Effect of Load on Muscle Activity, Kinematics, and Force Production During the Reverse Hyperextension Exercise.

The reverse hyperextension exercise is used to strengthen posterior chain musculature without axially loading the spine; however, there are no suggestions for loading. Twenty recreationally active individuals (13 males and 7 females; aged 25.4 [2.5] y; height 1.76 [0.09] m; mass 79.3 [15.8] kg) performed 2 sets of 10 repetitions with 50%, 100%, and 150% of bodyweight. Surface electromyography measured erector spinae, gluteus maximus, and biceps femoris activity. Motions of the trunk, lower extremities, and reverse hyperextension exercise pendulum were tracked. A 1-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to analyze differences. Few differences were found between 100% and 150% loads; however, heavier loads resulted in increased hip (5.0°) and trunk (4.0°) flexion compared with the 50% load. Similar patterns emerged for peak and integrated muscle activity, with erector spinae and gluteus maximus activity greater in the 100% and 150% loads than in the 50% load, and biceps femoris activation increasing as load increased. Peak force significantly (P < .001) increased with 100% (28% [31%]) and 150% (34% [40%]) loads compared with the 50% load. Findings suggest the reverse hyperextension exercise targets posterior chain musculature, but increasing loads does not linearly increase force and muscle activation.

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.

Biomechanical Comparison of the Reverse Hyperextension Machine and the Hyperextension Exercise.

Lawrence, MA, Chin, A, and Swanson, BT. Biomechanical comparison of the reverse hyperextension machine and the hyperextension exercise. J Strength Cond Res 33(8): 2053-2056, 2019-The purpose of this study was to compare activation of the erector spinae, gluteus maximus, and biceps femoris muscles, lower back extension moment, and lower extremity range of motion (ROM) between the reverse hyperextension (RHE) and hyperextension (HE) exercises. Motion and muscle activation of the trunk and lower extremity were measured while 20 recreationally active individuals performed 2 sets of 10 repetitions of each exercise. Equivalent loads were used for each exercise. Peak, average, and integrated muscle activity, low back moment, and ROM between the trunk and pelvis and the thigh and trunk were calculated. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test (p = 0.05) revealed significantly greater integrated activity of the biceps femoris and gluteus maximus during the HE exercise. The RHE exercise generated greater peak (+129%), integrated (+63%), and mean (+78%) low back moment as compared to the HE exercise. The RHE resulted in a significantly greater thigh to trunk ROM, 76.6 compared with 64.7. However, the RHE used less lumbar flexion, 20.4 compared with 31.1 for the HE. The RHE movement profile is preferable because it provides greater hip ROM with less angular stress and equivalent erector spinae activity.

Are movement-based classification systems more effective than therapeutic exercise or guideline based care in improving outcomes for patients with chronic low back pain? A systematic review.

Objectives: The purpose of this systematic review was to determine if movement-based classification (MBC) systems are more effective than therapeutic exercise or guideline-based care (GBC) in improving outcomes in patients with low back pain (LBP) based upon randomized clinical trials (RCT) with moderate to high methodological quality and low to moderate risk of bias. Methods: The search strategy was developed by a librarian experienced in systematic review methodology and peer reviewed by a second research librarian. The following databases were searched from their inception to May 17, 2018: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. The identified RCTs with a PEDro score of ≥6 were screened and assessed for risk of bias by two blinded individual reviewers using Covidence. Results: Seven studies were identified that had moderate-to-high methodological quality. One of the studies was identified as having a high risk of bias. Of the six studies that remained, only one study reported finding a statistically significant difference at the immediate follow-up that was not clinically significant. There was no significance at 6 and 12 months. Discussion: There is a paucity of moderate to high methodological quality RCTs with similar methodology that compare MBC to standard of care treatments for patients with LBP. Studies with moderate to high methodological quality that have a low risk of bias do not support MBCs as being superior to general exercise or GBC in the treatment of nonradicular LBP. Level of Evidence: 1a.

Comparison of range of motion during the cervical flexion rotation versus the side-bending rotation test in individuals with and without hyperlaxity.

Objective: The flexion rotation test (FRT) is used to determine C1-2 involvement in individuals with neck pain and headaches. Some individuals present with generalized joint hyperlaxity (GJH) which could influence the results of this test, which relies on a soft tissue locking mechanism. The purpose of this study was to examine the side-bend rotation test (SBRT), which utilizes osseous locking, compared to the FRT. Methods: Thirty-eight healthy individuals (25 female, 26.03 years) were assessed for GJH via the Beighton Hypermobility Index (BHI). A blinded examiner performed the FRT and SBRT bilaterally, measuring ROM using a digital goniometer device. Results: Statistically significant differences in ROM were present for the FRT based on negative (0-3) and positive (4-9) BHI score: (Right 46.4±3.6, 49.6±4.8, p=.031), (Left 45.5±3.5, 49.0±5.2, p=.023); no differences were observed for the SBRT (Right 37.6±4.3, 38.9±3.4), (Left 37.7±4.2, 37.6±3.4).  When further stratifying the groups, a one-way ANOVA and post-hoc testing revealed significant differences of FRT range of motion between the BHI 7-9 group(52.4 ± 4.4 -53.9 ± 3.4) compared to BHI 0-3 (45.4 ± 3.6-46.2 ± 3.5) and 4-6 groups (46.0 ± 3.7-46.4 ± 2.2), p < .001; there were no significant differences between the 0-3 and 4-6 groups. There were no between group differences for the SBRT, BHI 0-3 (37.5 ± 4.4-37.7 ± 4.3), BHI 7-9 (39.9 ± 3.7-39.2 ± 3.5). Discussion: Individuals with GJH demonstrated significant differences in ROM for the FRT, but not the SBRT. The SBRT may be a useful alternative to the FRT for individuals with hyperlaxity. However, further research needs to be conducted to assess the diagnostic ability of this test in individuals with cervical pathology.

EMG activity of selected rotator cuff musculature during grade III distraction and posterior glide glenohumeral mobilization: results of a pilot trial comparing painful and non-painful shoulders.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this pilot study were to investigate rotator cuff activity that may be present during grade III distraction and posterior glide mobilization of the glenohumeral (GH) joint, as well as to examine any differences in response between painful and non-painful shoulders utilizing these techniques. METHODS: EMG data were collected using Delsys EMGworks(®) software and Trigno(®) mini-wireless electrodes for the supraspinatus, infraspinatus and upper trapezius musculature during grade III GH distraction and posterior glide mobilization. A total of 20 shoulders (10 painful, 10 non-painful) were recruited from a sample of convenience. Submaximal voluntary dynamic contraction against gravity was used as reference for each of the three selected muscles. Participants underwent two trials of each mobilization, and the mean results for each group were assessed using descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation) and effect size. RESULTS: Both the painful and non-painful groups exhibited considerable levels of rotator cuff activity during each test parameter, with the painful group consistently generating higher supraspinatus and infraspinatus RMS and peak force activity. Analysis of the peak combined rotator cuff activity during distraction (d = 0.58) and posterior glides (d = 0.64) suggests moderate-to-high practical significance of the results. DISCUSSION: GH distraction and posterior glide mobilizations have traditionally been thought of as passive treatment procedures. The results of this pilot study indicate that the supraspinatus and infraspinatus are significantly active during these techniques. Findings suggest that during these techniques, the total infra/supraspinatus EMG activity approaches the level produced while raising the arm against gravity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.

Manual unloading of the lumbar spine: can it identify immediate responders to mechanical traction in a low back pain population? A study of reliability and criterion referenced predictive validity.

BACKGROUND: To date, no research has examined the reliability or predictive validity of manual unloading tests of the lumbar spine to identify potential responders to lumbar mechanical traction. PURPOSE: To determine: (1) the intra and inter-rater reliability of a manual unloading test of the lumbar spine and (2) the criterion referenced predictive validity for the manual unloading test. METHODS: Ten volunteers with low back pain (LBP) underwent a manual unloading test to establish reliability. In a separate procedure, 30 consecutive patients with LBP (age 50·86±11·51) were assessed for pain in their most provocative standing position (visual analog scale (VAS) 49·53±25·52 mm). Patients were assessed with a manual unloading test in their most provocative position followed by a single application of intermittent mechanical traction. Post traction, pain in the provocative position was reassessed and utilized as the outcome criterion. RESULTS: The test of unloading demonstrated substantial intra and inter-rater reliability K = 1·00, P = 0·002, K = 0·737, P = 0·001, respectively. There were statistically significant within group differences for pain response following traction for patients with a positive manual unloading test (P<0·001), while patients with a negative manual unloading test did not demonstrate a statistically significant change (P>0·05). There were significant between group differences for proportion of responders to traction based on manual unloading response (P = 0·031), and manual unloading response demonstrated a moderate to strong relationship with traction response Phi = 0·443, P = 0·015. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The manual unloading test appears to be a reliable test and has a moderate to strong correlation with pain relief that exceeds minimal clinically important difference (MCID) following traction supporting the validity of this test.

Short-term effects of thoracic spinal manipulations and message conveyed by clinicians to patients with musculoskeletal shoulder symptoms: a randomized clinical trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust manipulations (HVLATMs) and various messages on patients with musculoskeletal shoulder symptoms. BACKGROUND: Previous studies indicated that HVLATM directed at the thoracic spine and ribs resulted in improvements of shoulder range of motion, pain, and disability in patients with musculoskeletal shoulder symptoms. These studies did not explore if the outcome was dependent on thrust location, clinician communication with the patient, or if there were any lasting effects. METHODS: A consecutive sample of 100 patients with shoulder pain was randomized into four groups. Patients received one intervention session including: six thoracic HVLATM (spine versus scapula), a message about HVLATM (neutral versus positive), and standardized home exercises. Outcome measures included shoulder Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), NPRS with impingement testing, and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI). Measurements were recorded prior to intervention, immediately following intervention, and at short-term follow-up. Kruskal-Wallis statistics were used for between-group comparisons and Wilcoxon signed ranks for within-group comparisons. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients (22 per group) completed the study. Statistically significant differences were found for within-group comparisons for most time points assessed. No statistical differences were found for between-group comparisons. CONCLUSION: Patients improved following the interventions. Neither the type of HVLATM nor the message conveyed to the patients had a significant effect on the patients' improvements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1b.

Combined Effects of Glenohumeral Mobilization, Stretching, and Thoracic Manipulation on Shoulder Internal Rotation Range of Motion.

Background/purpose: Interventions including posterior glenohumeral mobilizations (PGM), sleeper stretches, and thoracic manipulation are commonly used to address posterior shoulder tightness. The purpose of this study was to assess the effects of adding thoracic manipulation to PGM and sleeper stretches on passive range of motion (PROM), joint mobility, and infraspinatus electromyographic (EMG) activity in shoulders with decreased internal rotation (IR) PROM. Design: Randomized Sequential Intervention Laboratory Study. Methods: Forty individuals with clinically significant IR loss attended two study sessions. Participants were randomized to receive five 30 seconds bouts of either grade III PGM or sleeper stretching. Following a seven-day washout period, all participants attended a second session and received a prescriptive supine HVLA manipulation targeting the T3-4 segment, followed by the previously randomized intervention. Outcome measures included internal rotation PROM, horizontal adduction PROM, posterior glenohumeral joint translation assessed via ultrasound imaging, and EMG activity of the infraspinatus during a PGM. All outcome measures were assessed pre- and immediately post-intervention and compared statistically. Results: There were significant within-group, but not between-group, differences for IR and horizontal adduction PROM following a single session of PGM or sleeper stretch. When combined with thoracic manipulation, significantly smaller within session changes of IR PROM were observed for both PGM (mean difference 4.4, p=0.017) and sleeper stretches (mean difference 6.4, p=0.0005). There were no significant between group differences for horizontal adduction PROM, humeral head translation, or EMG activity across all time points. Discussion: Both GH posterior mobilizations and sleeper stretches improved IR and horizontal adduction PROM in a single session. The addition of thoracic manipulation prior to local shoulder interventions resulted in smaller gains of both IR and horizontal adduction ROM. Level of evidence: Level 2.

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.

"Trustworthiness," confidence in estimated effects, and confidently translating research into clinical practice.

Trustworthy, preprocessed sources of evidence, such as systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines, are crucial for practicing clinicians. Confidence in estimated effects is related to how different the outcome data were between the two groups. Factors including the effect size, variability of the effect, research integrity, research methods, and selected outcome measures impact confidence in the estimated effect. The current evidence suggests that post-randomization biases cannot be ruled out with a high degree of certainty in published research, limiting the utility of preprocessed sources for clinicians. Research should be prospectively registered to improve this situation, and fidelity with prospective intent should be verified to minimize biases and strengthen confidence in estimated effects. Otherwise, discussions related to preprocessed literature, including P-values, point estimates of effect, confidence intervals, post-randomization biases, external and internal validity measures, and the confidence in estimated effects required to translate research into practice confidently, are all moot points.

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.

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.

Is the quality of systematic reviews influenced by prospective registration: a methods review of systematic musculoskeletal physical therapy reviews.

INTRODUCTION: It is unknown if verified prospective registration of systematic reviews (SRs) and the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that they use affect an SR's methodological quality on A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2). METHODS: Data originated from interventional SRs published in International Society of Physiotherapy Journals Editors (ISPJE) member journals, indexed in MEDLINE, between 1 January 2018 and 18 August 2021. Blinded reviewers identified the SRs and extracted the data for the variables of interest for the SRs and the RCTs. RESULTS: Two of 14 ISPJE member journals required prospective SR registration. Twenty SRs were identified, and 169 unique, retrievable RCTs were included within those SRs. One (5.0%) of the 20 SRs and 15 of the 169 (8.9%) RCTs were prospectively registered and published consistent with this intent. Nineteen (95.0%) of the 20 identified SRs was categorized as 'critically low' on the AMSTAR 2. DISCUSSION: SRs and the RCTs identified within them were infrequently prospectively registered, prospectively verifiable, or prospectively verified based on the established research record. CONCLUSIONS: Ensuring that SRs and RCTs have fidelity with the research record from conception to publication may help rule out low-value interventions, decrease variability in physical therapy practice, and solidify evidence-based physical therapy practice.

Cervical disc degeneration: important considerations for the manual therapist.

Cervical disc degeneration (CDD) is a progressive, age-related occurrence that is frequently associated with neck pain and radiculopathy. Consistent with the majority of published clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for neck pain, the 2017 American Physical Therapy Association Neck Pain CPG recommends cervical manipulation as an intervention to address acute, subacute, and chronic symptoms in the 'Neck Pain With Mobility Deficits' category as well for individuals with 'Chronic Neck Pain With Radiating Pain'. While CPGs are evidence-informed statements intended to help optimize care while considering the relative risks and benefits, these guidelines generally do not discuss the mechanical consequences of underlying cervical pathology nor do they recommend specific manipulation techniques, with selection left to the practitioner's discretion. From a biomechanical perspective, disc degeneration represents the loss of structural integrity/failure of the intervertebral disc. The sequelae of CDD include posterior neck pain, segmental hypermobility/instability, radicular symptoms, myelopathic disturbance, and potential vascular compromise. In this narrative review, we consider the mechanical, neurological, and vascular consequences of CDD, including information on the anatomy of the cervical disc and the mechanics of discogenic instability, the anatomic and mechanical basis of radiculitis, radiculopathy, changes to the intervertebral foramen, the importance of Modic changes, and the effect of spondylotic hypertrophy on the central spinal canal, spinal cord, and vertebral artery. The pathoanatomical and biomechanical consequences of CDD are discussed, along with suggestions which may enhance patient safety.

Do Prospective Intent and Established Metrics Correlate with Journal Impact Factor in Musculoskeletal Physical Therapy Trials?: A Secondary Analysis of A Methodological Review.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if there are any statistically significant associations between: 1) randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating physical therapy musculoskeletal interventions, 2) journal impact factor (JIF), 3) frequency of RCT citation, 4) whether prospective intent was identifiable, and 5) the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scores. METHODS: MEDLINE indexed RCTs addressing musculoskeletal interventions published between January 2016 and July 2020 in physical therapy journals were included. Two blinded reviewers identified the RCTs and extracted the variables of interest. RESULTS: With a familywise alpha adjustment, there was no statistically significant correlation between JIF and number of citations (rho = 0.187; p = 0.0280). Statistically significant weak positive correlations were identified between the JIF and prospectively registered RCTs (rho = 0.240; p = 0.0046), JIF and PEDro scores (rho = 0.250; p = 0.0031), and PEDro scores and prospectively registered RCTs (rho = 0.335; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that JIF and PEDro scores may not be accurate measures of RCT quality. Failing to ensure that published RCTs followed their prospective intent and using bibliometrics that fail to accurately measure what they propose appears to create untrustworthy preprocessed resources for practicing physical therapists during the evidence-based practice process. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1a.

The why, where, and how clinical reasoning model for the evaluation and treatment of patients with low back pain.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable overlap between pain referral patterns from the lumbar disc, lumbar facets, the sacroiliac joint (SIJ), and the hip. Additionally, sciatic like symptoms may originate from the lumbar spine or secondary to extra-spinal sources such as deep gluteal syndrome (GPS). Given that there are several overlapping potential anatomic sources of symptoms that may be synchronous in patients who have low back pain (LBP), it may not be realistic that a linear deductive approach can be used to establish a diagnosis and direct treatment in this group of patients. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this theoretical clinical reasoning model is to provide a framework to help clinicians integrate linear and non-linear clinical reasoning approaches to minimize clinical reasoning errors related to logically fallacious thinking and cognitive biases. METHODS: This masterclass proposes a hypothesis-driven and probabilistic approach that uses clinical reasoning for managing LBP that seeks to eliminate the challenges related to using any single diagnostic paradigm. CONCLUSIONS: This model integrates the why (mechanism of primary symptoms), where (location of the primary driver of symptoms), and how (impact of mechanical input and how it may or may not modulate the patient's primary complaint). The integration of these components individually, in serial, or simultaneously may help to develop clinical reasoning through reflection on and in action. A better understanding of what these concepts are and how they are related through the proposed model may help to improve the clinical conversation, academic application of clinical reasoning, and clinical outcomes.

The Unknown Prevalence of Postrandomization Bias in 15 Physical Therapy Journals: A Methods Review.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of prospective clinical trial registration and postrandomization bias in published musculoskeletal physical therapy randomized clinical trials (RCTs). DESIGN: A methods review. LITERATURE SEARCH: Articles indexed in MEDLINE and published between January 2016 and July 2020 were included. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Two independent blinded reviewers identified the RCTs using Covidence. We included RCTs related to musculoskeletal interventions that were published in International Society of Physiotherapy Journal Editors member journals. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted independently for the variables of interest from the identified RCTs by 2 blinded reviewers. The data were presented descriptively or in frequency tables. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-eight RCTs were identified. One third of RCTs were consistent with their prospectively registered intent (49/138); consistency with prospectively registered intent could not be determined for two thirds (89/138) of the RCTs. Four RCTs (8%)reported inconsistent results with the primary aims and 7 (14%) with the outcomes from the prospective clinical trial registry, despite high methodological quality (Physiotherapy Evidence Database [PEDro] scale score). Differences between prospectively registered and non-prospectively registered RCTs for PEDro scale scores had a medium effect size (r = 0.30). Two of 15 journals followed their clinical trial registration policy 100% of the time; in 1 journal, the published RCTs were consistent with the clinical trial registration. CONCLUSION: Postrandomization bias in musculoskeletal physical therapy RCTs could not be ruled out, due to the lack of prospective clinical trial registration and detailed data analysis plans. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(11):542-550. Epub 21 Sep 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10491.