Revolutionizing orthopedic healthcare: a systematic review unveiling recombinant antimicrobial peptides.

The increasing demand for orthopedic surgeries, including joint replacements, is driven by an aging population and improved diagnosis of joint conditions. Orthopedic surgeries carry a risk of infection, especially in patients with comorbidities. The rise of antibiotic resistance exacerbates this issue, necessitating alternatives like in vitro bioengineered antimicrobial peptides (AMPs), offering broad-spectrum activity and multiple action mechanisms. This review aimed to assess the prevalence of antimicrobial potential and the yield after purification among recombinant AMP families. The antimicrobial potential was evaluated using the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) values against the most common bacteria involved in clinical infections. This systematic review adhered to PRISMA guidelines, focusing on in vitro studies of recombinant AMPs. The search strategy was run on PubMed, Scopus and Embase up to 30th March 2023. The Population, Exposure and Outcome model was used to extract the data from studies and ToxRTool for the risk of bias analysis. This review included studies providing peptide production yield data and MIC values against pathogenic bacteria. Non-English texts, reviews, conference abstracts, books, studies focusing solely on chemical synthesis, those reporting incomplete data sets, using non-standard MIC assessment methods, or presenting MIC values as ranges rather than precise concentrations, were excluded. From 370 publications, 34 studies on AMPs were analyzed. These covered 46 AMPs across 18 families, with Defensins and Hepcidins being most common. Yields varied from 0.5 to 2,700 mg/L. AMPs were tested against 23 bacterial genera, with MIC values ranging from 0.125 to >1,152 µg/mL. Arenicins showed the highest antimicrobial activity, particularly against common orthopedic infection pathogens. However, AMP production yields varied and some AMPs demonstrated limited effectiveness against certain bacterial strains. This systematic review emphasizes the critical role of bioengineered AMPs to cope infections and antibiotic resistance. It meticulously evaluates recombinant AMPs, focusing on their antimicrobial efficacy and production yields. The review highlights that, despite the variability in AMP yields and effectiveness, Arenicins and Defensins are promising candidates for future research and clinical applications in treating antibiotic-resistant orthopedic infections. This study contributes significantly to the understanding of AMPs in healthcare, underscoring their potential in addressing the growing challenge of antibiotic resistance. Systematic review registration:https://osf.io/2uq4c/.

Evidence-informed and consensus-based statements about SAFEty of Physical Agent Modalities Practice in physiotherapy and rehabilitation medicine (SAFE PAMP): a national Delphi of healthcare scientific societies.

OBJECTIVE: A shared consensus on the safety about physical agent modalities (PAMs) practice in physiotherapy and rehabilitation is lacking. We aimed to develop evidence-informed and consensus-based statements about the safety of PAMs. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A RAND-modified Delphi Rounds' survey was used to reach a consensus. We established a steering committee of the Italian Association of Physiotherapy (Associazione Italiana di Fisioterapia) to identify areas and questions for developing statements about the safety of the most commonly used PAMs in physiotherapy and rehabilitation. We invited 28 National Scientific and Technical Societies, including forensics and lay members, as a multidisciplinary and multiprofessional panel of experts to evaluate the nine proposed statements and formulate additional inputs. The level of agreement was measured using a 9-point Likert scale, with consensus in the Delphi Rounds assessed using the rating proportion with a threshold of 75%. RESULTS: Overall, 17 (61%) out of 28 scientific and technical societies participated, involving their most representative members. The panel of experts mainly consisted of clinicians (88%) with expertise in musculoskeletal (47%), pelvic floor (24%), neurological (18%) and lymphatic (6%) disorders with a median experience of 30 years (IQR=17-36). Two Delphi rounds were necessary to reach a consensus. The final approved criteria list comprised nine statements about the safety of nine PAMs (ie, electrical stimulation neuromodulation, extracorporeal shock wave therapy, laser therapy, electromagnetic therapy, diathermy, hot thermal agents, cryotherapy and therapeutic ultrasound) in adult patients with a general note about populations subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The resulting consensus-based statements inform patients, healthcare professionals and policy-makers regarding the safe application of PAMs in physiotherapy and rehabilitation practice. Future research is needed to extend this consensus on paediatric and frail populations, such as immunocompromised patients.

Effectiveness of Telemedicine for Musculoskeletal Disorders: Umbrella Review.

BACKGROUND: Several systematic reviews (SRs) assessing the use of telemedicine for musculoskeletal conditions have been published in recent years. However, the landscape of evidence on multiple clinical outcomes remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to summarize the available evidence from SRs on telemedicine for musculoskeletal disorders. METHODS: We conducted an umbrella review of SRs with and without meta-analysis by searching PubMed and EMBASE up to July 25, 2022, for SRs of randomized controlled trials assessing telemedicine. We collected any kind of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), and objective measures, including direct and indirect costs. We assessed the methodological quality with the AMSTAR 2 tool (A Measurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews 2). Findings were reported qualitatively. RESULTS: Overall, 35 SRs published between 2015 and 2022 were included. Most reviews (n=24, 69%) were rated as critically low quality by AMSTAR 2. The majority of reviews assessed "telerehabilitation" (n=29) in patients with osteoarthritis (n=13) using PROMs (n=142 outcomes mapped with n=60 meta-analyses). A substantive body of evidence from meta-analyses found telemedicine to be beneficial or equal in terms of PROMs compared to conventional care (n=57 meta-analyses). Meta-analyses showed no differences between groups in PREMs (n=4), while objectives measures (ie, "physical function") were mainly in favor of telemedicine or showed no difference (9/13). All SRs showed notably lower costs for telemedicine compared to in-person visits. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine can provide more accessible health care with noninferior results for various clinical outcomes in comparison with conventional care. The assessment of telemedicine is largely represented by PROMs, with some gaps for PREMs, objective measures, and costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022347366; https://osf.io/pxedm/.

Performance of ChatGPT Compared to Clinical Practice Guidelines in Making Informed Decisions for Lumbosacral Radicular Pain: A Cross-sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of an artificial intelligence chatbot to clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) recommendations for providing answers to complex clinical questions on lumbosacral radicular pain. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: We extracted recommendations from recent CPGs for diagnosing and treating lumbosacral radicular pain. Relative clinical questions were developed and queried to OpenAI's ChatGPT (GPT-3.5). We compared ChatGPT answers to CPGs recommendations by assessing the (1) internal consistency of ChatGPT answers by measuring the percentage of text wording similarity when a clinical question was posed 3 times, (2) reliability between 2 independent reviewers in grading ChatGPT answers, and (3) accuracy of ChatGPT answers compared to CPGs recommendations. Reliability was estimated using Fleiss' kappa (κ) coefficients, and accuracy by interobserver agreement as the frequency of the agreements among all judgments. RESULTS: We tested 9 clinical questions. The internal consistency of text ChatGPT answers was unacceptable across all 3 trials in all clinical questions (mean percentage of 49%, standard deviation of 15). Intrareliability (reviewer 1: κ = 0.90, standard error [SE] = 0.09; reviewer 2: κ = 0.90, SE = 0.10) and interreliability (κ = 0.85, SE = 0.15) between the 2 reviewers was "almost perfect." Accuracy between ChatGPT answers and CPGs recommendations was slight, demonstrating agreement in 33% of recommendations. CONCLUSION: ChatGPT performed poorly in internal consistency and accuracy of the indications generated compared to clinical practice guideline recommendations for lumbosacral radicular pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(3):1-7. Epub 29 January 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12151.

Wearable Devices to Improve Physical Activity and Reduce Sedentary Behaviour: An Umbrella Review.

BACKGROUND: Several systematic reviews (SRs), with and without meta-analyses, have investigated the use of wearable devices to improve physical activity, and there is a need for frequent and updated syntheses on the topic. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate whether using wearable devices increased physical activity and reduced sedentary behaviour in adults. METHODS: We conducted an umbrella review searching PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Library, MedRxiv, Rxiv and bioRxiv databases up to February 5th, 2023. We included all SRs that evaluated the efficacy of interventions when wearable devices were used to measure physical activity in adults aged over 18 years. The primary outcomes were physical activity and sedentary behaviour measured as the number of steps per day, minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) per week, and minutes of sedentary behaviour (SB) per day. We assessed the methodological quality of each SR using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews, version 2 (AMSTAR 2) and the certainty of evidence of each outcome measure using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations). We interpreted the results using a decision-making framework examining the clinical relevance and the concordances or discordances of the SR effect size. RESULTS: Fifty-one SRs were included, of which 38 included meta-analyses (302 unique primary studies). Of the included SRs, 72.5% were rated as 'critically low methodological quality'. Overall, with a slight overlap of primary studies (corrected cover area: 3.87% for steps per day, 3.12% for MVPA, 4.06% for SB) and low-to-moderate certainty of the evidence, the use of WDs may increase PA by a median of 1,312.23 (IQR 627-1854) steps per day and 57.8 (IQR 37.7 to 107.3) minutes per week of MVPA. Uncertainty is present for PA in pathologies and older adults subgroups and for SB in mixed and older adults subgroups (large confidence intervals). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the use of WDs may increase physical activity in middle-aged adults. Further studies are needed to investigate the effects of using WDs on specific subgroups (such as pathologies and older adults) in different follow-up lengths, and the role of other intervention components.

Shear-wave elastography for the evaluation of tendinopathies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare pathologic and healthy tendons using shear-wave elastography (SWE). METHODS: A systematic review with meta-analysis was done searching Pubmed and EMBASE up to September 2022. Prospective, retrospective and cross-sectional studies that used SWE in the assessment of pathologic tendons versus control were included. Our primary outcome were SWE velocity (m/s) and stiffness (kPa). Methodological quality was assessed by the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). We used the mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to quantify effects between groups. We performed sensitivity analysis in case of high heterogeneity, after excluding poor quality studies according to MINORS assessment. We used Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation to evaluate the certainty of evidence (CoE). RESULTS: Overall, 16 studies with 676 pathologic tendons (188 Achilles, 142 patellar, 96 supraspinatus, 250 mixed) and 723 control tendons (484 healthy; 239 contralateral tendon) were included. Five studies (31.3%) were judged as poor methodological quality. Shear-wave velocity and stiffness meta-analyses showed high heterogeneity. According to a sensitivity analysis, pathologic tendons had a lower shear wave velocity (MD of - 1.69 m/s; 95% CI 1.85; - 1.52; n = 274; I2 50%) compared to healthy tendons with very low CoE. Sensitivity analysis on stiffness still showed high heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Pathological tendons may have reduced SWE velocity compared to controls, but the evidence is very uncertain. Future robust high-quality longitudinal studies and clear technical indications on the use of this tool are needed. PROTOCOL: PROSPERO identifier: CRD42023405410 CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: SWE is a relatively recent modality that may increase sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of conventional ultrasound imaging promoting early detection of tendinopathy. Non-negligible heterogeneity has been observed in included studies, so our findings may encourage the conduct of future high-quality longitudinal studies which can provide clear technical indications on the use of this promising tool in tendon imaging.

Reasons for missing evidence in rehabilitation meta-analyses: a cross-sectional meta-research study.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials are the best evidence for informing on intervention effectiveness. Their results, however, can be biased due to omitted evidence in the quantitative analyses. We aimed to assess the proportion of randomized controlled trials omitted from meta-analyses in the rehabilitation field and explore related reasons. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional meta-research study. For each systematic review included in a published selected sample in the rehabilitation field, we identified an index meta-analysis on the primary outcome and the main comparison. We then looked at all the studies considered eligible for the chosen comparison in the systematic review and identified those trials that have been omitted (i.e., not included) from each index meta-analysis. Reasons for omission were collected based on an eight-reason classification. We used descriptive statistics to describe the proportion of omitted trials overall and according to each reason. RESULTS: Starting from a cohort of 827 systematic reviews, 131 index meta-analyses comprising a total of 1761 eligible trials were selected. Only 16 index meta-analyses included all eligible studies while 15 omitted studies without providing references. From the remaining 100 index meta-analyses, 717 trials (40,7%) were omitted overall. Specific reasons for omission were: "unable to distinguish between selective reporting and inadequate planning" (39,3%, N = 282), "inadequate planning" (17%, N = 122), "justified to be not included" (15,1%, N = 108), "incomplete reporting" (8,4%, N = 60), "selective reporting" (3,3%, N = 24) and other situations (e.g., outcome present but no motivation for omission) (5,2%, N = 37). The 11,7% (N = 84) of omitted trials were not assessed due to non-English language or full text not available. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of the eligible trials were omitted from their index meta-analyses. Better reporting, protocol registration, definition and adoption of core outcome sets are needed to prevent omission of evidence in systematic reviews.

Bias in the measurement of the outcome is associated with effect sizes in randomized clinical trials on exercise therapy for chronic low back pain: a meta-epidemiological study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the relationships between the risk of bias and treatment effect estimates for exercise therapy interventions on pain intensity and physical functioning outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with chronic low back pain. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A cross-sectional meta-epidemiological study of the 230 RCTs (31,674 participants) in the 2021 'Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain' Cochrane Review were included. Study design characteristics, sample size, prospective trial registration, flowchart information, interventions, and comparisons were extracted. Independent pairs of reviewers assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. RESULTS: The metaregression included 220 (pain intensity) and 203 (physical functioning) effect sizes. Unadjusted and adjusted metaregression models showed no significant associations between the bias domains and pain intensity effect sizes. Only domain 'bias in the measurement of the outcome' was significantly associated with physical functioning (standardized mean difference: -0.40, 95% confidence interval: -0.77 to -0.02) when adjusted for flowchart reported (yes/no), prospective trial registration, sample size, and comparator type. CONCLUSION: The risk of bias in the measurement of the outcome could lead to slight overestimates of the effect size for physical functioning. Clinicians should consider this when they read and assess RCT results in this field. We encourage metaresearchers to replicate our findings using a consistent approach for evaluating the risk of bias (i.e., the RoB 2 tool) in other musculoskeletal conditions and interventions to investigate their generalizability.

Effectiveness and safety of virtual reality rehabilitation after stroke: an overview of systematic reviews.

Background: Virtual reality (VR) is an innovative neurorehabilitation modality that has been variously examined in systematic reviews. We assessed VR effectiveness and safety after cerebral stroke. Methods: In this overview of systematic reviews, we searched eleven databases (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, ISI Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Pedro, Otseeker, Healthevidence.org, Epistemonikos) and grey literature from inception to January 17, 2023. Studies eligible for inclusion were systematic reviews published in English that included adult patients with a clinical diagnosis of stroke (acute to chronic phase) undergoing any kind of immersive, semi-immersive or non-immersive VR intervention with or without conventional therapy versus conventional therapy alone. The primary outcome was motor upper limb function and activity. The secondary outcomes were gait and balance, cognitive and mental function, limitation of activities, participation, and adverse events. We calculated the degree of overlap between reviews based on the corrected covered area (CCA). Methodological quality was assessed using the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2) and the Certainty of Evidence (CoE) using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Discordances between results were examined using a conceptual framework based on the Jadad algorithm. This overview is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022329263. Findings: Of the 58 reviews included (n = 345 unique primary studies), 42 (72.4%) had conducted meta-analysis. More than half of the reviews (58.6%) were published between 2020 and 2022 and many (77.6%) were judged critically low in quality by AMSTAR 2. Most reported the Fugl Meyer Assessment scale (FMA-UE) to measure upper limb function and activity. For the primary outcome, there was a moderate overlap of primary studies (CCA 9.0%) with discordant findings. Focusing on upper limb function (FMA-UE), VR with or without conventional therapy seems to be more effective than conventional therapy alone, with low to moderate CoE and probable to definite clinical relevance. For secondary outcomes there was uncertainty about the superiority or no difference between groups due to substantial heterogeneity of measurement scales (eg, methodological choices). A few reviews (n = 6) reported the occurrence of mild adverse events. Interpretation: Current evidence suggests that multiple meta-analyses agreed on the superiority of VR with or without conventional therapy over conventional therapy on FME-UE for upper limb. Clinicians may consider embedding VR technologies into their practice as appropriate with patient's goals, abilities, and preferences. However, caution is needed given the poor methodological quality of reviews. Funding: Italian Ministry of Health.

What is the landscape of evidence about the safety of physical agents used in physical medicine and rehabilitation? A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Several systematic reviews (SRs) assessing the effectiveness of superficial physical agents have been published, but the evidence about their safety remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To identify areas where there is evidence of the safety of physical agents by a scoping review. DESIGN: Four databases were systematically searched for including English SRs that explored and reported safety in terms of adverse events (AEs) related to the application of physical agents in outpatient and inpatient physical medicine and rehabilitation settings managed by healthcare professionals, published in January 2011-29 September 2021. The severity of AEs was classified according to the Common Terminology Criteria. Then, AE findings were summarised according to the SR syntheses. Finally, the reporting of the certainty of the evidence was mapped. RESULTS: Overall, 117 SRs were retrieved. Most of the SRs included randomised controlled trials (77%) and patients with musculoskeletal disorders (67%). The most investigated physical agents were extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) (15%), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (13%) and electrical stimulation (12%). No AE (35%) was reported in one-third of the included primary studies in SRs, whereas few severe AEs occurred in less than 1% of the sample. Among physical agents, ESWT showed an increased risk of experiencing mild AEs compared with the control. Most SRs reported a qualitative AE synthesis (65.8%), and few reported the certainty of the evidence (17.9%), which was mainly low. CONCLUSION: We found evidence of safety on several physical agents coming mostly from qualitative synthesis. No significant harms of these interventions were found except for ESWT reporting mild AEs. More attention to the AEs reporting and their classification should be pursued to analyse them and assess the certainty of evidence quantitatively. REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/6vx5a/.

Structured approach with primary and secondary survey for major trauma care: an overview of reviews.

BACKGROUND: A structured approach involves systematic management of trauma patients. We aim to conduct an overview of reviews about the clinical efficacy and safety of structured approach (i.e., primary and secondary survey) by guideline checklist compared to non-structured approach (i.e. clinical examination); moreover, routine screening whole-body computer tomography (WBCT) was compared to non-routine WBCT in patients with suspected major trauma. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews up to 3 May 2022. Systematic reviews (SRs) that investigated the use of a structured approach compared to a non-structured approach were eligible. Two authors independently extracted data, managed the overlapping of primary studies belonging to the included SRs and calculated the corrected covered area (CCA). The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. RESULTS: We included nine SRs investigating two comparisons in stable trauma patients: structured approach vs non-structured approach (n = 1) and routine WBCT vs non-routine WBCT (n = 8). The overlap of included primary studies was generally high across outcomes (CCA ranged between 20.85 and 42.86%) with some discrepancies in the directions of effects across reviews. The application of a structured approach by checklist may improve adherence to guidelines (e.g. Advanced Trauma Life Support) during resuscitation and might lead to a reduction in mortality among severely injured patients as compared to clinical examination (Adjusted OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.30-0.89; p = 0.018; low certainty of evidence). The use of routine WBCT seems to offer little to no effects in reducing mortality and time spent in emergency room or department, whereas non-routine WBCT seems to offer little to no effects in reducing radiation dose, intensive care unit length of stay (LOS) and hospital LOS (low-to-moderate certainty of evidence). CONCLUSIONS: The application of structured approach by checklist during trauma resuscitation may improve patient- and process-related outcomes. Including non-routine WBCT seems to offer the best trade-offs between benefits and harm. Clinicians should consider these findings in the light of their clinical context, the volume of patients in their facilities, the need for time management, and costs.

Does femoroacetabular impingement syndrome affect range of motion? A systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) affect hip range of motion (ROM). SOURCES OF DATA: We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis searching six electronic databases from inception to March 21, 2022. We included studies assessing hip ROM in FAIS, FAI morphology without symptoms (FAIm), and healthy controls. Mean differences between groups were measured in ROM degrees with 95% confidence interval (CI). AREAS OF AGREEMENT: A total of 17 studies (1702 hips) were included. Comparison of FAIS patients versus healthy controls showed that hip ROM was clinically and statistically reduced in FAIS for internal rotation (90° hip flexion, -8.01°, 95% CI: -11.21, -4.90; 0° hip flexion -6.38°, 95% CI: -9.79, -2.97); adduction (90° hip flexion, -4.74°, 95% CI: -8.13, -1.34); flexion (-5.41°, 95% CI: -7.05, -3.49), abduction (0° hip flexion, -5.76°, 95% CI: -8.38, -3.23), and external rotation (90° hip flexion, -3.5°, 95% CI: -5.32, -1.67) ranging from low to high certainty of evidence. Comparison of FAIm versus healthy controls showed no statistically significant differences in any direction of movement, albeit with uncertainty of evidence. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: The certainty of evidence was unclear, particularly for asymptomatic FAIm. GROWING POINTS: Hip ROM may be reduced in all directions except extension in FAIS compared to controls. Hip ROM may not be restricted in asymptomatic FAIm. AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: Further studies are needed to resolve the uncertainty of evidence about ROM restrictions in asymptomatic FAIm compared to healthy controls.

One-Third of Systematic Reviews in Rehabilitation Applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) System to Evaluate Certainty of Evidence: A Meta-Research Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how many systematic reviews (SRs) of the literature in rehabilitation assess the certainty of evidence (CoE) and how many apply the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to do this. DATA SOURCES: For this meta-research study, we searched PubMed and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases for SRs on rehabilitation published in 2020. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently selected the SRs and extracted the data. Reporting characteristics and appropriate use of the GRADE system were assessed. DATA SYNTHESIS: The search retrieved 827 records: 29% (239/827) SRs evaluated CoE, 68% (163/239) of which applied the GRADE system. GRADE was used by SRs of randomized controlled trials (RCTs, 88%; 144/163), non-randomized intervention studies (NRIS, 2%; 3/163), and both RCT and NRIS (10%; 16/163). In the latter case, a separate GRADE assessment according to the study design was not provided in 75% (12/16). The reasons for GRADE judgment were reported in 82% (134/163) of SRs. CONCLUSIONS: One-third of SRs in rehabilitation assessed CoE with the GRADE system. GRADE assessment was presented transparently by most SRs. Journal editors and funders should encourage the uptake of the GRADE system when considering SRs in rehabilitation for publication. The authors should pre-define GRADE assessment in a registered and/or published protocol.

Knowledge, attitude and barriers of the Italian National Guidelines System for the development of clinical practice guidelines: a cross-sectional survey of registered scientific-technical societies.

BACKGROUND: To explore knowledge, attitude, and barriers of the Italian National Guidelines System (SNLG) for the development of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) among scientific-technical societies (STS) of health care professional. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was distributed to the STS registered in the Italian Ministry of Health (n = 336). The questionnaire consisted of three sections: Respondent characteristics; Perception, knowledge, attitude, and use of CPGs; Knowledge of the SNLG. RESULTS: The survey sample was 194 (57.7%) STS: 69% STS members stated they "often consulted CPGs". Two out of three STS perceived scientific activities as extremely important. Additionally, 20.6% STS had submitted at least one CPG to the SNLG platform after the Gelli-Bianco Law went into effect (median 1 CPG; interquartile range, IQR, 1-4). The most often cited barrier (62.7%) to CPG submission was limited economic resources. CONCLUSIONS: STS members hold a positive attitude towards CPGs despite barriers to CPG development.

Some conservative interventions are more effective than others for people with chronic non-specific neck pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

QUESTION: Which is the most effective conservative intervention for patients with non-specific chronic neck pain (CNSNP)? DESIGN: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with CNSNP of at least 3 months duration. INTERVENTIONS: All available pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcome was adverse events. RESULTS: Overall, 119 RCTs (12,496 patients; 32 interventions) were included. Risk of bias was low in 50.4% of trials, unclear in 22.7% and high in 26.9%. Compared with inert treatment, a combination of active and/or passive multimodal non-pharmacological inventions (eg, exercise and manual therapy) were effective for pain on a 0-to-10 scale at 1 month (MD range 0.84 to 3.74) and at 3 to 6 months (MD range 1.06 to 1.49), and effective on disability on a 0-to-100 scale at 1 month (MD range 10.26 to 14.09) and 3 to 6 months (MD range 5.60 to 16.46). These effects ranged from possible to definite clinical relevance. Compared with inert treatment, anti-inflammatory drugs alone or in combination with another non-pharmacological treatment did not reduce pain at 1 month or 3 to 6 months. At 12 months, no superiority was found over inert treatment on both outcomes. Most mild adverse events were experienced following acupuncture/dry needling intervention. On average, the evidence varied from low to very low certainty. CONCLUSIONS: While multimodal non-pharmacological interventions may reduce pain and disability for up to 3 to 6 months of follow-up when compared with inert treatment, the evidence was very uncertain about their effects. Better quality and larger trials are needed to improve the certainty of evidence. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019124501.

More than one third of clinical practice guidelines on low back pain overlap in AGREE II appraisals. Research wasted?

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews can apply the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II tool to critically appraise clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for treating low back pain (LBP); however, when appraisals differ in CPG quality rating, stakeholders, clinicians, and policy-makers will find it difficult to discern a unique judgement of CPG quality. We wanted to determine the proportion of overlapping CPGs for LBP in appraisals that applied AGREE II. We also compared inter-rater reliability and variability across appraisals. METHODS: For this meta-epidemiological study we searched six databases for appraisals of CPGs for LBP. The general characteristics of the appraisals were collected; the unit of analysis was the CPG evaluated in each appraisal. The inter-rater reliability and the variability of AGREE II domain scores for overall assessment were measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Overall, 43 CPGs out of 106 (40.6%) overlapped in seventeen appraisals. Half of the appraisals (53%) reported a protocol registration. Reporting of AGREE II assessment was heterogeneous and generally of poor quality: overall assessment 1 (overall CPG quality) was rated in 11 appraisals (64.7%) and overall assessment 2 (recommendation for use) in four (23.5%). Inter-rater reliability was substantial/perfect in 78.3% of overlapping CPGs. The domains with most variability were Domain 6 (mean interquartile range [IQR] 38.6), Domain 5 (mean IQR 28.9), and Domain 2 (mean IQR 27.7). CONCLUSIONS: More than one third of CPGs for LBP have been re-appraised in the last six years with CPGs quality confirmed in most assessments. Our findings suggest that before conducting a new appraisal, researchers should check systematic review registers for existing appraisals. Clinicians need to rely on updated CPGs of high quality and confirmed by perfect agreement in multiple appraisals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Protocol Registration OSF: https://osf.io/rz7nh/.

The Effectiveness of Behavioral Interventions in Adults with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder during Clinical Rehabilitation: A Rapid Review.

BACKGROUND: This review examined the effectiveness of behavioral interventions for adults with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) triggered by physical injury or medical trauma. It discusses implications in support of rehabilitation management for COVID-19 survivors diagnosed with PTSD. METHODS: This study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Interim Guidance from the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group. The authors searched for randomized control trials in PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases up to 31 March 2021. RESULTS: Five studies (n = 459) met the inclusion criteria. Each study measured a different comparison of interventions. The certainty of the evidence was judged to be very low for all outcomes. Post-traumatic stress disorder symptom reduction was found to be in favor of trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy, cognitive therapy, and cognitive-behavioral therapy. Cognitive function improvements were observed in favor of the cognitive processing therapy control intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is uncertainty about whether behavioral interventions are effective in reducing PTSD symptoms and improving functioning and quality of life when the disorder is triggered by a physical or medical trauma rather than a psychological trauma. Further research should investigate their efficacy in the context of rehabilitation management and gather evidence on this population.

Effectiveness of treatments for acute and subacute mechanical non-specific low back pain: a systematic review with network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of interventions for acute and subacute non-specific low back pain (NS-LBP) based on pain and disability outcomes. DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature with network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase and CENTRAL databases were searched from inception until 17 October 2020. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) involving adults with NS-LBP who experienced pain for less than 6 weeks (acute) or between 6 and 12 weeks (subacute). RESULTS: Forty-six RCTs (n=8765) were included; risk of bias was low in 9 trials (19.6%), unclear in 20 (43.5%), and high in 17 (36.9%). At immediate-term follow-up, for pain decrease, the most efficacious treatments against an inert therapy were: exercise (standardised mean difference (SMD) -1.40; 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.41 to -0.40), heat wrap (SMD -1.38; 95% CI -2.60 to -0.17), opioids (SMD -0.86; 95% CI -1.62 to -0.10), manual therapy (SMD -0.72; 95% CI -1.40 to -0.04) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (SMD -0.53; 95% CI -0.97 to -0.09). Similar findings were confirmed for disability reduction in non-pharmacological and pharmacological networks, including muscle relaxants (SMD -0.24; 95% CI -0.43 to -0.04). Mild or moderate adverse events were reported in the opioids (65.7%), NSAIDs (54.3%) and steroids (46.9%) trial arms. CONCLUSION: With uncertainty of evidence, NS-LBP should be managed with non-pharmacological treatments which seem to mitigate pain and disability at immediate-term. Among pharmacological interventions, NSAIDs and muscle relaxants appear to offer the best harm-benefit balance.

Prevalence and associated factors of COVID-19 across Italian regions: a secondary analysis from a national survey on physiotherapists.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) broke out in China in December 2019 and now is a pandemic all around the world. In Italy, Northern regions were hit the hardest during the first wave. We aim to explore the prevalence and the exposure characteristics of physiotherapists (PTs) working in different Italian regions during the first wave of COVID-19. METHODS: Between April and May 2020 a structured anonymous online survey was distributed to all PTs registered in the National Professional Registry to collect prevalence data of a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 (i.e., nasopharyngeal swab and/or serological test). A bottom-up agglomerative nesting hierarchical clustering method was applied to identify groups of regions based on response rate. Multivariable logistic regression was used to explore personal and work-related factors associated with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 15,566 PTs completed the survey (response rate 43.3%). The majority of respondents (57.7%) were from Northern regions. Considering all respondents, the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases in Northern and Central Italy, was higher compared to those in Southern Italy (6.9% vs. 1.8%, P < 0.001); focusing the analysis on respondents who underwent nasopharyngeal swab and/or serological test led to similar findings (14.1% vs. 6.4%, P < 0.001). Working in Northern and Central regions was associated with a higher risk of confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 compared to Southern regions (OR 3.4, 95%CI 2.6 to 4.3). PTs working in Northern and Central regions were more likely to be reallocated to a different unit and changing job tasks, compared to their colleagues working in the Southern regions (10.5% vs 3.7%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Work-related risk factors were differently distributed between Italian regions at the time of first pandemic wave, and PTs working in the Northern and Central regions were more at risk of a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, especially when working in hospitals. Preventive and organizational measures should be applied to harmonize physiotherapy services in the national context. REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/x7cha.

AGREE II appraisals of clinical practice guidelines in rehabilitation showed poor reporting and moderate variability in quality ratings when users apply different cuff-offs: a methodological study.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the reporting characteristics of Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II appraisals in rehabilitation and explore how much quality ratings of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) vary applying different cut-offs. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a methodological study re-analyzing data of an overview of AGREE II CPG appraisals in rehabilitation. Reporting characteristics of appraisals and methods used for quality rating were abstracted. We applied the most frequent cut-offs retrieved on all CPG sample to explore changes in quality ratings (i.e., high/low). RESULTS: We included 40 appraisals (n = 544 CPGs).The AGREE II overall assessment 1 (overall CPG quality) was reported in 26 appraisals (65%) and the overall assessment 2 (recommendation for use) in 17 (42.5%). Twenty-five appraisals (62.5%) reported the use of cut-offs based on domains and/or overall assessments. Application of the most reported cut-offs led to variability in quality ratings in 26% of the CPGs, of which 92% CPGs shifted their rating from low to high-quality and 8% shifted from high to low-quality. CONCLUSION: Rehabilitation stakeholders should take care to select the highest quality CPG in view of the poor reporting of AGREE II overall assessment 1 and 2 and moderate variability of quality ratings.