with COPD and 12-month fall history or balance issues were tracked for 12-month prospective falls. Baseline balance measures - Brief Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Brief BESTest), single leg stance (SLS), Timed Up and Go (TUG), and TUG Dual-Task (TUG-DT) test - were assessed using intra-class correlation (ICC2,1) for reliability, Pearson/Spearman correlation with balance-related factors for convergent validity, t-tests/Wilcoxon rank-sum tests with fall-related and disease-related factors for known-groups validity, and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) for predictive validity. RESULTS: Among 174 participants (73 ± 8 years; 86 females) with COPD, all balance measures showed excellent inter-rater and test-retest reliability (ICC2,1 = 0.88-0.97) and moderate convergent validity (r = 0.34-0.77) with related measures. Brief BESTest and SLS test had acceptable known-groups validity (p < 0.05) for 12-month fall history, self-reported balance problems, and gait aid use. TUG test and TUG-DT test discriminated between groups based on COPD severity, supplemental oxygen use, and gait aid use. All measures displayed insufficient predictive validity (AUC<0.70) for 12-month prospective falls. CONCLUSION: Though all four balance measures demonstrated excellent reliability, they lack accuracy in prospectively predicting falls in community-dwelling older adults with COPD. These measures are best utilized within multi-factorial fall risk assessments for this population.

Compliance with clinical guidelines for whiplash improved with a targeted implementation strategy: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Implementation strategies for clinical guidelines have shown modest effects in changing health professional's knowledge and practice, however, targeted implementations are suggested to achieve greater improvements. This study aimed to examine the effect of a targeted implementation strategy of the Australian whiplash guidelines on health professionals' knowledge, beliefs and practice and to identify predictors of improved knowledge. METHODS: 94 health professionals (Physiotherapists, Chiropractors and Osteopaths) who manage whiplash participated in this study. Prior to their inclusion in the study, health professionals were classified as compliant with clinical guidelines for whiplash (n = 52) or non-compliant (n = 42), according to a record of clinical practice. All participants completed a 2- day interactive workshop with outcomes measured at baseline and 3 months following the workshop. The workshop was delivered by opinion leaders, with the educational content focused on the pre-identified knowledge and practice gaps in relation to clinical guidelines for whiplash. Knowledge and health professional beliefs were assessed by a questionnaire and professional practice by record of clinical practice. RESULTS: Participants significantly increased knowledge (p < 0.0001) and were more likely to be compliant with the guidelines at follow-up (compliant at baseline 58%, follow-up 79%, p = 0.002). Health professional belief systems significantly changed to be more behavioural (p = 0.02) and less biomedical (p = 0.000). Predictors of improved knowledge were baseline knowledge (parameter estimate = -0.6, p = 0.000) and profession (parameter estimate = -3.8, p = 0.003) (adj R2 = 35%). CONCLUSIONS: A targeted implementation strategy improved health professional's knowledge and clinical practice so that they became more compliant with clinical guidelines for whiplash. In addition health professionals' belief systems significantly changed to be more behavioural in orientation. Baseline knowledge and profession predicted 35% of the variance in improved knowledge.

The spinal stenosis pedometer and nutrition lifestyle intervention (SSPANLI) randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Because of symptoms, people with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) are often inactive, and this sedentary behaviour implies risk for diseases including obesity. Research has identified body mass index as the most powerful predictor of function in LSS. This suggests that function may be improved by targeting weight as a modifiable factor. An e-health lifestyle intervention was developed aimed at reducing fat mass and increasing physical activity in people with LSS. The main components of this intervention include pedometer-based physical activity promotion and nutrition education. METHODS/DESIGN: The Spinal Stenosis Pedometer and Nutrition Lifestyle INTERVENTION (SSPANLI) was developed and piloted with 10 individuals. The protocol for a randomized controlled trail comparing the SSPANLI intervention to usual non-surgical care follows. One hundred six (106) overweight or obese individuals with LSS will be recruited. Baseline and follow-up testing includes dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, blood draw, 3-day food record, 7-day accelerometry, questionnaire, maximal oxygen consumption, neurological exam, balance testing and a Self-Paced Walking Test. INTERVENTION: During Week 1, the intervention group will receive a pedometer, and a personalized consultation with both a Dietitian and an exercise specialist. For 12 weeks participants will log on to the e-health website to access personal step goals, walking maps, nutrition videos, and motivational quotes. Participants will also have access to in-person Coffee Talk meetings every 3 weeks, and meet with the Dietitian and exercise specialist at week 6. The control group will proceed with usual care for the 12-week period. Follow-up testing will occur at Weeks 13 and 24. DISCUSSION: This lifestyle intervention has the potential to provide a unique, non-surgical management option for people with LSS. Through decreased fat mass and increased function, we may reduce risk for obesity, chronic diseases of inactivity, and pain. The use of e-health interventions provides an opportunity for patients to become more involved in managing their own health. Behaviour changes including increased physical activity, and improved dietary habits promote overall health and quality of life, and may decrease future health care needs in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01902979.

Loneliness and resilience are associated with nutrition risk after the first wave of COVID-19 in community-dwelling older Canadians.

Nutrition risk is linked to hospitalization, frailty, depression, and death. Loneliness during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may have heightened nutrition risk. We sought to determine prevalence of high nutrition risk and whether loneliness, mental health, and assistance with meal preparation/delivery were associated with risk in community-dwelling older adults (65+ years) after the first wave of COVID-19 in association analyses and when adjusting for meaningful covariates. Data were collected from 12 May 2020 to 19 August 2020. Descriptive statistics, association analyses, and linear regression analyses were conducted. For our total sample of 272 participants (78 ± 7.3 years old, 70% female), the median Seniors in the Community: Risk evaluation for Eating and Nutrition (SCREEN-8) score (nutrition risk) was 35 [1st quartile, 3rd quartile: 29, 40], and 64% were at high risk (SCREEN-8 < 38). Fifteen percent felt lonely two or more days a week. Loneliness and meal assistance were associated with high nutrition risk in association analyses. In multivariable analyses adjusting for other lifestyle factors, loneliness was negatively associated with SCREEN-8 scores (-2.92, 95% confidence interval [-5.51, -0.34]), as was smoking (-3.63, [-7.07, -0.19]). Higher SCREEN-8 scores were associated with higher education (2.71, [0.76, 4.66]), living with others (3.17, [1.35, 4.99]), higher self-reported health (0.11, [0.05, 0.16]), and resilience (1.28, [0.04, 2.52]). Loneliness, but not mental health and meal assistance, was associated with nutrition risk in older adults after the first wave of COVID-19. Future research should consider longitudinal associations among loneliness, resilience, and nutrition.

The Effects of Combined Motor Control and Isolated Extensor Strengthening versus General Exercise on Paraspinal Muscle Morphology, Composition, and Function in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Low back pain (LBP), a globally widespread and persistent musculoskeletal disorder, benefits from exercise therapy. However, it remains unclear which type leads to greater changes in paraspinal muscle health. This study aimed to (1) compare the effects of a combined motor control and isolated lumbar extension exercise (MC+ILEX) versus a general exercise (GE) intervention on paraspinal muscle morphology, composition, and function, and (2) examine whether alterations in paraspinal muscle health were correlated with improvements in pain, function, and quality of life. Fifty participants with chronic LBP were randomly assigned to each group and underwent a 12-week supervised intervention program. Magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound assessments were acquired at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks to examine the impact of each intervention on erector spinae (ES) and multifidus (MF) muscle size (cross-sectional area, CSA), composition, and function at L4-L5 and L5-S1. Self-reported questionnaires were also acquired to assess participant-oriented outcomes. Our findings indicated that the MC+ILEX group demonstrated greater improvements in MF and ES CSA, along with MF thickness at both levels (all p < 0.01). Both groups significantly improved in pain, function, and quality of life. This study provided preliminary results suggesting that an MC+ILEX intervention may improve paraspinal morphology while decreasing pain and disability.

The relationship between fear of falling and functional ability following a multi-component fall prevention program: an analysis of clinical data.

OBJECTIVES: The first objective was to evaluate clinical data from a multi-component fall prevention program. The second objective was to explore the relationship between physical function and fear of falling (FoF). METHODS: Adults (N = 287, mean age = 76 years) who participated in the Building Balance Program between 2011-2020 were assessed with five physical function measures and two FoF measures. Repeated measures ANOVA controlling for age and sex were performed to assess change from baseline. Linear regressions were conducted to evaluate how physical function explained variations in FoF. RESULTS: There were significant improvements between pre and post-program Berg Balance Scale (BBS) scores (p < .001), Timed-Up and Go (TUG) times (p < .001), 30 second Chair-Stand (30 CST repetitions) (p < .001), Functional Reach (FR) distance (p < .001), gait speed (p < .001), single item-FoF score (p < .001), and short Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I score) (p < .001). After controlling for sex on all regression analyses, age, and pre-program gait speed explained variations in pre-program short FES-I scores (Adjusted R2 = 0.19). Age, pre-program BBS and 30 CST repetitions explained variations in pre-program level of FoF (Adjusted R2 = 0.25). Variations in post-program short FES-I scores (Adjusted R2 = 0.17) were explained by age, post-program TUG times and FR distance after controlling for age and sex. Robust regressions indicated variations in post-program level of FoF explained by age, post-program TUG and FR distance with a two-way interaction between age and FR. CONCLUSION: A multi-component fall prevention program improved physical function and decreased FoF. A small association between physical function and FoF similar between pre- and post-program conditions was identified.

A scoping review of the literature on grandparents of children with disabilities.

PURPOSE: The objectives of this review were to: (a) explore the extent and nature of available research on non-custodial grandparents of children with physical, intellectual, or neurodevelopmental disabilities and (b) descriptively summarize the research findings from those studies. METHODS: We followed the five-stage scoping review methodology to identify relevant studies from four databases: Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO. Primary, peer-reviewed studies that explored grandparent-related topics in the context of childhood disability were included. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies were identified and analyzed. All of the studies followed non-experimental and qualitative study designs. In the last decade, there has been a growing interest in research on this population (n = 15). Grandparents varied considerably in age, education, employment status, and living arrangements (n = 4680). Grandmothers represented the vast majority of the population (82%). We grouped the grandparent-related findings from the individual reports into four categories: 1. Adjustment to grandchild's disability, 2. Roles, 3. Perceptions, and 4. Experiences. CONCLUSION: Grandparents of children with disabilities are a heterogeneous population that experiences unique challenges in their grandparenting role. Future studies on this topic should be oriented toward high-quality, experimental study designs that take into consideration cultural, religious and demographic factors. Grandparents' involvement in healthcare should be encouraged.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONGrandparents of children with developmental disabilities who are not primary caregivers to their grandchild(ren) are significant family members in many families.They face unique challenges in adapting to their grandchild's disability and interacting with professionals regarding their grandchild's disability and functioning.Although there is considerable heterogeneity within this population, most grandparents share the experiences of gradual emotional adjustment to their grandchild's disability, active family involvement, positive perceptions of their family and grandchild's disability and lack of services for them.There are no identified interventions in the research literature that aimed to support grandparents of children with disabilities.

Participation Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Participation in life situations is a critical aspect of health recognized by the World Health Organization. Guidelines to prevent spreading of COVID-19 place older adults at risk of worsening participation. The purpose of this study was to identify the factors associated with participation during the COVID-19 pandemic among community-dwelling older adults living in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Participants were recruited from identified census dissemination areas in Hamilton. Participants completed surveys either by phone or online during the months of May to August 2020. Measures were organized into factors related to body functions and structures, activities, participation, as well as personal and environmental contextual factors using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework. Multivariable regression analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with participation as measured by the Late-Life Disability Instrument's (LLDI) frequency and limitations scales. RESULTS: A total of 272 older adults completed the survey (78 [7.3] years; 70% female). Use of a walking aid, driving status, perceived mental health status, nutrition risk, and physical function explained 48.2% of the variance observed in the LLDI-frequency scale scores. Use of a walking aid, driving status, perceived mental health status, receiving health assistance, and physical function explained 38.5% of the variance observed in the LLDI-limitation scale scores. CONCLUSION: Results highlighted factors across multiple ICF domains that are associated with participation restriction among a sample of community-dwelling older adults during the pandemic. Participation during the pandemic was greatest in those that were able to walk without needing to use a walking aid, being a licensed and current driver, perceiving good to excellent mental health, and having greater physical function. IMPACT: Our findings contribute to the literature on older adult participation during lockdowns, restrictions, pandemics, and/or other similar circumstances.

Prevalence, Incidence, and Factors Associated With Non-Specific Chronic Low Back Pain in Community-Dwelling Older Adults Aged 60 Years and Older: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is common among older adults. This systematic review aimed to summarize: (1) the prevalence and incidence of CLBP in older adults, and (2) demographic, psychological, and clinical factors positively/negatively associated with prevalence/incidence of CLBP among older adults. Four databases were searched to identify relevant publications. Ten studies (31,080 older adults) were included after being screened by 5 independent reviewers using predetermined criteria. The methodological quality of these studies was evaluated by standardized tools. The quality of evidence for all factors were appraised by modified GRADE for cohort studies. Twenty-eight and 1 factors were associated with a higher prevalence and a lower 5-year cumulative incidence of CLBP, respectively. No prognostic factor was identified. There was very limited to limited evidence that females, obesity, anxiety, depression, mental disorders, self-expectation of recovery, self-perceived health status, lifestyle (smoking, daily fluoride consumption), previous falls or lower body injury, retirement/disability due to ill health, family history of body pain, comorbidity (knee osteoarthritis, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with/without hypertension), weak abdominal muscles, leg pain, leg pain intensity, widespread pain, pain interference on functioning, use of pain medication, occupational exposure (driving for >20 years, or jobs involving bending/twisting for >10 years), disc space narrowing and severe facet osteoarthritis were significantly related to a higher prevalence of CLBP in older adults. However, very limited evidence suggested that intermediate level of leisure-time physical activity was associated with a lower prevalence of CLBP in older adults. Given the aging population and limited information regarding risk factors for CLBP in older adults, future high-quality prospective studies should identify relevant risk factors to help develop proper preventive and treatment strategies. PERSPECTIVE: Despite the high prevalence of non-specific chronic low back pain among older adults, there is only very limited to limited evidence regarding factors associated with a higher prevalence of chronic low back pain in this population. Given the aging population, high-quality prospective studies are warranted to address this gap.

Undertaking Rehabilitation Research During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Emergent Strategies From a Trainee-Faculty Workshop.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted everyday rehabilitation research. Many academic institutions have halted in-person human research including rehabilitation sciences. Researchers are faced with several barriers to continuing their research programs. The purpose of this perspective article is to report the results of an interdisciplinary workshop aimed at understanding the challenges and corresponding strategies for conducting rehabilitation research during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Twenty-five rehabilitation researchers (17 trainees and eight faculty) attended a 2-h facilitated online workshop in to discuss challenges and strategies they had experienced and employed to conduct rehabilitation research during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Rehabilitation researchers reported challenges with (1) pandemic protocol adjustments, (2) participant accessibility, and (3) knowledge dissemination, along with corresponding strategies to these challenges. Researchers experienced disruptions in study outcomes and intervention protocols to adhere to public health guidelines and have suggested implementing novel virtual approaches and study toolkits to facilitate offsite assessment. Participant accessibility could be improved by engaging community stakeholders in protocol revisions to ensure equity, safety, and feasibility. Researchers also experienced barriers to virtual conferences and publication, suggested opportunities for smaller networking events, and revisiting timeframes for knowledge dissemination. Conclusion: This perspective article served as a catalyst for discussion among rehabilitation researchers to identify novel and creative approaches that address the complexities of conducting rehabilitation research during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Pelvic floor muscle tenderness on digital palpation among women: convergent validity with central sensitization.

BACKGROUND: Tenderness on palpation of the pelvic floor muscles (PFMs) is a clinical assessment tool used alongside other tests to identify PFM involvement in pelvic complaints including pelvic pain. Although reliability of PFM tenderness has been determined, validity has yet to be established. OBJECTIVES: To assess convergent validity of PFM tenderness on digital palpation with the presence of central pain mechanism, as determined by a score of greater than 40 on the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI). A secondary objective was to assess the agreement between PFM tenderness and self-reported symptoms of PFM sensitivity. METHODS: Participants completed a battery of self-report questions, the CSI, and various physical assessments (blinded assessors). Convergent validity was assessed between tenderness on palpation and the CSI. Kappa statistics were used to determine agreement between tenderness on palpation and self-reported perineal pain, urinary urgency, dyspareunia, and dysmenorrhea. RESULTS: Ninety-nine female participants with hip or back pain and at least one self-reported symptom of pelvic floor dysfunction were included in the study (mean age 40.56±12.72 years). Convergent validity was found between PFM tenderness on palpation and scores greater than 40 on the CSI (X12=4.2,p=0.04). There was poor agreement between tenderness on palpation with dyspareunia (agreement 62.83%, Kappa=0.27), dysmenorrhea (agreement 55.75%, Kappa=0.14), or perineal pain (agreement 53.04%, Kappa=0.10). CONCLUSIONS: PFM tenderness on digital palpation confirmed convergent validity with CSI scores, suggesting central pain mechanisms. Clinicians may need to consider the role of central pain mechanisms in their clinical decision making when treating PFM dysfunction.