Prevalence and consequences of concurrent dizziness on disability and quality of life in patients with long-lasting neck pain.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence of concurrent dizziness in patients seeking treatment for neck pain at a secondary care clinic and examine how dizziness associates with physical function, disability, quality of life, and duration of neck pain. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study where patients referred for neck pain (n = 133) were recruited from an outpatient spine clinic and divided into: patients with and without dizziness. All patients were examined with posturography, global body examination-flexibility and cervical range of motion, and completed the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and RAND-12 health survey. Patients with concurrent dizziness completed the Vertigo Symptom Scale short form (VSSsf). RESULTS: Forty-three percent of the patients reported dizziness. Concurrent dizziness was associated with increased postural sway with eyes open (p < .001), eyes closed (p = .024), eyes open on foam (p = .010), eyes closed on foam (p = .003), higher disability on the NDI (ß: 2.9, p = .009), RAND-12 physical (ß: -4.3, p = .014) and mental subscales (ß: -4.0, p = .014). A higher score on NDI was associated with higher score on the VSSsf (total score: r = 0.51, p < .001, anxiety: r = 0.52, p < .001, vertigo: r = 0.43, p = .02.). CONCLUSION: Dizziness is common among patients with long-lasting neck pain. It is associated with higher disability due to neck symptoms and general health-related quality of life. The findings highlight the importance of evaluating and addressing dizziness in patients with neck disorders.

Amoxicillin Did Not Reduce Modic Change Edema in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: Subgroup Analyses of a Randomised Trial (the AIM Study).

STUDY DESIGN: Exploratory subgroup analyses of a randomised trial [Antibiotics in Modic changes (AIM) study]. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to assess the effect of amoxicillin versus placebo in reducing Modic change (MC) edema in patients with chronic low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The AIM study showed a small, clinically insignificant effect of amoxicillin on pain-related disability in patients with chronic low back pain and MC type 1 (edema type) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 180 patients were randomised to receive 100 days of amoxicillin or placebo. MC edema was assessed on MRI at baseline and one-year follow-up. Per-protocol analyses were conducted in subgroups with MC edema on short tau inversion recovery (STIR) or T1/T2-weighted MRI at baseline. MC edema reductions (yes/no) in STIR and T1/T2 series were analyzed separately. The effect of amoxicillin in reducing MC edema was analyzed using logistic regression adjusted for prior disk surgery. To assess the effect of amoxicillin versus placebo within the group with the most abundant MC edema on STIR at baseline ("STIR3" group), we added age, STIR3 (yes/no), and STIR3×treatment group (interaction term) as independent variables and compared the marginal means (probabilities of edema reduction). RESULTS: Compared to placebo, amoxicillin did not reduce MC edema on STIR (volume/intensity) in the total sample with edema on STIR at baseline (odds ratio 1.0, 95% CI: 0.5, 2.0; n=141) or within the STIR3 group (probability of edema reduction 0.69, 95% CI: 0.47, 0.92 with amoxicillin and 0.61, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.80 with placebo; n=41). Compared with placebo, amoxicillin did not reduce MC edema in T1/T2 series (volume of the type 1 part of MCs) (odds ratio: 1.0, 95% CI: 0.5, 2.3, n=104). Edema declined in >50% of patients in both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: From baseline to one-year follow-up, amoxicillin did not reduce MC edema compared with placebo. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.

Associations between pressure pain threshold in the neck and postural control in patients with dizziness or neck pain - a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: It is theorized that neck pain may cause reduced postural control due to the known physiological connection between the receptors in the cervical spine and the vestibular system. The purpose of this study was to examine whether the pressure pain threshold in the neck is associated with postural sway in patients with dizziness or neck pain. METHODS: Consecutive patients with dizziness (n = 243) and neck pain (n = 129) were recruited from an otorhinolaryngological department and an outpatient spine clinic, respectively. All subjects underwent static posturography. Pressure pain thresholds were measured at four standardized points in the neck, and generalized pain was assessed using the American College of Rheumatology tender points. The relationship between postural sway and pressure pain threshold was analyzed by linear regression, and the covariates included age, sex, and generalized pain. RESULTS: In the dizzy group, there was a small, inverse relationship between pressure pain thresholds and sway area with eyes closed, after adjusting for age, sex, and generalized pain (bare platform; lower neck, p = 0.002, R2 = 0.068; upper neck, p = 0.038, R2 = 0.047; foam rubber mat; lower neck, p = 0.014, R2 = 0.085). The same inverse relationship was found between pressure pain thresholds in the neck and the Romberg ratio on a bare platform after adjusting for age, sex and generalized pain (upper neck, p = 0.15, R2 = 0.053; lower neck, p = 0.002, R2 = 0.069). Neither of these relationships were present in the neck pain group. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that the pressure pain threshold in the neck is associated with postural sway in patients suffering from dizziness after adjusting for age, sex, and generalized pain, but only with closed eyes. The association was small and should be interpreted with caution. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration: Clinicaltrial.gov NCT03531619. Retrospectively registered 22 May 2018.

Virtual reality training for upper extremity in subacute stroke (VIRTUES): study protocol for a randomized controlled multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Novel virtual reality rehabilitation systems provide the potential to increase intensity and offer challenging and motivating tasks. The efficacy of virtual reality systems to improve arm motor function early after stroke has not been demonstrated yet in sufficiently powered studies. The objective of the study is to investigate whether VR training as an adjunct to conventional therapy is more effective in improving arm motor function in the subacute phase after stroke than dose-matched conventional training, to assess patient and therapist satisfaction when working with novel virtual reality training and to calculate cost-effectiveness in terms of resources required to regain some degree of dexterity. METHODS/DESIGN: Randomized controlled observer-blind trial. DISCUSSION: Virtual reality systems are promising tools for rehabilitation of arm motor function after stroke. Their introduction in combination with traditional physical and occupational therapy may enhance recovery after stroke, and at the same time demand little personnel resources to increase training intensity. The VIRTUES trial will provide further evidence of VR-based treatment strategies to clinicians, patients and health economists. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02079103.

Long-term follow-up of disability pensioners having musculoskeletal disorders.

BACKGROUND: Previously we have conducted a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effect of a brief cognitive behavioural program with a vocational approach aiming to return disability pensioners with back pain to work, as compared to no intervention. One year after the intervention, 10 participants (22%) who received the program and 5 (11%) in the control group reported to have entered a return to work process. The aims of this study were to evaluate long-term effects of the intervention, and compare this effect to 2 reference populations not participating in the original trial. METHODS: Three groups of disability pensioners were investigated: 1) Disability pensioners having back pain (n = 89) previously participating in the RCT (randomized to either a brief cognitive behavioural intervention or to a control group), 2) 342 disability pensioners having back pain, but refusing to participate in the study and 3) 449 disability pensioners having other musculoskeletal disorders than back pain. Primary outcome was return to work, defined as a reduction in payment of disability pension. RESULTS: Only 2 of 89 (2.3%) participants from the RCT had reduced disability pension at 3-years follow-up, both from the control group. None of the participants that had been in a process of returning to work after 1 year had actually gained employment at 3-years follow-up. In the 2 groups not participating in the previous RCT, only 4 (1.2%) and 8 (1.6%) had returned to work after 3 years respectively. CONCLUSION: The number of pensioners who returned to work was negligible in all groups regardless of having participated in a cognitive behavioural intervention or not.

Relative cost-effectiveness of extensive and light multidisciplinary treatment programs versus treatment as usual for patients with chronic low back pain on long-term sick leave: randomized controlled study.

STUDY DESIGN: A subgroup of 195 patients with chronic low back pain, being part of a larger study of other musculoskeletal patients, were included in a randomized controlled prospective clinical study. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcome in terms of return to work and cost-effectiveness of a light multidisciplinary treatment program with an extensive multidisciplinary program and treatment as usual initiated by their general practitioner. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Light multidisciplinary programs seem to reduce sick leave in patients with subacute low back pain. There are few, if any, previous studies of the effectiveness of light versus extensive multidisciplinary treatment on return to work in patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS: Patients with chronic low back pain (n = 195), on an average sick-listed for 3 months, were included. The patients were randomized to a light multidisciplinary treatment program, an extensive multidisciplinary program, or treatment as usual by their primary physician. Full return to work was used as outcome response, and follow-up was 26 months after the end of treatment. Cost-benefit was calculated for the treatment programs. RESULTS: In men significantly better results for full return to work were found for the light multidisciplinary treatment compared with treatment as usual, but no differences were found between extensive multidisciplinary treatment and treatment as usual. No significant differences between any of the two multidisciplinary treatment programs and the controls were found for women. Productivity gains for the society from light multidisciplinary treatment versus "treatment as usual" of 57 male patients with low back pain would during the first 2 years accumulate to U.S. $852.000. CONCLUSIONS: The light multidisciplinary treatment model is a cost-effective treatment for men with chronic low back pain.