Adjunctive electrophysical therapies used in addition to land-based exercise therapy for osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objectives: To review evidence for effectiveness of electrophysical therapies (EPTs), used adjunctively with land-based exercise therapy, for hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA), compared with 1) placebo EPTs delivered with land-based exercise therapy or 2) land-based exercise therapy only. Methods: Six databases were searched up to October 2023 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs)/quasi-RCTs comparing adjunctive EPTs alongside land-based exercise therapy versus 1) placebo EPTs alongside land-based exercise, or 2) land-based exercise in hip or knee OA. Outcomes included pain, function, quality of life, global assessment and adverse events. Risk of bias and overall certainty of evidence were assessed. We back-translated significant Standardised Mean Differences (SMDs) to common scales: 2 points/15% on a 0-10 Numerical Pain Rating Scale and 6 points/15% on the WOMAC physical function subscale. Results: Forty studies (2831 patients) evaluated nine different EPTs for knee OA. Medium-term effects (up to 6 months) were evaluated in seven trials, and one evaluated long-term effects (>6 months). Adverse events were reported in one trial. Adjunctive laser therapy may confer short-term effects on pain (SMD -0.68, 95%CI -1.03 to -0.34; mean difference (MD) 1.18 points (95% CI -1.78 to -0.59) and physical function (SMD -0.60, 95%CI -0.88 to -0.34; MD 12.95 (95%CI -20.05 to -5.86)) compared to placebo EPTs, based on very low-certainty evidence. No other EPTs (TENS, interferential, heat, shockwave, shortwave, ultrasound, EMG biofeedback, NMES) showed clinically significant effects compared to placebo/exercise, or exercise only. Conclusions: Very low-certainty evidence supports laser therapy used adjunctively with exercise for short-term improvement in pain and function. No other EPTs demonstrated clinically meaningful effects.

Primary care-based models of care for osteoarthritis; a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and describe the extent, nature, characteristics, and impact of primary care-based models of care (MoCs) for osteoarthritis (OA) that have been developed and/or evaluated. DESIGN: Six electronic databases were searched from 2010 to May 2022. Relevant data were extracted and collated for narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Sixty-three studies pertaining to 37 discrete MoCs from 13 countries were included, of which 23 (62%) could be classified as OA management programmes (OAMPs) comprising a self-management intervention to be delivered as a discrete package. Four models (11%) focussed on enhancing the initial consultation between a patient presenting with OA at the first point of contact into a local health system and the clinician. Emphasis was placed on educational training for general practitioners (GPs) and allied healthcare professionals delivering this initial consultation. The remaining 10 MoCs (27%) detailed integrated care pathways of onward referral to specialist secondary orthopaedic and rheumatology care within local healthcare systems. The majority (35/37; 95%) were developed in high-income countries and 32/37 (87%) targeted hip/and or knee OA. Frequently identified model components included GP-led care, referral to primary care services and multidisciplinary care. The models were predominantly 'one-size fits all' and lacked individualised care approaches. A minority of MoCs, 5/37 (14%) were developed using underlying frameworks, three (8%) of which incorporated behaviour change theories, while 13/37 (35%) incorporated provider training. Thirty-four of the 37 models (92%) were evaluated. Outcome domains most frequently reported included clinical outcomes, followed by system- and provider-level outcomes. While there was evidence of improved quality of OA care associated with the models, effects on clinical outcomes were mixed. CONCLUSION: There are emerging efforts internationally to develop evidence-based models focused on non-surgical primary care OA management. Notwithstanding variations in healthcare systems and resources, future research should focus on model development alignment with implementation science frameworks and theories, key stakeholder involvement including patient and public representation, provision of training and education for providers, treatment individualisation, integration and coordination of services across the care continuum and incorporation of behaviour change strategies to foster long-term adherence and self-management.

Multisensory perception is not influenced by previous concussion history in retired rugby union players.

BACKGROUND: To assess whether concussion history adversely affects multisensory integration, we compared susceptibility to the Sound-Induced Flash Illusion (SIFI) in retired professional rugby players compared to controls. METHODS: Retired professional rugby players ((N = 58) and retired international rowers (N = 26) completed a self-report concussion history questionnaire and the SIFI task. Susceptibility to the SIFI (i.e., perceiving two flashes in response to one flash paired with two beeps) was assessed at three stimulus onset asynchronies (70 ms, 150 ms or 230 ms).Logistic mixed-effects regression modeling was implemented to evaluate how athlete grouping, previous concussion history and total number of years playing sport, impacted the susceptibility to the SIFI task. The statistical significance of a fixed effect of interest was determined by a likelihood ratio test. RESULTS: Former rugby players had significantly more self-reported concussions than the rower group (p < 0.001). There was no impact of athlete grouping (i.e., retired professional rugby players and retired international rowers), years participation in elite sport or concussion history on performance in the SIFI. CONCLUSION: A career in professional rugby, concussion history or number of years participating in professional rugby was not found to be predictive of performance on the SIFI task.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of osteoarthritis management programmes in primary or community care settings: a systematic review and qualitative framework synthesis protocol.

Despite consistent international guidelines for osteoarthritis (OA) management, evidence-based treatments are underutilised. OA management programmes (OAMPs) are being implemented internationally to address this evidence-practice gap. An OAMP is defined as a 'model of evidence-based, non-surgical OA care that has been implemented in a real-world setting'. Our objective is to identify, synthesise and appraise qualitative research identifying anticipated or experienced micro (individual/behavioural), meso (organisational) or macro (context/system) level barriers or facilitators to the implementation of primary or community care-based OAMPs. Five electronic databases will be searched for papers published between 2010 and 2021. Qualitative or mixed-methods studies that include qualitative data on the anticipated or experienced barriers or facilitators to the implementation of primary or community care-based OAMPs, from the perspective of service users or service providers, will be included. The review will be reported using the PRISMA and ENTREQ guidelines. A data extraction form will be used to provide details of the included studies. Data will be analysed and identified barriers and facilitators will be mapped onto an appropriate implementation framework, such as the Theoretical Domains Framework. The appropriate JBI critical appraisal tools will be used to assess methodological quality, while the GRADE-CERQual approach will be used to assess confidence in the findings. Translation of evidence-based guidelines into practice is challenging and reliant on the quality of implementation. By comparing and contrasting anticipated and experienced barriers, this review will determine the extent of congruence between the two, and provide valuable insights into the views and experiences of key stakeholders involved in the implementation of OAMPs. The mapping of identified barriers and facilitators to behaviour change theory will enhance the applicability and construct validity of our findings and will offer significant utility for future development and implementation of OAMPs. Registration: This protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021255698) on 15/07/21.

Primary care-based models of care for osteoarthritis: a scoping review protocol.

Background: The burden of osteoarthritis (OA) to individuals and health systems is substantial and is expected to increase due to population ageing and rising prevalence of obesity and multimorbidity. Primary care-based models of care (MoCs) are being increasingly developed in response to this growing burden. However, these MoCs have yet to be formally reviewed. A MoC can be defined as an 'evidence-informed strategy, framework or pathway that outlines the optimal manner in which condition-specific care should be delivered to consumers within a local health system'. Objective: To identify and describe the available research regarding the extent, nature and characteristics of MoCs for OA that have been developed or evaluated in primary care. Methods: A scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the Arksey and O'Malley scoping review framework and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Systematic literature searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Web of Science and LILACs will be conducted from 2010 to present, aligning with publication dates of recent clinical guidelines. A structured iterative search of grey literature will be conducted. Full-text original quantitative or mixed method studies which describe the development or evaluation of MoCs for OA in primary care will be considered. Data will be charted and synthesised and a narrative synthesis will be conducted. Conclusions: This scoping review will provide a broad overview regarding the extent, nature and characteristics of the available literature on primary care based MoCs for OA. Findings will be used to identify gaps in the current evidence to identify areas for future research.

Athlete concussion history recall is underestimated: a validation study of self-reported concussion history among current professional rugby union players.

Objective: To assess the concurrent validity and test re-test reliability of the Michigan Traumatic Brain Injury Identification Method (MTBIIM). The psychometric properties of this concussion index were investigated by comparing the agreement between player self-reported diagnosed concussions and medical record diagnosed concussions among professional rugby union players.Study Design: Cross-sectional study i) validation and ii) test re-test reliability.Methods: The MTBIIM was administered via a structured interview to obtain the number and nature of player self-reported concussion histories from players, while contracted to the host club. Self-reported concussion history information was compared to medically recorded data captured between 2008 and 2017. A mixed-effects logistic regression model explored predictors of player self-report accuracy.Results: Data from 62 players (25.39[4.36] years) included 99 unique rugby related concussions. Medically documented concussions (n = 92) per player (1.48 [1.96]) were 30% more than the mean number of self-reported diagnosed (n = 63) concussions per player (1.02 [1.21] events). Overall, self-reported diagnosed concussions and medical record diagnosed concussion histories had a 'fair' level of agreement (k=0.274; SE [0.076]), p=.001). Self-reported lifetime concussion history was signicantly negatively correlated with recall of concussions.Conclusions: Initial concurrent validity of the MTBIIM was found to be fair with the average athlete under-reporting the number of clinically diagnosed concussions.

A career in sport does not eliminate risk of cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the cardiovascular health of field-based athletes.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors in current field-based athletes. DESIGN: Meta-analysis. METHODS: This review was conducted and reported in accordance with PRISMA and pre-registered with PROSPERO. Articles were retrieved via online database search engines, with no date or language restriction. Studies investigating current field-based athletes (>18years) for CVD risk factors according to the European Society of Cardiology and American Heart Association were screened. Full texts were screened using Covidence and Cochrane criteria. Eligible articles were critically appraised using the AXIS tool. Individual study estimates were assessed by random-effect meta-analyses to examine the overall effect. RESULTS: This study was ascribed a 1b evidence level, according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine. 41 studies were identified, including 5546 athletes from four sports; American football; soccer; rugby and baseball mean ages: 18-28. Despite participation in sport, increased body mass was associated with increased total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein, triglycerides, hypertension, systolic blood pressure, and decreased high-density lipoprotein. Linemen had increased prevalence of hypertension compared to non-athletes. Conflicting findings on fasting glucose were prevalent. There were inconsistencies in screening and reporting of CVD risk factors. Sport specific anthropometric demands were associated with elevated prevalence of CVD risk factors, most notably: elevated body mass; dyslipidemia; elevated systolic blood pressure and; glucose. CONCLUSIONS: There are elevated levels of risk for CVD in some athletes, primarily football players. Lifestyle behaviours associated with elite athleticism, particularly football linemen potentially expose players to greater metabolic and CVD risk, which is not completely offset by sport participation.

History of Sport-Related Concussion and Long-Term Clinical Cognitive Health Outcomes in Retired Athletes: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Sport-related concussions (SRCs) are known to have short-term effects on cognitive processes, which can result in diverse clinical presentations. The long-term effects of SRC and repeated exposure to head impacts that do not result in SRC on specific cognitive health outcomes remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: To synthesize and appraise the evidence base regarding cognitive health in living retired athletes with a history of head-impact exposure or SRC. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of the EMBASE, PsycINFO, MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science databases was conducted from inception to April 2018 using common key words and medical subject headings related to 3 components: (1) the participant (eg, retired athlete), (2) the primary outcome measure (eg, cognitive test used), and (3) the secondary outcome measure (eg, history of sport concussion). STUDY SELECTION: Cross-sectional studies of living retired male or female athletes in which at least 1 cognitive test was used as an outcome measure were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction was performed using Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Methodologic quality was assessed independently by 2 reviewers using the Downs and Black tool. DATA SYNTHESIS: The search yielded 46 cross-sectional observational studies that were included in a qualitative synthesis. Most included studies (80%, n = 37) were published in the 5 years before our review. A large proportion of these studies (n = 20) included retired American National Football League players. The other research investigated professional, university, high school, and amateur retired athletes participating in sports such as American and Australian football, boxing, field and ice hockey, rugby, and soccer. The total sample consisted of 13 975 participants: 7387 collision-sport athletes, 662 contact-sport athletes, 3346 noncontact-sport athletes, and 2580 participants classified as controls. Compared with control participants or normative data, retired athletes displayed worse performance in 17 of 31 studies (55%) of memory, 6 of 11 studies (55%) of executive function, and 4 of 6 studies (67%) of psychomotor function and increased subjective concerns about cognitive function in 11 of 14 studies (79%). The authors of 13 of 46 investigations (28%) reported a frequency-response relationship, with poorer cognitive outcomes in athletes who had greater levels of exposure to head impacts or concussions. However, these results must be interpreted in light of the lack of methodologic rigor and moderate quality assessment of the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of poorer cognitive health among retired athletes with a history of concussion and head-impact exposure is evolving. Our results suggest that a history of SRC may more greatly affect the cognitive domains of memory, executive function, and psychomotor function. Retired athletes appeared to have increased self-reported cognitive difficulties, but the paucity of high-quality, prospective studies limited the conclusions that could be drawn regarding a cause-and-effect relationship between concussion and long-term health outcomes. Future researchers should consider a range of cognitive health outcomes, as well as premorbid ability, in diverse samples of athletes with or without a history of concussion or head-impact exposure to delineate the long-term effects of sport participation on cognitive functioning.

Influence of playing rugby on long-term brain health following retirement: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review was to systematically investigate long-term brain health in retired rugby players. METHODS: Six databases were systematically searched from inception to January 2018 using Medical Subject Headings and keywords. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion. Cross-sectional studies of living retired male or female rugby players in which at least one cognitive test was used as an outcome measure were included. Data extraction was performed using Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Methodological quality was assessed independently by two reviewers using the Downs and Black methodological quality tool. RESULTS: This review yielded six studies with an overall methodological quality of 'moderate'. A total of 672 male retired rugby players (mean ages of 38-52 years) were included in this review. Three studies investigated neuropsychological functioning in retired rugby players in comparison with controls, with no significant evidence of decreased performance in the majority of tests when compared with controls. Five out of the six studies explored self-reported measures of cognition. Three studies compared retired rugby players to controls, one of which found significantly increased subjective cognitive complaints among retired rugby players. The other two studies found that persistent postconcussion symptoms were associated with a higher number of self-reported concussions. Two studies reported decreased fine motor control in retired rugby players in comparison with controls. Neurometabolites and electrophysiological changes were explored by two studies, with minimal and non-significant findings. CONCLUSIONS: Overall findings are mixed. Methodological biases reduce the overall study quality and limited the conclusions that can be drawn. Findings of decreased fine motor control in retired athletes may be influenced by lack of controlling for evidence of upper limb musculoskeletal injuries. While some studies show evidence of reduced cognitive function among former athletes, the results are not significantly lower than population norms. Cognitive findings from this review are inconsistent within and across study cohorts and are biased towards positive findings when self-report methods were selected. Current evidence suggests that large gaps remain in the understanding of the cause-and-effect relationships between playing rugby and long-term brain health in retired players.