The effectiveness of pain science education on caregiver and children's knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors- a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Pain science education can be used as part of treatment and prevention for chronic pain in children. We assessed the effectiveness of pain science education on knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors in children and the people that care for children. We set a minimum criterion for education to address pain biology knowledge. We included studies aimed at both treatment and prevention of chronic pain. We conducted searches using five databases. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Data were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis or assessed using a narrative synthesis. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE. We screened 14505 records and included seven studies involving 351 caregivers and 1285 children. Four studies were included in meta-analyses. We found low certainty evidence that PSE has a large beneficial effect on caregiver knowledge and beliefs compared to alternative education (SMD=1.14 (95%CI: 0.88 to 1.42; I²=0%). We found no difference in functional disability in children with chronic pain after PSE (FDI score MD=0.73 (95%CI: -0.81 to 2.27; I=0%). Narrative syntheses showed low certainty evidence for improved knowledge and beliefs in children with preventative and treatment effects. Overall we found few studies, and along with high risk of bias, this significantly contributed to the low certainty of findings. The effect of learning pain science for both preventative and treatment effects in children, carers and the child/carer dyad remain mostly unknown. This review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022344382) on 22 July 2022. PERSPECTIVE: This review examines the effect of pain science education (PSE) on pain-related knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors in children and the people that care for children (0-18). The findings contribute to knowledge about pain treatments and health promotion for caregivers of children with and without chronic pain. Clear recommendations for improving the quality of evidence in future studies are outlined.

Questionnaires assessing knowledge and beliefs about musculoskeletal conditions are potentially suitable for use, but further research is needed: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the measurement properties of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for knowledge and/or beliefs about musculoskeletal conditions. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review was performed according to the COSMIN guidelines. This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO - ID: CRD42022303111. Electronic databases, reference lists, forward citation tracking, and contact with experts were used to identify studies. Eligible studies were reports developing or assessing a measurement property of a PROM measuring musculoskeletal condition specific-knowledge and/or beliefs. We assessed the methodological quality and measurement properties of included studies. A modified GRADE approach was used to rate the quality of evidence for each PROM. RESULTS: The literature search was performed from inception to 11th September 2023. Sixty records were included, reporting 290 individual studies, and provided information on 25 PROMs. Five PROMs presented sufficient structural validity, three presented sufficient cross-cultural validity, ten presented sufficient reliability, three presented sufficient criterion validity, six presented sufficient hypothesis-testing, and four presented sufficient responsiveness. No PROM presented sufficient evidence for content validity, internal consistency, and measurement error. Based on the available evidence, no PROM was classified as suitable for use according to the COSMIN recommendations. Twenty-four PROMs are potentially suitable for use, and one PROM is not recommended for use. CONCLUSION: No PROM designed to assess knowledge and/or beliefs about musculoskeletal conditions meets the COSMIN criteria of suitable for use. Most PROMs identified in this systematic review were considered as potentially suitable for use and need further high-quality research to assess their measurement properties.

Corrigendum to "Effect of exercise therapy in patients with hip osteoarthritis: A systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis" [Osteoarthr Cartil Open 5 (2023) 100338].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.ocarto.2023.100338.].

Sleep as a prognostic factor in low back pain: a systematic review of prospective cohort studies and secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials.

Sleep problems are common in individuals with low back pain (LBP) and sleep restriction seems to be associated with impaired pain processing. Our objective was to investigate whether sleep is associated with future LBP outcomes (i.e. pain intensity, disability, and recovery) in adults. We conducted a systematic review of prospective cohort studies and secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials (registration-PROSPERO CRD42022370781). In December 2022, we searched the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases. Fourteen studies, totaling 19 170 participants were included. Thirteen studies were rated as having high risk of bias (QUIPS tool). We used vote-counting and meta-analysis approaches to synthesize the data. We found associations between baseline sleep with future pain intensity, recovery, and between changes in sleep with changes in pain intensity, changes in disability, and recovery. We further synthesized outcomes as "overall LBP improvement" outcomes. Baseline poor sleep was moderately associated with non-improvement in LBP in the long-very long term (OR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.39 to 1.73; three studies providing unadjusted effect sizes), and non-improvement in sleep was largely associated with non-improvement in LBP in the short-moderate term (OR 3.45, 95% CI: 2.54 to 4.69; four studies providing unadjusted effect sizes). We found no association between baseline sleep with future disability and overall LBP improvement in the short-moderate term. Therefore, sleep may be a prognostic factor for pain intensity and recovery from LBP. All findings were supported by low to very low-quality evidence. Better-conducted studies are needed to strengthen our certainty about the evidence.

Dry needling perceptions and experiences: A survey of Australian physiotherapists.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of information on the use of dry needling in Australian physiotherapy practice. OBJECTIVES: Our primary aim was to enhance the understanding of why Australian physiotherapists use dry needling in clinical practice. The secondary aim was to explore Australian physiotherapists experiences with adverse events caused by dry needling. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey. METHOD: We developed a survey and disseminated it through email to physiotherapists from all states and territories in Australia. Participant demographics and responses were reported as frequencies and percentages. RESULTS/FINDINGS: We invited 1006 Australian physiotherapists, of which 232 (23%) viewed the online survey and 203 (20%) consented to participate, of which nearly all completed the survey (n = 198, 98%). Most respondents worked in private practice (n = 164, 83%), with 127 (64%) reporting using dry needling as an intervention within the previous 12 months. Physiotherapists typically used dry needling to decrease pain intensity (n = 105, 85%) and reduce muscle tension (n = 100, 81%). Reports of minor adverse events were common and included discomfort during the treatment (n = 77, 62%) and bruising (n = 69, 56%). Some respondents reported experiencing major adverse events including prolonged aggravation of symptoms (n = 10, 8%) and syncope (n = 16, 13%). CONCLUSIONS: We found that many Australian physiotherapists in private practice use dry needling, usually to decrease pain intensity and muscle tension. Minor adverse events were experienced by more than half the respondents and between 8 and 13% of the Australian physiotherapists surveyed reported experiencing a major adverse event due to dry needling.

Clinical validation of grouping conservative treatments in neck pain for use in a network meta-analysis: a Delphi consensus study.

BACKGROUND: A network meta-analysis aims to help clinicians make clinical decisions on the most effective treatment for a certain condition. Neck pain is multifactorial, with various classification systems and treatment options. Classifying patients and grouping interventions in clinically relevant treatment nodes for a NMA is essential, but this process is poorly defined. OBJECTIVE: Our aim is to obtain consensus among experts on neck pain classifications and the grouping of interventions into nodes for a future network meta-analysis. DESIGN: A Delphi consensus study involving neck pain experts worldwide. METHODS: We invited authors of neck pain clinical practice guidelines published from 2014 onwards. The Delphi baseline questionnaire was developed based on the findings of a scoping review, including four items on classifications and 19 nodes. Participants were asked to record their level of agreement on a seven-point Likert scale or using Yes/No/Not sure answer options for the various statements. We used descriptive analysis to summarise the responses on each statement with content analysis of the free-text comments. RESULTS: In total, 18/80 experts (22.5%) agreed to participate in one or more Delphi rounds. We needed three rounds to reach consensus for two classification of neck pain: one based on aetiology and one on duration. In addition, we also reached consensus on the grouping of interventions, including a definition of each node, with the number of nodes reduced to 17. CONCLUSION: With this consensus we clinically validated two neck pain classifications and grouped conservative treatments into 17 well-defined and clinically relevant nodes.

Does the Number of Comorbidities Predict Pain and Disability in Older Adults With Chronic Low Back Pain? A Longitudinal Study With 6- and 12-Month Follow-ups.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: People who live longer often live with multimorbidity. Nevertheless, whether the presence of multimorbidity affects pain and disability in older adults with chronic low back pain (LBP) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether multimorbidity predicts pain intensity and disability at 6- and 12-month follow-ups in older adults with chronic LBP. METHODS: This was a prospective, longitudinal study with 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Participants with chronic LBP (age ≥ 60 years) were recruited and interviewed at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Self-reported measures included the number of comorbidities, assessed through the Self-Administered Comorbidity Questionnaire, pain intensity, assessed with the 11-point Numerical Rating Scale, and disability, assessed with the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. Data were analyzed using univariate and multivariate regression models. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: A total of 220 participants were included. The number of comorbidities predicted pain intensity at 6-month (ß= 0.31 [95% CI: 0.12 to 0.50]) and 12-month (ß= 0.29 [95% CI: 0.08 to 0.50]) follow-ups. The number of comorbidities predicted disability at 6-month (ß= 0.55 [95% CI: 0.20 to 0.90]) and 12-month (ß= 0.40 [95% CI: 0.03 to 0.77]) follow-ups. CONCLUSION: The number of comorbidities at baseline predicted pain and disability at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups in older adults with chronic LBP. These results highlight the role of comorbidities as a predictive factor of pain and disability in patients with chronic LBP, emphasizing the need for timely and continuous interventions in older adults with multimorbidity to mitigate LBP-related pain and disability.

Description of massage interventions in randomised clinical trials for neck pain; a review using the TIDieR checklist.

OBJECTIVE: How interventions are reported can impact the ability to implement these intervention in clinical practice. Therefore, our aim is to assess the reporting of massage interventions in randomised controlled trials for patients with neck pain. DATA SOURCES: This manuscript concerns a secondary analysis of trials evaluating massage for neck pain selected for a scoping review. An updated literature search was completed using four databases to 31 July 2023. REVIEW METHODS: Trials were selected that evaluate massage interventions. Two independent assessors extracted descriptive information, methodological quality (PEDro-scale) and assessed completeness of reporting of the intervention using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDier-checklist). We present frequencies of the extracted data. RESULTS: We included 35 trials (2840 patients) with neck pain. Most trials (n = 23) included patients with chronic non-specific neck pain. We found a wide variety of massage interventions from Chinese massage, Swedish massage to myofascial release. In addition, the dose, number of sessions and the duration of the intervention varied widely. The methodological quality overall was fair to good (varied between 4-8/10), and we found a moderate completeness of reporting. All trials provided the name of the intervention, 30 (86%) provided a rationale and 26 (74%) trials described details of the massage intervention. CONCLUSION: The massage interventions were moderately described in trials in patients with neck pain, but provided enough information to guide the decision making for designing future Network Meta-analysis as to what trials need to be considered when grouping massage interventions in a clinically relevant way.

Test procedures and positive diagnostic criteria of the upper limb tension tests differ: a systematic review of the DiTA database.

BACKGROUND: The validity of the ULTT is unclear, due to heterogeneity of test procedures and variability in the definition of a positive test OBJECTIVE: To evaluate test procedures and positive diagnostic criteria for the upper limb tension test (ULTT) in diagnostic test accuracy studies. METHODS: A systematic review of diagnostic accuracy studies was performed. We conducted a search of the DiTA (Diagnostic Test Accuracy) database and selected primary studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of the ULTT. We assessed risk of bias, performed data extraction on study characteristics, test procedures, and positive diagnostic criteria, and performed a descriptive analysis. RESULTS: We included nine studies (681 participants), four diagnosing people with cervical radiculopathy (CR), four diagnosing people with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), and one included both CR and CTS. The risk of bias varied between 2 and 6 out of 6 positive items. Eight studies reported on the ULTT1 (median nerve). Overall, all studies clearly described their test procedures and positive diagnostic criteria although the order of movements and the diagnostic criteria between studies varied. We suggest a more standardised test procedure for the ULTT1 to consist of: 1) stabilising the shoulder in abduction, 2) extending the wrist/fingers, 3) supinating the forearm, 4) externally rotating the shoulder, 5) extending the elbow, and finally 6) performed structural differentiation by side bending (lateral flexion) of the neck. This proposed test procedure should reproduce the symptoms and enables the clinician to evaluate whether symptoms increase/decrease when stressing or relaxing the nerves. CONCLUSION: Based on our findings we proposed a more standardised test procedure for the ULTT1 with accompanying positive diagnostic criteria to facilitate homogeneity in future diagnostic accuracy studies of the ULTT.

Research from Low-Income and Middle-Income Countries will Benefit Global Health and the Physiotherapy Profession, but it Requires Support.

Disparities in research publications are common in the physiotherapy and rehabilitation fields.1 A small proportion of published research arises from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs),1,2 home to 85% of the world's population. Systems-level, institutional-level, and individual-level factors contribute to these disparities. With urgent and unified actions, global health and the standard of physiotherapy research in LMICs can be improved and strengthened. In this editorial, we will discuss the challenges encountered by researchers from LMICs in conducting and publishing high-quality research and propose potential strategies to address these challenges.

User profile of people contacting a stroke helpline (StrokeLine) in Australia: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: StrokeLine is a specialised telephone helpline led by health professionals in Australia. AIMS: (i) To describe the profile of StrokeLine callers; (ii) to understand the reasons people engage with the service and (iii) how StrokeLine responded to the caller's needs. METHODS: Routine call data were obtained from the StrokeLine between November 2019 and November 2020. Data were extracted and descriptive analyses performed. De-identified free-text data were obtained separately for November 2019 and June 2020 and analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Of the 1429 calls most were from carers, family and friends (38%) or the stroke survivor themselves (34%). Most calls were made by women (64%) and the average age of the stroke survivor was ≥65 years (33%) with the time since the stroke occurred <1 year. The main reason for calling was to manage stroke-related impairments (40%). Providing information, support and advice was the most common action provided by StrokeLine staff (25%). Content analysis of 225 calls revealed most stroke survivors called for emotional support, while carers sought more practical guidance. StrokeLine provided information for referral to relevant services and guidance on what to do next. CONCLUSIONS: Most calls were received from family and carers, as well as stroke survivors. They contacted StrokeLine for information and advice, practical solutions, emotional support, and referral advice to other services.