Prognostic factors of chronic postsurgical pain following gastrointestinal surgery: A systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) presents a considerable healthcare challenge, impacting patients, and healthcare providers, particularly in the context of gastrointestinal surgery. The notable incidence of CPSP in this specific surgical domain emphasizes the need to identify patients with a high risk of developing this condition. Despite various studies exploring this topic, a comprehensive systematic review focusing on prognostic factors of CPSP following gastrointestinal surgery is currently lacking. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is, through systematically examination of existing literature, to assess both established and potentially novel prognostic factors, associated with CPSP following gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS: Adhering to the Cochrane Handbook and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist, we will use pre-established criteria based on Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, and Setting (PICOT-S), to determine eligibility for inclusion. Essentially, this entails studies reporting on prognostic factors of CPSP following gastrointestinal surgery. Relevant studies will be identified through systematic searches in medical databases, examination of reference lists from included studies, and screening of Clinicaltrials.gov. No restrictions will be imposed regarding language, publication time or source, and both randomized trials and observational studies will be included. Data extraction will follow the Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of prognostic factor studies (CHARMS-PF) and for quality assessment, we will use the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. RESULTS: The aim for the systematic review is to identify and assess the prognostic value of potential factors for the development of CPSP following gastrointestinal surgery. CONCLUSION: By creating a comprehensive overview of important prognostic factors for the development of CPSP following gastrointestinal surgery, the findings of this systematic review have the potential to guide future research and to enhance patient information resources.

Childhood and adolescence physical activity and multimorbidity later in life: A systematic review.

Background: No systematic summary exists on childhood physical activity and later-life multimorbidity risks. We primarily investigated the association of physical activity in childhood and adolescence and the development of multimorbidity in adulthood. Secondarily, we examined whether physical activity level differ in children and adolescents with and without multimorbidity and whether there is a cross-sectional association between physical activity and multimorbidity. Methods: Following Cochrane Handbook guidelines and adhering to PRISMA recommendations, we included cross-sectional, case-control and longitudinal studies that investigated the association between physical activity in children and adolescents and development of multimorbidity. Results were summarized narratively and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO, CRD42023407063. Results: Of 9064 studies identified, 11 were included in 13 papers. Longitudinals studies suggested that being physically active in childhood and adolescence was associated with a lower risk of multimorbidity in adulthood. Three out of five studies reported lower physical activity level in children and adolescents with multimorbidity compared to those without, and two did not find a between-group difference. Cross-sectional evidence on the association between multimorbidity and lower physical activity was uncertain. Overall, the evidence certainty for all outcomes was considered low due to the indirectness and inconsistency in findings. Conclusions: Childhood and adolescence physical activity appeared to be linked with a reduced risk of later-life multimorbidity but the certainty of the evidence is low. These results support the promotion of physical activity during childhood and adolescence.

One-year effectiveness of high-load compared with low-load strengthening exercise on self-reported function in patients with hypermobile shoulders: a secondary analysis from a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the long-term effectiveness of high-load versus low-load strengthening exercise on self-reported function in patients with hypermobility spectrum disorder (HSD) and shoulder symptoms. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a superiority, parallel-group, randomised trial (balanced block randomisation 1:1, electronic concealment) including adult patients (n=100) from primary care with HSD and shoulder pain and/or instability ≥3 months. Patients received 16 weeks of shoulder exercises (three sessions/week): HEAVY (n=50, full-range, high-load, supervised twice/week) or LIGHT (n=50, neutral/mid-range, low-load, supervised three times in total). The 1-year between-group difference in change in self-reported function was measured using the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI, scale 0-2100, 0=best). Secondary outcomes were self-reported measures including changes in shoulder-related symptoms, function, emotions and lifestyle, quality of life, patient-perceived effect, treatment utility and adverse events. A blinded analyst conducted the analyses using linear mixed model repeated measurements analysis. RESULTS: One-year data were available in 86 out of 100 participants (79% women, mean age 37.8 years) (LIGHT 84%, HEAVY 88%). The mean WOSI score between-group difference favoured HEAVY (-92.9, 95% CI -257.4 to 71.5, p=0.268) but was not statistically significant. The secondary outcomes were mostly inconclusive, but patients in HEAVY had larger improvement in the WOSI emotions subdomain (-36.3; 95% CI -65.4 to -7.3, p=0.014). Patient-perceived effect favoured HEAVY anchored in WOSI-emotions (55% vs 31%, p=0.027) and WOSI-lifestyle (50% vs 29%, p=0.042). CONCLUSION: High-load shoulder strengthening exercise was not superior to low-load strengthening exercise in improving self-reported function at 1 year. High-load strengthening exercise may be more effective in improving patient emotions about shoulder pain and function, but more robust data are needed to support these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03869307.

Quality of reporting and nature of harms in clinical trials on supervised exercise in patients with rheumatoid arthritis or axial spondyloarthritis.

To describe the quality of reporting and the nature of reported harms in clinical studies on the effectiveness of supervised exercises in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). We performed a systematic review, searching eight databases up to February 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating supervised exercises in adults with RA or axSpA were considered eligible. Data on harms were extracted according to the CONSORT Harms 2022 Checklist. Among others, it was recorded if harms were prespecified or non-prespecified. Moreover, the nature of reported harms was listed. Forty RCTs were included for RA and 25 for axSpA, of which 29 (73%) and 13 (52%) reported information on harms. In 13 (33%) RCTs in RA and four (16%) in axSpA, the collection of harms outcomes was described in the methods section. Prespecified outcomes were reported by eight (RA) and two (axSpA) RCTs. Non-specified harms outcomes were reported by six (RA) and four (axSpA) RCTs. Prespecified harms outcomes included measures of pain, disease activity, inflammation, and structural joint changes. The nature of non-prespecified harms outcomes varied largely, with pain being most common. A considerable proportion of trials on supervised exercise in RA or axSpA does not or inadequately report harms outcomes. Pain was the most commonly reported prespecified or non-specified harm. For a considerate interpretation of the balance between benefits and harms of supervised exercise in RA or axSpA, use of the CONSORT Harms 2022 Checklist for the design, conduct and reporting of trials is advocated.

Benefits and Harms of Digital Health Interventions Promoting Physical Activity in People With Chronic Conditions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Digital health interventions for managing chronic conditions have great potential. However, the benefits and harms are still unclear. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the benefits and harms of digital health interventions in promoting physical activity in people with chronic conditions. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to October 2022. Eligible randomized controlled trials were included if they used a digital component in physical activity promotion in adults with ≥1 of the following conditions: depression or anxiety, ischemic heart disease or heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, knee or hip osteoarthritis, hypertension, or type 2 diabetes. The primary outcomes were objectively measured physical activity and physical function (eg, walk or step tests). We used a random effects model (restricted maximum likelihood) for meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses to assess the impact of study-level covariates. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. RESULTS: Of 14,078 hits, 130 randomized controlled trials were included. Compared with usual care or minimal intervention, digital health interventions increased objectively measured physical activity (end of intervention: standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.29, 95% CI 0.21-0.37; follow-up: SMD 0.17, 95% CI 0.04-0.31) and physical function (end of intervention: SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.12-0.59; follow-up: SMD 0.29, 95% CI 0.01-0.57). The secondary outcomes also favored the digital health interventions for subjectively measured physical activity and physical function, depression, anxiety, and health-related quality of life at the end of the intervention but only subjectively measured physical activity at follow-up. The risk of nonserious adverse events, but not serious adverse events, was higher in the digital health interventions at the end of the intervention, but no difference was seen at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Digital health interventions improved physical activity and physical function across various chronic conditions. Effects on depression, anxiety, and health-related quality of life were only observed at the end of the intervention. The risk of nonserious adverse events is present during the intervention, which should be addressed. Future studies should focus on better reporting, comparing the effects of different digital health solutions, and investigating how intervention effects are sustained beyond the end of the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020189028; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=189028.

Telephone consultation for cancer survivors with unclarified need for rehabilitation in a primary healthcare setting: a mixed methods process evaluation.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the implementation of telephone consultations to assess cancer patients' needs for rehabilitation, with focus on patients' acceptance, health professionals' experience and contextual factors. METHODS: A mixed methods process evaluation was conducted at a primary healthcare rehabilitation clinic. Cancer survivors above 18 years of age with an unclarified rehabilitation need at discharge from hospital, was offered a telephone consultation provided by health professionals. Data on implementation and acceptability were collected using medical records systems, data collection forms and semi-structured interviews with six patients and two health professionals. RESULTS: Eighty-one cancer survivors were referred to the intervention, and 54% continued to further rehabilitation. The telephone consultations were executed approximately eight days after referral and took on average 44 min to deliver. Overall, the patients found that the telephone consultation addressed what they considered the most important topics, and the health professionals found the intervention to be acceptable. Both patients and health professionals reported challenges regarding the referral process. CONCLUSION: Patient acceptance of the intervention was high, and the telephone consultation was implemented to a high degree, resulting in more than half of the patients continuing to further rehabilitation. Patients' and health professionals' perspectives provided valuable insights about contextual factors.

Factors influencing functioning after volar locking plate fixation of distal radius fractures: a scoping review of 148 studies.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A better understanding of factors that influence functioning may improve the identification of patients with distal radius fractures (DRFs) who need hand therapy. The purpose of this scoping review was to provide a comprehensive overview of factors that have been evaluated for their influence on hand functioning following volar plate fixation of DRFs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 6 databases were searched from 2005 to 2021 for publications regarding surgical treatment for a DRF with a volar locking plate. Included studies evaluated demographic, perioperative, and postoperative factors within the 6 weeks post-surgery for their influence on functioning at least 3 months post-surgery. Functioning was assessed with patient-reported outcome measures. The factors were categorized into themes and mapped to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). RESULTS: 148 studies were included. 708 factors were categorized into 39 themes (e.g. pain) and mapped to the ICF components. The themes were primarily mapped to "body functions and structures" (n = 26) and rarely to "activities and participation" (n = 5). Fracture type (n = 40), age (n = 38), and sex (n = 22) were the most frequently evaluated factors. CONCLUSION: This scoping review identified an extensive number of factors evaluated within 6 weeks after surgery for their influence on functioning at least 3 months after volar plate fixation of a DRF and the existing research has primarily evaluated factors related to "body functions and structures," with limited focus on factors related to "activities and participation."

The effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy procedures for spine pain: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) is a guideline-recommended treatment option for spinal pain. The recommendation is based on multiple systematic reviews. However, these reviews fail to consider that clinical effects may depend on SMT "application procedures" (i.e., how and where SMT is applied). Using network meta-analyses, we aim to investigate which SMT "application procedures" have the greatest magnitude of clinical effectiveness for reducing pain and disability, for any spinal complaint, at short-term and long-term follow-up. We will compare application procedural parameters by classifying the thrust application technique and the application site (patient positioning, assisted, vertebral target, region target, Technique name, forces, and vectors, application site selection approach and rationale) against: 1. Waiting list/no treatment; 2. Sham interventions not resembling SMT (e.g., detuned ultrasound); 3. Sham interventions resembling SMT; 4. Other therapies not recommended in clinical practice guidelines; and 5. Other therapies recommended in clinical practice guidelines. Secondly, we will examine how contextual elements, including procedural fidelity (whether the SMT was delivered as planned) and clinical applicability (whether the SMT is similar to clinical practice) of the SMT. METHODS: We will include randomized controlled trials (RCT) found through three search strategies, (i) exploratory, (ii) systematic, and (iii) other known sources. We define SMT as a high-velocity low-amplitude thrust or grade V mobilization. Eligibility is any RCT assessing SMT against any other type of SMT, any other active or sham intervention, or no treatment control on adult patients with pain in any spinal region. The RCTs must report on continuous pain intensity and/or disability outcomes. Two authors will independently review title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction. Spinal manipulative therapy techniques will be classified according to the technique application and choice of application sites. We will conduct a network-meta analysis using a frequentist approach and multiple subgroup and sensitivity analyses. DISCUSSION: This will be the most extensive review of thrust SMT to date, and will allow us to estimate the importance of different SMT application procedures used in clinical practice and taught across educational settings. Thus, the results are applicable to clinical practice, educational settings, and research studies. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022375836.

The Effects of Different Management Strategies or Rehabilitation Approaches on Knee Joint Structural and Molecular Biomarkers Following Traumatic Knee Injury: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials for the OPTIKNEE Consensus.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the effectiveness of management strategies and rehabilitation approaches for knee joint structural and molecular biomarker outcomes following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and/or meniscal tear. DESIGN: Intervention systematic review. LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and SPORTDiscus databases from their inception up to November 3, 2021. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of management strategies or rehabilitation approaches for structural/molecular biomarkers of knee joint health following ACL and/or meniscal tear. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 5 RCTs (9 papers) with primary ACL tear (n = 365). Two RCTs compared initial management strategies (rehabilitation plus early vs optional delayed ACL surgery), reporting on structural biomarkers (radiographic osteoarthritis, cartilage thickness, meniscal damage) in 5 papers and molecular biomarkers (inflammation, cartilage turnover) in 1 paper. Three RCTs compared different post-ACL reconstruction (ACLR) rehabilitation approaches (high vs low intensity plyometric exercises, accelerated vs nonaccelerated rehabilitation, continuous passive vs active motion), reporting on structural biomarkers (joint space narrowing) in 1 paper and molecular biomarkers (inflammation, cartilage turnover) in 2 papers. RESULTS: There were no differences in structural or molecular biomarkers between post-ACLR rehabilitation approaches. One RCT comparing initial management strategies demonstrated that rehabilitation plus early ACLR was associated with greater patellofemoral cartilage thinning, elevated inflammatory cytokine response, and reduced incidence of medial meniscal damage over 5 years compared to rehabilitation with no/delayed ACLR. CONCLUSION: Very low-certainty evidence suggests that different initial management strategies (rehabilitation plus early vs optional delayed ACL surgery) but not postoperative rehabilitation approaches may influence the incidence of meniscal damage, patellofemoral cartilage loss and cytokine concentrations over 5 years post-ACL tear. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(4):1-22. Epub: 20 February 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11576.

Diagnosis, prevention and treatment of common shoulder injuries in sport: grading the evidence - a statement paper commissioned by the Danish Society of Sports Physical Therapy (DSSF).

This statement paper summarises and appraises the evidence on diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of common shoulder injuries in sports. We systematically searched Medline and Embase. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool was applied to evaluate the overall quality of evidence.For diagnosis, we included 19 clinical tests from mixed populations. Tests for anterior instability, biceps-labrum complex injuries and full subscapularis rupture had high diagnostic accuracy (low to moderate quality of evidence).For prevention, the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center, the Shoulder Control, the FIFA 11+ shoulder injury prevention programmes, and a baseball-specific programme (range of motion, stretching, dynamic stability and strengthening exercises) showed moderate to large effect size in reducing the risk of shoulder injury compared with no intervention (very low to moderate quality of evidence).For treatment, a rehabilitation programme including stretching, ice packs, electrotherapy and compression, and strengthening exercises showed a large effect size in reducing pain and disability compared with no intervention in athletes with subacromial impingement syndrome (very low to moderate quality of evidence). For the treatment of supraspinatus tendinopathy, hyperthermia treatment (heating the skin to 38°C-40°C) resulted in large effect size in reducing pain and disability compared with ultrasound or pendular swinging and stretching exercises (moderate quality of evidence). Strengthening exercise alone or in combination with stretching exercises promoted a large effect in reducing shoulder pain (cohort studies, no comparators) (very low quality of evidence). The quality of evidence for most estimates was low to moderate, indicating that future high-quality research may alter our recommendations for clinical practice.

Biopsychosocial Rehabilitation for Inflammatory Arthritis and Osteoarthritis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefits and harms associated with biopsychosocial rehabilitation in patients with inflammatory arthritis and osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. Data were collected through electronic searches of Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, and CINAHL databases up to March 2019. Trials examining the effect of biopsychosocial rehabilitation in adults with inflammatory arthritis and/or OA were considered eligible, excluding rehabilitation adjunct to surgery. The primary outcome for benefit was pain and total withdrawals for harm. RESULTS: Of the 27 trials meeting the eligibility criteria, 22 trials (3,750 participants) reported sufficient data to be included in the quantitative synthesis. For patient-reported outcome measures, biopsychosocial rehabilitation was slightly superior to control for pain relief (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.19 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) -0.31, -0.07]), had a small effect on patient global assessment score (SMD -0.13 [95% CI -0.26, -0.00]), with no apparent effect on health-related quality of life, fatigue, self-reported disability/physical function, mental well-being, and reduction in pain intensity ≥30%. Clinician-measured outcomes displayed a small effect on observed disability/physical function (SMD -0.34 [95% CI -0.57, -0.10]), a large effect on physician global assessment score (SMD -0.72 [95% CI -1.18, -0.26]), and no effect on inflammation. No difference in harms existed in terms of the number of withdrawals, adverse events, or serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: Biopsychosocial rehabilitation produces a significant but clinically small beneficial effect on patient-reported pain among patients with inflammatory arthritis and OA, with no difference in harm. Methodologic weaknesses were observed in the included trials, suggesting low-to-moderate confidence in the estimates of effect.

Risk factors for knee osteoarthritis after traumatic knee injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and cohort studies for the OPTIKNEE Consensus.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and quantify potential risk factors for osteoarthritis (OA) following traumatic knee injury. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analyses that estimated the odds of OA for individual risk factors assessed in more than four studies using random-effects models. Remaining risk factors underwent semiquantitative synthesis. The modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach for prognostic factors guided the assessment. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL searched from inception to 2009-2021. ELIGIBILITY: Randomised controlled trials and cohort studies assessing risk factors for symptomatic or structural OA in persons with a traumatic knee injury, mean injury age ≤30 years and minimum 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: Across 66 included studies, 81 unique potential risk factors were identified. High risk of bias due to attrition or confounding was present in 64% and 49% of studies, respectively. Ten risk factors for structural OA underwent meta-analysis (sex, rehabilitation for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear, ACL reconstruction (ACLR), ACLR age, ACLR body mass index, ACLR graft source, ACLR graft augmentation, ACLR+cartilage injury, ACLR+partial meniscectomy, ACLR+total medial meniscectomy). Very-low certainty evidence suggests increased odds of structural OA related to ACLR+cartilage injury (OR=2.31; 95% CI 1.35 to 3.94), ACLR+partial meniscectomy (OR=1.87; 1.45 to 2.42) and ACLR+total medial meniscectomy (OR=3.14; 2.20 to 4.48). Semiquantitative syntheses identified moderate-certainty evidence that cruciate ligament, collateral ligament, meniscal, chondral, patellar/tibiofemoral dislocation, fracture and multistructure injuries increase the odds of symptomatic OA. CONCLUSION: Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that various single and multistructure knee injuries (beyond ACL tears) increase the odds of symptomatic OA. Risk factor heterogeneity, high risk of bias, and inconsistency in risk factors and OA definition make identifying treatment targets for preventing post-traumatic knee OA challenging.

Objectively measured physical activity levels and adherence to physical activity guidelines in people with multimorbidity-A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine levels of objectively measured physical activity (PA) and the proportion of adults with multimorbidity that adheres to PA guidelines. METHODS: All studies, where PA was measured at baseline using an activity monitor in an adult (≥18 years) multimorbid (≥80% of the population had ≥2 chronic conditions) population. A systematic literature search was performed in Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, opengrey.eu and google.com from inception up until 18th of January 2022. Risk of bias was assessed with a modified version of the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. A random-effects meta-analyses was performed to estimate daily minutes of sedentary behavior (SB), light PA (LPA), moderate PA (MPA), moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) and steps. Proportions adhering to PA guidelines was narratively synthesized. Certainty of evidence was determined using The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: Fifteen studies (2,172 participants) were included. The most frequent combination of conditions were type 2 diabetes and hypertension (six studies). Participants spent a daily average of 500.5 (95% CI: 407.1 to 593.9) minutes in SB, 325.6 (95% CI: 246.4 to 404.7 minutes in LPA and 32.7 (95% CI: 20.2 to 45.3) minutes in MVPA. The mean daily number of steps was 5,145 (95% CI: 4264 to 6026) for people in free-living conditions. The proportion adhering to PA guidelines ranged widely (7.4% to 43%). All studies were rated as at high risk of bias and the certainty of evidence was very low. CONCLUSIONS: PA levels and adherence varied from low to above guideline recommended levels for adults with chronic conditions, depending on PA intensity. The very low certainty of evidence calls for high quality studies focusing on detailed descriptions of PA behavior in people with multimorbidity. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020172456.

Measurement properties for muscle strength tests following anterior cruciate ligament and/or meniscus injury: What tests to use and where do we need to go? A systematic review with meta-analyses for the OPTIKNEE consensus.

OBJECTIVES: Critically appraise and summarise the measurement properties of knee muscle strength tests after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and/or meniscus injury using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments Risk of Bias checklist. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analyses. The modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-guided assessment of evidence quality. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, CINAHL and SPORTSDiscus searched from inception to 5 May 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies evaluating knee extensor or flexor strength test reliability, measurement error, validity, responsiveness or interpretability in individuals with ACL and/or meniscus injuries with a mean injury age of ≤30 years. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies were included involving 31 different muscle strength tests (mode and equipment) in individuals following an ACL injury and/or an isolated meniscus injury. Strength tests were assessed for reliability (n=8), measurement error (n=7), construct validity (n=27) and criterion validity (n=7). Isokinetic concentric extensor and flexor strength tests were the best rated with sufficient intrarater reliability (very low evidence quality) and construct validity (moderate evidence quality). Isotonic extensor and flexor strength tests showed sufficient criterion validity, while isometric extensor strength tests had insufficient construct and criterion validity (high evidence quality). CONCLUSION: Knee extensor and flexor strength tests of individuals with ACL and/or meniscus injury lack evidence supporting their measurement properties. There is an urgent need for high-quality studies on these measurement properties. Until then, isokinetic concentric strength tests are most recommended, with isotonic strength tests a good alternative.

Physicians' vs patients' global assessments of disease activity in rheumatology and musculoskeletal trials: A meta-research project with focus on reasons for discrepancies.

BACKGROUND: In most rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), global assessments of disease activity by physicians and patients are 'anchor outcomes' in therapeutic trials evaluating whether a treatment is effective. OBJECTIVES: To compare physicians' vs patients' global assessments of disease activity in RMD trials and explore reasons for discrepancies between them. METHODS: Eligible trials were sampled from systematic reviews of treatments for RMDs by using the Cochrane database of systematic reviews (i.e., reviews from the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group, [CMSG]). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for RMDs were eligible if they reported quantitative analyses of both physicians´ and patients´ global assessments at the same time point for the comparison of the same experimental intervention against the same comparator (i.e., placebo, no treatment, or other treatment). We accepted data from trial comparisons for each type of outcome, regardless of the type of intervention and type of RMD within the CMSG. Using mixed-effects meta-regression models, we assigned the dependent variable as the ratio of odds ratios (ROR) of global change with the experimental intervention, versus the control comparator. An ROR>1 would indicate that physicians rated the experimental intervention more favorable than their patients did. RESULTS: We were able to estimate the ROR (data from both physicians' and patients' global assessments) across 70 trials (116 randomized comparisons) in 7 diseases (ankylosing spondylitis, fibromyalgia, psoriatic arthritis, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, and gout). The combined ROR across all effectiveness comparisons were rated significantly in favor of the intervention by physicians: ROR=1.15 CI 95% (1.07 to 1.23). This combined ROR was based on a substantial heterogeneity across comparisons (I2=89.1%). Across all the stratified analyses, the type of the RMD was an informative reason for discrepancies, with a statistically significant ROR in rheumatoid arthritis ROR=1.33, CI 95% (1.13 to 1.56), unlike the ROR in all other conditions (ROR=1.04, CI 95% (0.95-1.14). CONCLUSION: In comparative effectiveness research on rheumatology, physicians' global assessments of disease activity, surprisingly, are more in favor of the experimental interventions than are those of the patients.

Benefits and Harms of Interventions With Surgery Compared to Interventions Without Surgery for Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the benefits and harms of interventions with and without surgery for musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. DESIGN: Intervention systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). LITERATURE SEARCH: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and CENTRAL, all up to January 7, 2021. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs (English, German, Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian) of interventions with and without surgery conducted in any setting for any non-fracture MSK condition in adults (mean age: 18+ years) evaluating the outcomes on a continuous (benefits) or count (harms) scale. Outcomes were pain, self-reported physical function, quality of life, serious adverse events (SAEs), and death at 1 year. DATA SYNTHESIS: Random-effects metaanalyses for MSK conditions where there were data from at least 2 trials. RESULTS: One hundred RCTs (n = 12 645 patients) across 28 different conditions at 9 body sites were included. For 9 out of 13 conditions with data on pain (exceptions include some spine conditions), 11 out of 11 for function, and 9 out of 9 for quality of life, there were no clinically relevant differences (standardized mean difference of 0.50 or above) between interventions with and without surgery. For 13 out of 16 conditions with data on SAEs and 16 out of 16 for death, there were no differences in harms. Only 6 trials were at low risk of bias. CONCLUSION: The low certainty of evidence does not support recommending surgery over nonsurgical alternatives for most MSK conditions with available RCTs. Further high-quality RCTs may change this conclusion. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(6):312-344. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11075.

Rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament and meniscal injuries: a best-evidence synthesis of systematic reviews for the OPTIKNEE consensus.

OBJECTIVE: Synthesise evidence for effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions following ACL and/or meniscal tear on symptomatic, functional, clinical, psychosocial, quality of life and reinjury outcomes. DESIGN: Overview of systematic reviews with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation certainty of evidence. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and Cochrane Library. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials investigating rehabilitation interventions following ACL and/or meniscal tears in young adults. RESULTS: We included 22 systematic reviews (142 trials of mostly men) evaluating ACL-injured individuals and none evaluating isolated meniscal injuries. We synthesised data from 16 reviews evaluating 12 different interventions. Moderate-certainty evidence was observed for: (1) neuromuscular electrical stimulation to improve quadriceps strength; (2) open versus closed kinetic chain exercises to be similarly effective for quadriceps strength and self-reported function; (3) structured home-based versus structured in-person rehabilitation to be similarly effective for quadriceps and hamstring strength and self-reported function; and (4) postoperative knee bracing being ineffective for physical function and laxity. There was low-certainty evidence that: (1) preoperative exercise therapy improves self-reported and physical function postoperatively; (2) cryotherapy reduces pain and analgesic use; (3) psychological interventions improve anxiety/fear; and (4) whole body vibration improves quadriceps strength. There was very low-certainty evidence that: (1) protein-based supplements improve quadriceps size; (2) blood flow restriction training improves quadriceps size; (3) neuromuscular control exercises improve quadriceps and hamstring strength and self-reported function; and (4) continuous passive motion has no effect on range of motion. CONCLUSION: The general level of evidence for rehabilitation after ACL or meniscal tear was low. Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that several rehabilitation types can improve quadriceps strength, while brace use has no effect on knee function/laxity.

What tests should be used to assess functional performance in youth and young adults following anterior cruciate ligament or meniscal injury? A systematic review of measurement properties for the OPTIKNEE consensus.

OBJECTIVES: To critically appraise and summarise measurement properties of functional performance tests in individuals following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) or meniscal injury. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches were performed in Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO) and SPORTSDiscus (EBSCO) on 7 July 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies evaluating at least one measurement property of a functional performance test including individuals following an ACL tear or meniscal injury with a mean injury age of ≤30 years. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments Risk of Bias checklist was used to assess methodological quality. A modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation assessed evidence quality. RESULTS: Thirty studies evaluating 26 functional performance tests following ACL injury were included. No studies were found in individuals with an isolated meniscal injury. Included studies evaluated reliability (n=5), measurement error (n=3), construct validity (n=26), structural validity (n=1) and responsiveness (n=1). The Single Leg Hop and Crossover Hop tests showed sufficient intrarater reliability (high and moderate quality evidence, respectively), construct validity (low-quality and moderate-quality evidence, respectively) and responsiveness (low-quality evidence). CONCLUSION: Frequently used functional performance tests for individuals with ACL or meniscal injury lack evidence supporting their measurement properties. The Single Leg Hop and Crossover Hop are currently the most promising tests following ACL injury. High-quality studies are required to facilitate stronger recommendations of performance-based outcomes following ACL or meniscal injury.

Knee extensor muscle weakness is a risk factor for the development of knee osteoarthritis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis including 46 819 men and women.

OBJECTIVE: To update a systematic review on the association between knee extensor muscle weakness and the risk of incident knee osteoarthritis in women and men. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches in PubMed, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, AMED and CENTRAL in May 2021. ELIGIBLE CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Longitudinal studies with at least 2 years follow-up including baseline measure of knee extensor muscle strength, and follow-up measure of symptomatic or radiographic knee osteoarthritis. Studies including participants with known knee osteoarthritis at baseline were excluded. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using six criteria for study validity and bias. Grading of Recommendations Assessments, Development and Evaluation assessed overall quality of evidence. Meta-analysis estimated the OR for the association between knee extensor muscle weakness and incident knee osteoarthritis. RESULTS: We included 11 studies with 46 819 participants. Low quality evidence indicated that knee extensor muscle weakness increased the odds of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis in women (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.64) and in adult men (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.78), and for radiographic knee osteoarthritis in women: OR 1.43 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.71) and in men: OR 1.39 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.82). No associations were identified for knee injured populations except for radiographic osteoarthritis in men. DISCUSSION: There is low quality evidence that knee extensor muscle weakness is associated with incident symptomatic and radiographic knee osteoarthritis in women and men. Optimising knee extensor muscle strength may help to prevent knee osteoarthritis. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020214976.

Placebo response and effect in randomized clinical trials: meta-research with focus on contextual effects.

BACKGROUND: Contextual effects (i.e., placebo response) refer to all health changes resulting from administering an apparently inactive treatment. In a randomized clinical trial (RCT), the overall treatment effect (i.e., the post-treatment effect in the intervention group) can be regarded as the true effect of the intervention plus the impact of contextual effects. This meta-research was conducted to examine the average proportion of the overall treatment effect attributable to contextual effects in RCTs across clinical conditions and treatments and explore whether it varies with trial contextual factors. METHODS: Data was extracted from trials included in the main meta-analysis from the latest update of the Cochrane review on "Placebo interventions for all clinical conditions" (searched from 1966 to March 2008). Only RCTs reported in English having an experimental intervention group, a placebo comparator group, and a no-treatment control group were eligible. RESULTS: In total, 186 trials (16,655 patients) were included. On average, 54% (0.54, 95%CI 0.46 to 0.64) of the overall treatment effect was attributable to contextual effects. The contextual effects were higher for trials with blinded outcome assessor and concealed allocation. The contextual effects appeared to increase proportional to the placebo effect, lower mean age, and proportion of females. CONCLUSION: Approximately half of the overall treatment effect in RCTs seems attributable to contextual effects rather than to the specific effect of treatments. As the study did not include all important contextual factors (e.g., patient-provider interaction), the true proportion of contextual effects could differ from the study's results. However, contextual effects should be considered when assessing treatment effects in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019130257 . Registered on April 19, 2019.