Using the benefit-harm trade-off method to determine the smallest worthwhile effect of intensive motor training on strength for people with spinal cord injury.

STUDY DESIGN: Interviews using the benefit-harm trade-off method and an online survey. OBJECTIVES: To determine the smallest worthwhile effect (SWE) of motor training on strength for people with spinal cord injury (SCI). SETTING: SCI units, Australia. METHODS: Forty people with recent SCI who had participated in motor training as part of their rehabilitation program (patient participants) and 37 physiotherapists (physiotherapist participants) working in SCI were recruited. The patient participants underwent an iterative process using the benefit-harm trade-off method to determine the SWE of motor training on strength. The physiotherapist participants were given an online survey to determine the SWE for five different scenarios. Both groups considered the SWE of a physiotherapy intervention involving an additional 12 h of motor training for 10 weeks on top of usual care. They were required to estimate the smallest improvement in strength (points on the Total Motor Score of the International Standards for Neurological Classification of SCI) to justify the effort and associated costs, risks or inconveniences of the motor training. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range) smallest improvement in strength that patient and physiotherapist participants deemed worth the effort and associated costs, risks or inconveniences of the motor training was 3 (1-5) points, and 9 (7-13) points, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: People with recent SCI are willing to devote 12 h a week for 10 weeks to motor training in addition to their usual care to gain small changes in strength. Physiotherapists wanted to see greater improvements to justify the intervention.

Remotely delivered physiotherapy is as effective as face-to-face physiotherapy for musculoskeletal conditions (REFORM): a randomised trial.

QUESTION: Is remotely delivered physiotherapy as good or better than face-to-face physiotherapy for the management of musculoskeletal conditions? DESIGN: Randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial with concealed allocation, blinded assessors and intention-to-treat analysis. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 210 adult participants with a musculoskeletal condition who presented for outpatient physiotherapy at five public hospitals in Sydney. INTERVENTION: One group received a remotely delivered physiotherapy program for 6 weeks that consisted of one face-to-face physiotherapy session in conjunction with weekly text messages, phone calls at 2 and 4 weeks, and an individualised home exercise program delivered through an app. The other group received usual face-to-face physiotherapy care in an outpatient setting. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the Patient Specific Functional Scale at 6 weeks with a pre-specified non-inferiority margin of -15 out of 100 points. Secondary outcomes included: the Patient Specific Functional Scale at 26 weeks; kinesiophobia, pain, function/disability, global impression of change and quality of life at 6 and 26 weeks; and satisfaction with service delivery at 6 weeks. RESULTS: The mean between-group difference (95% CI) for the Patient Specific Functional Scale at 6 weeks was 2.7 out of 100 points (-3.5 to 8.8), where a positive score favoured remotely delivered physiotherapy. The lower end of the 95% CI was greater than the non-inferiority margin. Whilst non-inferiority margins were not set for the secondary outcomes, the 95% CI of the mean between-group difference ruled out clinically meaningful differences. CONCLUSION: Remotely delivered physiotherapy with support via phone, text and an app is as good as face-to-face physiotherapy for the management of musculoskeletal conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12619000065190.

Early and Intensive Motor Training for people with spinal cord injuries (the SCI-MT Trial): protocol of the process evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: People with spinal cord injury receive physical rehabilitation to promote neurological recovery. Physical rehabilitation commences as soon as possible when a person is medically stable. One key component of physical rehabilitation is motor training. There is initial evidence to suggest that motor training can enhance neurological recovery if it is provided soon after injury and in a high dosage. The Early and Intensive Motor Training Trial is a pragmatic randomised controlled trial to determine whether 10 weeks of intensive motor training enhances neurological recovery for people with spinal cord injury. This pragmatic randomised controlled trial will recruit 220 participants from 15 spinal injury units in Australia, Scotland, Italy, Norway, England, Belgium and the Netherlands. This protocol paper describes the process evaluation that will run alongside the Early and Intensive Motor Training Trial. This process evaluation will help to explain the trial results and explore the potential facilitators and barriers to the possible future rollout of the trial intervention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The UK Medical Research Council process evaluation framework and the Implementation Research Logic Model will be used to explain the trial outcomes and inform future implementation. Key components of the context, implementation and mechanism of impact, as well as the essential elements of the intervention and outcomes, will be identified and analysed. Qualitative and quantitative data will be collected and triangulated with the results of the Early and Intensive Motor Training Trial to strengthen the findings of this process evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the Early and Intensive Motor Training Trial and process evaluation has been obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee at the Northern Sydney Local Health District (New South Wales) in Australia (project identifier: 2020/ETH02540). All participants are required to provide written consent after being informed about the trial and the process evaluation. The results of this process evaluation will be published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12621000091808); Universal Trial Number (U1111-1264-1689).

Early and intensive motor training to enhance neurological recovery in people with spinal cord injury: trial protocol.

STUDY DESIGN: Protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial (the SCI-MT trial). OBJECTIVES: To determine whether 10 weeks of intensive motor training enhances neurological recovery in people with recent spinal cord injury (SCI). SETTING: Fifteen spinal injury units in Australia, Scotland, England, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, and Belgium. METHODS: A pragmatic randomised controlled trial will be undertaken. Two hundred and twenty people with recent SCI (onset in the preceding 10 weeks, American Spinal Injuries Association Impairment Scale (AIS) A lesion with motor function more than three levels below the motor level on one or both sides, or an AIS C or D lesion) will be randomised to receive either usual care plus intensive motor training (12 h of motor training per week for 10 weeks) or usual care alone. The primary outcome is neurological recovery at 10 weeks, measured with the Total Motor Score from the International Standards for Neurological Classification of SCI. Secondary outcomes include global measures of motor function, ability to walk, quality of life, participants' perceptions about ability to perform self-selected goals, length of hospital stay and participants' impressions of therapeutic benefit at 10 weeks and 6 months. A cost-effectiveness study and process evaluation will be run alongside the trial. The first participant was randomised in June 2021 and the trial is due for completion in 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the SCI-MT Trial will guide recommendations about the type and dose of inpatient therapy that optimises neurological recovery in people with SCI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12621000091808 (1.2.2021).

Protocol for a process evaluation: face-to-face physiotherapy compared with a supported home exercise programme for the management of musculoskeletal conditions: the REFORM trial.

INTRODUCTION: The REFORM (REhabilitation FOR Musculoskeletal conditions) trial is a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial (n=210) designed to determine whether a supported home exercise programme is as good or better than a course of face-to-face physiotherapy for the management of some musculoskeletal conditions. The trial is currently being conducted across Sydney government hospitals in Australia. This process evaluation will run alongside the REFORM trial. It combines qualitative and quantitative data to help explain the trial results and determine the feasibility of rolling out supported home exercise programmes in settings similar to the REFORM trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two theoretical frameworks underpin our process evaluation methodology: the Realist framework (context, mechanism, outcomes) considers the causal assumptions as to why a supported home exercise programme may be as good or better than face-to-face physiotherapy in terms of the context, mechanisms and outcomes of the trial. The RE-AIM framework describes the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance of the intervention. These two frameworks will be broadly used to guide this process evaluation using a mixed-methods approach. For example, qualitative data will be derived from interviews with patients, healthcare professionals and stakeholders, and quantitative data will be collected to determine the cost and feasibility of providing supported home exercise programmes. These data will be analysed iteratively before the analysis of the trial results and will be triangulated with the results of the primary and secondary outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial will be conducted in accordance with the National Health and Medical Research Council National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2018) and the Note for Good Clinical Practice (CPMP/ICH-135/95). Ethical approval was obtained on 17 March 2017 from the Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (trial number: HREC/16HAWKE/431-RESP/16/287) with an amendment for the process evaluation approved on 4 February 2020. The results of the process evaluation will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12619000065190.

Do any physiotherapy interventions increase spinal cord independence measure or functional independence measure scores in people with spinal cord injuries? A systematic review.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether any physiotherapy interventions increase Spinal Cord Independence Measure or Functional Independence Measure scores (SCIM/FIM) in people with spinal cord injury (SCI), with the overall aim of determining whether any physiotherapy interventions need to be controlled for in studies examining the effects of novel experimental interventions on SCIM/FIM. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to identify all randomised controlled trials examining the effect of any physiotherapy intervention on SCIM/FIM in people with SCI. PEDro scores were used to rate risk of bias. The results of similar trials and comparisons were pooled using meta-analyses. RESULTS: Thirty-three trials met the inclusion criteria but only 27 provided useable data. The median (IQR) PEDro score was 6.0 (4.0-7.0). A meta-analysis of four trials comparing robotic gait training with overground gait training that used a combination of FIM/SCIM indicated a pooled mean (95% CI) between-group difference of 0.38 standardised mean difference (SMD; 95% CI, 0.08-0.67). A second meta-analysis of two trials comparing upper limb training with and without functional electrical stimulation using FIM indicated a pooled (95% CI) between-group difference of 1.31 SMD (0.62-1.99). Another six trials examining a range of different physiotherapy interventions reported a statistically significant mean between-group difference on SCIM/FIM. CONCLUSION: There is low-quality evidence to indicate that a small number of physiotherapy interventions increase SCIM/FIM. The importance of controlling for all physiotherapy interventions in studies examining the effects of novel experimental interventions on SCIM/FIM is as yet unclear.

Face-to-face physiotherapy compared with a supported home exercise programme for the management of musculoskeletal conditions: protocol of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial-the REFORM trial.

INTRODUCTION: Exercise, support and advice are considered core components of management for most musculoskeletal conditions and are typically provided by physiotherapists through regular face-to-face treatments. However, exercise can be provided remotely as part of a home exercise programme, while support and advice can be provided over the telephone. There is initial evidence from trials and systematic reviews to suggest that remotely provided physiotherapy can be used to manage a variety of musculoskeletal conditions safely and effectively. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The aim of this single-blind randomised controlled non-inferiority trial is to determine whether a supported home exercise programme is as good as or better than face-to-face physiotherapy for the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions. Two hundred and ten participants will be recruited from five public hospitals in Sydney, Australia. Participants will be randomised to either the supported home exercise group or the face-to-face physiotherapy group. Participants allocated to the supported home exercise group will initially receive one face-to-face session with the trial physiotherapist and will then be managed remotely for the next 6 weeks. Participants allocated to the face-to-face physiotherapy group will receive a course of physiotherapy as typically provided in Sydney government hospitals. The primary outcome is function measured by the Patient Specific Functional Scale at 6 weeks. There will be nine secondary outcomes measured at 6 and 26 weeks. Separate analyses will be conducted on each outcome, and all analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. A health economic evaluation will be conducted from a health funder plus patient perspective. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained on the 17 March 2017 from the Northern Sydney Local Health District HREC, trial number HREC/16HAWKE/431-RESP/16/287. The results of this study will be submitted for publication to peer-reviewed journals and be presented at national and international conferences. Recruitment commenced in March 2019, and it is anticipated that the trial will be completed by December 2021. This trial will investigate two different models of physiotherapy care for people with musculoskeletal conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CPMP/ICH-135/95. PROTOCOL VERSION: The most recent version of the protocol is V.1.2 dated November 2019.

Accuracy of physiotherapists' predictions for mobility outcomes at 1-year post spinal cord injury.

The primary objective of this study was to determine the accuracy of physiotherapists' predictions of mobility for people with spinal cord injury (SCI). Five physiotherapists and 47 patients from two SCI units were recruited. Two sets of predictions about mobility at 1 year were made for each patient shortly after they commenced rehabilitation. The predictions were made using standardized outcome measures. One set of predictions was made by the physiotherapists from the patients' SCI unit who had face-to-face contact with the patients and the other set of predictions was made by the physiotherapists from the other SCI unit who had no face-to-face contact with the patients and instead relied on chart records, and vice versa for patients from the second SCI unit. Correlations between mobility at 1 year and the predictions made by the physiotherapists who had face-to-face contact with the patients ranged between 0.54 and 0.85. The corresponding correlations for the physiotherapists who did not have face-to-face contact ranged between 0.40 and 0.71. Contact and non-contact physiotherapists' predictions were within one point of outcomes between 55% and 83% of the time. Physiotherapists were reasonably accurate at predicting future mobility. Face-to-face contact with patients slightly improved the accuracy of predictions.

Physical therapists' ability to predict future mobility after spinal cord injury.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Goal setting is an important aspect of any physical therapy program. It not only determines the focus of therapy but also determines discharge planning and equipment prescription. The effectiveness of goal setting is dependent on therapists' ability to predict patients' future mobility. The purpose of this study was to determine how accurately physical therapists can predict the future mobility of people with spinal cord injuries (SCI) at the time of admission to rehabilitation. METHODS: A cohort observational study was undertaken in 2 SCI units in Sydney, Australia, where a consecutive series of 50 patients admitted for rehabilitation was recruited. At the time of admission to rehabilitation, treating therapists predicted each patient's likely future mobility. Therapists used standardized assessment scales that captured ability to mobilize in a wheelchair, transfer, move in bed, and walk. After 3 months of standard in-patient rehabilitation, patients were reassessed by blinded assessors using the same scales. Therapists' predictions on admission were compared with patients' outcomes at 3 months. RESULTS: There was a strong positive correlation between therapists' predictions on admission and patients' outcomes at 3 months (r = 0.53-0.92). Therapists' predictions were within 1 point of patient outcomes between 60% and 78% of the time. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Physical therapists are able to accurately predict future mobility of people with SCI at the time of admission to rehabilitation. Ability to accurately predict future mobility is necessary for goal setting and for ensuring that therapy, discharge planning, and equipment prescription are appropriate. These findings are important because they indicate how much confidence patients, funders, policy makers, and administrators can have in therapists' ability to predict patients' future mobility.

Metabolic tumor volume predicts for recurrence and death in head-and-neck cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the prognostic value of metabolic tumor volume measured on 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging and other clinical factors in patients treated for locally advanced head-and-neck cancer (HNC) at a single institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2003 and August 2007, 85 patients received positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography-guided chemoradiotherapy for HNC. Metabolically active tumor regions were delineated on pretreatment PET scans semiautomatically using custom software. We evaluated the relationship of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose-PET maximum standardized uptake value (SUV) and total metabolic tumor volume (MTV) with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Mean follow-up for surviving patients was 20.4 months. The estimated 2-year locoregional control, DFS, and OS for the group were 88.0%, 69.5%, and 78.4%, respectively. The median time to first failure was 9.8 months among the 16 patients with relapse. An increase in MTV of 17.4 mL (difference between the 75th and 25th percentiles) was significantly associated with an increased hazard of first event (recurrence or death) (1.9-fold, p < 0.001), even after controlling for Karnofsky performance status (KPS) (1.8-fold, p = 0.001), and of death (2.1-fold, p < 0.001). We did not find a significant relationship of maximum SUV, stage, or other clinical factors with DFS or OS. CONCLUSIONS: Metabolic tumor volume is an adverse prognostic factor for disease recurrence and death in HNC. MTV retained significance after controlling for KPS, the only other significant adverse prognostic factor found in this cohort. MTV is a direct measure of tumor burden and is a potentially valuable tool for risk stratification and guiding treatment in future studies.