The smallest worthwhile effect on pain intensity of exercise therapy for people with chronic low back pain: a discrete choice experiment study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the smallest worthwhile effect (SWE) of exercise therapy for people with non-specific chronic low back pain (CLBP). DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment. METHODS: The SWE was estimated as the lowest reduction in pain that participants would consider exercising worthwhile, compared to not exercising i.e., effects due to natural history and other components (e.g., regression to the mean). We recruited English-speaking adults in Australia with non-specific CLBP to our online survey via email obtained from a registry of previous participants and advertisements on social media. We used discrete choice experiment to estimate the SWE of exercise compared to no exercise for pain intensity. We analysed the discrete choice experiment using a mixed logit model, and mitigated hypothetical bias through certainty calibration, with sensitivity analyses performed with different certainty calibration thresholds. RESULTS: Two-hundred and thirteen participants completed the survey. The mean age (±SD) was 50.7±16.5, median (IQR) pain duration 10 years (5-20), and mean pain intensity (±SD) was 5.8±2.3 on a 0-10 numerical rating scale. For people with CLBP the SWE of exercise was a between-group reduction in pain of 20%, compared to no exercise. In the sensitivity analyses, the SWE varied with different levels of certainty calibration; from 0% without certainty calibration to 60% with more extreme certainty calibration. CONCLUSION: This patient-informed threshold of clinical importance could guide the interpretation of findings from randomised trials and meta-analyses of exercise therapy compared to no exercise.

Moderators of treatment effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for patients with (sub) acute low back pain: Protocol for a systematic review with individual participant data meta-analysis.

A Cochrane review found that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are slightly more effective than placebo on acute and subacute low back pain (LBP) outcomes (pain intensity, disability, and global improvement). Our objectives are: (1) to assess the overall treatment effect of NSAIDs in adults with acute and subacute LBP; (2) to identify the moderation of baseline patients' characteristics on treatment effect. We will conduct a systematic search of RCTs on effectiveness of NSAIDs compared with placebo in adults with non-chronic LBP in Medline ALL, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials*. We will screen the records after January 2020, and include eligible RCTs before January 2020 screened by the Cochrane review mentioned above. Our primary outcomes are pain intensity, disability, and health-related quality of life, secondary outcomes are adverse events. Our IPD dataset will consist of the information on each eligible trial characteristics and included variables according to a predefined coding scheme. We will assess risk-of-bias of included RCTs with the Cochrane Risk Of Bias (RoB)-2 assessment tool. We will perform power calculations with closed-form solutions and prioritize a one-stage approach for IPD-MA. For reporting the results, we will adhere to the PRISMA-IPD statement.

Physical and psychosocial work-related exposures and the occurrence of disorders of the shoulder: A systematic review update.

This review is an update of a previous systematic review and assesses the evidence for the association of work-related physical and psychosocial risk factors and specific disorders of the shoulders. Medline, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central and PsycINFO were searched and study eligibility and risk of bias assessment was performed by two independent reviewers. A total of 14 new articles were added with the majority focusing on rotator cuff syndrome (RCS) with seven studies. Nine articles reported psychosocial exposures in addition to physical exposures. The strongest evidence was found for the association between elevation, repetition, force and vibration and the occurrence of SIS and tendinosis/tendonitis. Evidence also suggests that psychosocial exposures are associated with the occurrence of RCS and tendinosis/tendonitis. Other findings were inconsistent which prevents drawing strong conclusions.

Italian versions of the Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire (NPQ): psychometric properties and an investigation on the understanding of pain neurophysiology in physical therapists.

OBJECTIVES: The Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire (NPQ) is widely used to assess pain knowledge among clinicians and patients with pain, but an Italian version is not available. This study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the NPQ into Italian, to test its psychometric properties, to assess the knowledge of Italian physical therapists (PTs) on pain, and to evaluate which characteristics are associated with pain knowledge. METHODS: The NPQ was translated into Italian, integrated with some additional questions (IT-NPQ-New), and sent by email via the Italian Association of Physiotherapy newsletter. Rasch analysis (RA) was used to test the psychometric properties of the Italian versions. Multivariable regression analyses were used to check for associations between participants' characteristics and their NPQ scores. RESULTS: A sample of 753 PTs completed the survey. RA of the NPQ-19 and IT-NPQ-New revealed that 10 (IT-NPQ-10) and 18 (IT-NPQ-18) items fit the model. Both questionnaires showed good psychometric properties. The overall median score among Italian PTs was 6.0 [5.0-7.0] and 11.0 [9.0-13.0] points for the IT-NPQ-10 and the IT-NPQ-18, respectively. These scores were statistically different among groups according to gender, age, years of professional activity, post-graduate specialization and days attended of targeted pain courses, with the latter being the most influential variable. CONCLUSIONS: Italian PTs now dispose of two tools to assess their basic knowledge related to pain science. Our study also showed that pain knowledge among Italian PTs needs improvement, especially considering recent biopsychosocial approaches to pain.

The prevalence, incidence and management of low back pain with radiating leg pain in Dutch general practice: A population-based cohort study in the Rijnmond Primary Care Database.

BACKGROUND: Radiating leg pain is common in patients with low back pain (LBP). In this study, we aimed to determine the prevalence and incidence of LBP with radiating leg pain in Dutch general practice, and to describe the prescribed medications and requested imaging diagnostics. METHODS: The Rijnmond Primary Care Database containing over 500,000 primary care patients was used to select patients ≥18 years with LBP with radiating leg pain between 2013 and 2021. Data on patient characteristics, LBP episodes, prescribed medication and requested imaging in the first 3 months of an episode was extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to present patient characteristics and diagnostic/therapeutic interventions. RESULTS: A total of 27,695 patients were included. The total number of LBP with radiating leg pain episodes in these patients was 36,268. In 2021, the incidence and prevalence were 19.1 and 25.7 per 1000 patient years, respectively. In 60% of patients, the episode duration was shorter than 1 month. In 62% of the episodes, patients visited the general practitioner (GP) one to two times. In 59% of the episodes, at least one medication was prescribed, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) being the most common one (45%). In approximately 11% of the episodes, additional diagnostic imaging was requested. CONCLUSION: LBP with radiating leg pain is common in Dutch general practice patients. About 2/3rd were prescribed pain medications. Dutch request few to none diagnostic imaging for these patients which is in line with clinical practice guidelines. SIGNIFICANCE: In this new study, we have gained insights into the incidence and prevalence of LBP with radiating leg pain in Dutch general practice. Both remained fairly stable over the study period of 9 years (2013-2021). Overall, the care burden regarding seeking contact with the GPs and the requested diagnostics seem not to be that high. In 62% of the care episodes, there were one or two consultations with the GP, and in 11% of the episodes a diagnostic imaging was requested. Pain medications frequently prescribed (i.e. 2/3rd of the episodes), with NSAIDs being the most common ones.

Does the intensity of pain and disability affect health-related quality of life of older adults with back pain? Multilevel analysis between Brazil and Netherlands: a cross-sectional study of the BACE consortium.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of back pain (BP) in the older adults is less favorable than in younger adults and progress to adverse outcomes and consequent worsening of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The present study aimed to verify the association between BP intensity, disability and HRQoL in older adults residents in Brazil and Netherlands, and to evaluate whether the country of residence influences the associations. METHODS: Data were collected from 602 Brazilian and 675 Dutch participants with a new episode of BP from the Back Complaints in Elders (BACE) consortium. For the present study, a cross section was used. Pain intensity and disability were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), respectively. HRQoL was assessed using the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) quality of life questionnaire. Age, sex, and education were descriptive variables. Pain intensity (NPS score) and country were the independent variables and quality of life assessed by each SF domain - 36 was the dependent variable. Analysis of models at the individual level was performed to verify the association between pain and disability, also HRQoL in Netherlands and Brazil in the total sample. The multilevel model was used to verify whether the older adults person's country of residence influenced this relationship. RESULTS: The average age of the participants was 67.00 (7.33) years. In the total sample, linear regression analysis adjusted for sex and age showed a significant association between BP intensity scores and HRQoL, for all domains. There was no association between disability and HRQoL. In the multilevel analysis, there was an association between BP intensity and HRQoL in all domains and an association between the country of residence and HRQoL, influencing the effect of pain, in all domains, except for the physical functioning. CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic and cultural aspects of different countries can affect the perception of the elderly about their HRQoL in the presence of BP. Pain and disability in Brazilian and Dutch older adults ones are experienced differently in relation to their HRQoL.

Prognostic Models for Chronic Low Back Pain Outcomes in Primary Care Are at High Risk of Bias and Lack Validation-High-Quality Studies Are Needed: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an updated overview of available prognostic models for people with chronic low back pain (LBP) in primary care. DESIGN: Prognosis systematic review LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched for relevant studies on MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases (up to July 13, 2022), and performed citation tracking in Web of Science. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: We included observational (cohort or nested case-control) studies and randomized controlled trials that developed or validated prognostic models for adults with chronic LBP in primary care. The outcomes of interest were physical functioning, pain intensity, and health-related quality of life at any follow-up time-point. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted using the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS), and the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias of the models. Due to the number of studies retrieved and the heterogeneity, we reported the results descriptively. RESULTS: Ten studies (out of 5593 hits screened) with 34 models met our inclusion criteria, of which six are development studies and four are external validation studies. Five studies reported the area under the curve of the models (ranging from 0.48 to 0.84), whereas no study reported calibration indices. The most promising model is the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire Short-Form. CONCLUSIONS: Given the high risk of bias and lack of external validation, we cannot recommend that clinicians use prognostic models for patients with chronic LBP in primary care settings. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(5):1-13. Epub 15 February 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12081.

Nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic low back pain? The low back pain phenotyping (BACPAP) consortium's international and multidisciplinary consensus recommendations.

The potential to classify low back pain as being characterised by dominant nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic mechanisms is a clinically relevant issue. Preliminary evidence suggests that these low back pain phenotypes might respond differently to treatments; however, more research must be done before making specific recommendations. Accordingly, the low back pain phenotyping (BACPAP) consortium was established as a group of 36 clinicians and researchers from 13 countries (five continents) and 29 institutions, to apply a modified Nominal Group Technique methodology to develop international and multidisciplinary consensus recommendations to provide guidance for identifying the dominant pain phenotype in patients with low back pain, and potentially adapt pain management strategies. The BACPAP consortium's recommendations are also intended to provide direction for future clinical research by building on the established clinical criteria for neuropathic and nociplastic pain. The BACPAP consortium's consensus recommendations are a necessary early step in the process to determine if personalised pain medicine based on pain phenotypes is feasible for low back pain management. Therefore, these recommendations are not ready to be implemented in clinical practice until additional evidence is generated that is specific to these low back pain phenotypes.

Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of a smartphone-based manikin to support pain self-reporting.

Introduction: Many people worldwide suffer from chronic pain. Improving our knowledge on chronic pain prevalence and management requires methods to collect pain self-reports in large populations. Smartphone-based tools could aid data collection by allowing people to use their own device, but the measurement properties of such tools are largely unknown. Objectives: To assess the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of a smartphone-based manikin to support pain self-reporting. Methods: We recruited people with fibromyalgia, rheumatoid arthritis, and/or osteoarthritis and access to a smartphone and the internet. Data collection included the Global Pain Scale at baseline and follow-up, and 30 daily pain drawings completed on a 2-dimensional, gender-neutral manikin. After deriving participants' pain extent from their manikin drawings, we evaluated convergent and discriminative validity, test-retest reliability, and responsiveness and assessed findings against internationally agreed criteria for good measurement properties. Results: We recruited 131 people; 104 were included in the full sample, submitting 2185 unique pain drawings. Manikin-derived pain extent had excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.94), moderate convergent validity (ρ, 0.46), and an ability to distinguish fibromyalgia and osteoarthritis from rheumatoid arthritis (F statistics, 30.41 and 14.36, respectively; P < 0.001). Responsiveness was poor (ρ, 0.2; P, 0.06) and did not meet the respective criterion for good measurement properties. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that smartphone-based manikins can be a reliable and valid method for pain self-reporting, but that further research is warranted to explore, enhance, and confirm the ability of such manikins to detect a change in pain over time.

Clinical improvements due to specific effects and placebo effects in conservative interventions and changes observed with no treatment in randomized controlled trials of patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Little is known about the contribution of placebo effects and changes observed with no treatment in interventions for nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP). This systematic review assessed the proportions of the overall treatment effect that may be attributable to specific treatment effects, placebo effects, and changes observed with no treatment in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with NSLBP. Trials published before 2019 were identified from a published systematic review, and the search was updated in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central for trials published between January 2019 and March 2023. Three-arm RCTs comparing the effects of experimental interventions vs placebo control vs no intervention reporting pain intensity, physical function, and/or health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were included. Sixteen RCTs with 1436 adults with chronic NSLBP testing conservative and mainly passive interventions were included. For pain intensity (16 studies), 33%, 18%, and 49% of the overall short-term treatment effect was attributable to specific treatment effects, placebo effects, and changes observed with no treatment, respectively. For physical function (11 studies) and HRQoL (6 studies), these proportions were 34%, 13%, and 53%, and 11%, 41%, and 48%, respectively. These results show that approximately half of the overall treatment effect of conservative and mainly passive interventions for patients with chronic NSLBP is attributable to changes observed with no treatment, rather than specific or placebo effects of treatments. However, the certainty of evidence was very low to low, suggesting that the true effects might be markedly different from the effect sizes underlying these estimates.

Measurement properties of the EQ-5D in children and adolescents: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Although the EQ-5D instruments have been initially designed for adult populations, there are new studies evaluating and applying these instruments to children and adolescents. The EuroQol Group adapted and created two versions designed for these groups, i.e., the EQ-5D-Y versions. The measurement properties of the EQ-5D have been systematically reviewed in different health conditions. However, there is a lack of a proper systematic assessment including the studies' risk of bias and focusing on recent studies assessing the EQ-5D instruments in children and adolescents. The lack of a systematic assessment of the EQ-5D versions does not allow us to have a comprehensive evaluation of the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of these instruments among children and adolescents. This systematic review aims to critically appraise and summarize the evidence on the measurement properties of the EQ-5D instruments (self-reported version - answered by children and adolescents; and proxy versions - versions reported by parents, caregivers, or health professionals) in children and adolescents. METHODS: A systematic review searching the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, EconLit, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED), Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database. Two independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts and select full texts for eligibility. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology will be followed to conduct three main assessment steps: risk of bias, quality criteria for measurement properties, and evidence synthesis. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will provide comprehensive information about the evidence regarding the measurement properties of EQ-5D instruments in children and adolescents of different settings and countries. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework with Registration https://osf.io/r8kt9/ and PROSPERO: CRD42020218382.

Exploring the facilitators and barriers in opioid deprescribing for non-cancer pain treatment experienced by general practitioners: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend opioid deprescribing in patients on long-term opioid treatment for chronic non-cancer pain. This study aims to explore facilitators and barriers in opioid deprescribing among general practitioners in the Netherlands. In addition, this study aims to identify possibilities for improvement regarding opioid deprescribing in primary care. METHODS: Focus group discussions with Dutch General practitioners were held by two skilled moderators. The focus group discussions were transcribed verbatim and analysed using MAXQDA software. Three independent reviewers searched for overarching themes using thematic analysis with an inductive approach. Discussions were organized until data saturation was reached. RESULTS: Twenty-two general practitioners participated in four focus group discussions. Five main themes emerged from the data: (1) patient-centred care; (2) ensuring proper pain management (3) dilemmas and hardships in dealing with opioid use disorder; (4) the competency gap; (5) needs and possibilities to improve opioid deprescribing in primary care. The first theme addresses the main facilitators in opioid tapering. The following three themes emerged as main barriers in opioid deprescribing. The fifth theme identified possibilities for change. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates the importance of intrinsic motivation and a tailored approach to deprescribe opioids in patients with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment. Identified barriers include struggles in pain management, challenges caused by opioid use disorder, insufficient capacities such as time constraints and lack of skills. Recommendations for improvement involve enhanced collaboration with healthcare professionals in primary and secondary care, provision of practical tools and assurance of sufficient time. SIGNIFICANCE: This focus group study among 22 Dutch general practitioners elucidates the complexities of opioid deprescribing and reveals pivotal themes such as patient-centred care, pain management challenges, and competency gaps. The findings underscore the crucial role of intrinsic motivation and that of a tailored approach in opioid deprescribing, while demonstrating how a lack in effective pain treatments, practical capacities and challenges caused by opioid dependence, impede opioid deprescribing. By uncovering these complexities, this study aims to inform future deprescribing strategies.

Physical and psychosocial work-related exposures and the incidence of carpal tunnel syndrome: A systematic review of prospective studies.

This systematic review summarizes the evidence on associations between physical and psychosocial work-related exposures and the development of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Relevant databases were searched up to January 2020 for cohort studies reporting associations between work-related physical or psychosocial risk factors and the incidence of CTS. Two independent reviewers selected eligible studies, extracted relevant data, and assessed risk of bias (RoB). We identified fourteen articles for inclusion which reported data from nine cohort studies. Eight reported associations between physical exposure and the incidence of CTS and five reported associations between psychosocial exposures and the incidence of CTS. Quality items were generally rated as unclear or low RoB. Work-related physical exposure factors including high levels of repetition, velocity, and a combination of multiple physical exposures were associated with an increased risk of developing CTS. No other consistent associations were observed for physical or psychosocial exposures at work and CTS incidence.

In trials of physiotherapy for chronic low back pain, clinical relevance is rarely interpreted, with great heterogeneity in the frameworks and thresholds used: a meta-research study.

QUESTIONS: How do authors of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) interpret the clinical relevance of the effects of physiotherapy interventions compared with no intervention on pain intensity, physical function and time to recovery in people with chronic low back pain (CLBP)? How can the clinical relevance be re-interpreted based on the available smallest worthwhile effect (SWE) threshold for this comparison? Are the studies in this field adequately powered? DESIGN: Cross-sectional meta-research study. PARTICIPANTS: People with CLBP. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain intensity, physical function and time to recovery. RESULTS: This review included 23 RCTs with 1,645 participants. Twenty-two and 18 studies were included in the analysis of pain intensity and physical function, respectively. No studies investigated time to recovery. Sixteen studies reported varying thresholds to interpret clinical relevance for physical function and pain intensity. Discrepancies between interpretation using the minimal important difference and SWE values were observed in five studies. Study power ranged from 9% to 98%, with only four studies having a power > 80%. CONCLUSION: Little attention is given to the interpretation of clinical relevance in RCTs comparing physiotherapy with no intervention in CLBP, with great heterogeneity in the frameworks and thresholds used. Future trials should inform patients and clinicians on whether the effect of an intervention is large enough to be worthwhile, using a reliable and comprehensive approach like available SWE estimates. REGISTRATION: medRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.14.22283454.

Development of recommendations for a minimum dataset for Identifying Social factors that Stratify Health Opportunities and Outcomes (ISSHOOs) in pain research.

There is increasing recognition of the need for researchers to collect and report data that can illuminate health inequities. In pain research, routinely collecting equity-relevant data has the potential to inform about the generalisability of findings; whether the intervention has differential effects across strata of society; or it could be used to guide population targeting for clinical studies. Developing clarity and consensus on what data should be collected and how to collect it is required to prompt researchers to further consider equity issues in the planning, conduct, interpretation, and reporting of research. The overarching aim of the 'Identifying Social Factors that Stratify Health Opportunities and Outcomes' (ISSHOOs) in pain research project is to provide researchers in the pain field with recommendations to guide the routine collection of equity-relevant data. The design of this project is consistent with the methods outlined in the 'Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines' and involves 4 stages: (i) Scoping review; (ii) Delphi Study; (iii) Consensus Meeting; and (iv) Focus Groups. This stakeholder-engaged project will produce a minimum dataset that has global, expert consensus. Results will be disseminated along with explanation and elaboration as a crucial step towards facilitating future action to address avoidable disparities in pain outcomes.

The Uptake of the Core Outcome Set for Non-Specific Low Back Pain Clinical Trials is Poor: A Meta-Epidemiological Study of Trial Registrations.

We conducted a meta-epidemiological study on all non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) trial registrations on the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov. We aimed to 1) assess the uptake of the core outcome set (COS) for NSLBP in clinical trials; 2) assess the uptake of the core outcome measurement set for NSLBP in clinical trials; and 3) determine whether specific study characteristics are associated with the COS uptake. After applying the relevant filters for the condition, study type, and phase of the trial, 240 registry entries were included in this study. Only 50 (20.8%) entries showed a full COS uptake, and this rate did not increase over time. Most registry entries that planned to measure physical functioning (n = 152) used the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (n = 74; 48.7%); a small percentage used the numeric rating scale (n = 60; 27.3%) or Short Form-12 (n = 5; 8.3%) if they planned to measure pain intensity (n = 220) or health-related quality of life (n = 60), respectively. Only the planned sample size (OR = 1.02; 95% CI = 1.01, 1.03) showed a significant but small association with COS uptake. The uptake of the COS for NSLBP is poor. Only 21% of the randomized controlled trials aimed to measure all COS domains in their study registration and COS uptake is not increased over time. Great heterogeneity in measurement instruments was also observed, revealing poor core outcome measurement set uptake. PERSPECTIVE: The Core Outcome Set (COS) for non-specific low back pain was published more than 20 years ago. We evaluated whether trial registrations are using this set of outcomes when testing interventions for low back pain. Full uptake was found only in 21% of the sample, and this is not increasing over time. Researchers should use the COS to ensure that trials measure relevant outcomes consistently.

Teaching evidence-based practice to physiotherapy students in Italy: a cross sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is being rapidly adopted by the Italian physiotherapy community, although a knowledge gap persists at clinical level with consequent lack of integration of EBP into ground roots practice. Teaching of EBP during the Bachelor of Science (BSc) undergraduate course in physiotherapy likely has a vital role to play in the spread of knowledge, providing a grounding in the fundamental concepts of EBP. The aim of the present study was to investigate the prevalence of EBP educational content in Italian BSc courses in physiotherapy. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study during which characteristics of EBP teaching in BSc degree courses of physiotherapy in Italy were collected from institutional websites during the period May to September 2021 with an update in August 2022. We used the STrengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines for our manuscript. RESULTS: Forty-two physiotherapy BSc degree programs were retrieved, accounting for all the BSc delivered in the 2021-2022 academic year. Fourteen of these (33.3%) did not report EBP content. Northern universities provided EBP content in 16 out of 18 (88%) degree courses. Central Italian universities provided EBP content in 6 out of 9 (66.6%) degree courses. Southern universities delivered EBP content in 3 out of 9 (33.3%) degree courses. The universities of Sicily and Sardinia provided EBP content in 2 out of 5 (40%) degree courses. The degree courses taught in public universities were more likely to contain EBP material (25 out of 37, 67.4%), compared to those taught within the private system (3 out of 5, 60%). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of EBP content within physiotherapy BSc degree programs in Italy can be considered suboptimal, with both regional differences and according to the system (public vs private). The results of this study could be used as a stimulus for increasing investment in the teaching of EBP in Italian physiotherapy degree courses, thereby improving educational standards.

Using PROGRESS-plus to identify current approaches to the collection and reporting of equity-relevant data: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to identify what and how data relating to the social determinants of health are collected and reported in equity-relevant studies and map these data to the PROGRESS-Plus framework. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We performed a scoping review. We ran two systematic searches of MEDLINE and Embase for equity-relevant studies published during 2021. We included studies in any language without limitations to participant characteristics. Included studies were required to have collected and reported at least two participant variables relevant to evaluating individual-level social determinants of health. We applied the PROGRESS-Plus framework to identify and organize these data. RESULTS: We extracted data from 200 equity-relevant studies, providing 962 items defined by PROGRESS-Plus. A median of 4 (interquartile range = 2) PROGRESS-Plus items were reported in the included studies. 92% of studies reported age; 78% reported sex/gender; 65% reported educational attainment; 49% reported socioeconomic status; 45% reported race; 44% reported social capital; 33% reported occupation; 14% reported place and 9% reported religion. CONCLUSION: Our synthesis demonstrated that researchers currently collect a limited range of equity-relevant data, but usefully provides a range of examples spanning PROGRESS-Plus to inform the development of improved, standardized practices.

The smallest worthwhile effect on pain intensity of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and exercise therapy for acute and chronic low back pain: a benefit-harm trade-off study.

QUESTION: What are the smallest worthwhile effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for people with acute and chronic low back pain (LBP)? What is the smallest worthwhile effect of individualised exercise for people with chronic LBP compared with no intervention? DESIGN: Benefit-harm trade-off study. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were recruited by advertisement on social media and included if they were English-speaking adults in Australia who had non-specific LBP. OUTCOME MEASURE: Pain intensity. RESULTS: A total of 116 people with acute LBP and 230 people with chronic LBP were recruited. For acute LBP, the smallest worthwhile effect of NSAIDs additional to no intervention was a 30% (IQR 10 to 40%) reduction in pain intensity. For chronic LBP, the smallest worthwhile effect of NSAIDs additional to no intervention was a 27.5% (IQR 10 to 50%) reduction in pain intensity. For chronic LBP, the smallest worthwhile effect of exercise additional to no intervention was a 20% (IQR 10 to 40%) reduction in pain intensity. There were small associations between baseline pain, duration of pain and level of exercise and the smallest worthwhile effect of NSAIDs for acute LBP. There were no other clear associations. CONCLUSIONS: For people with LBP, the smallest worthwhile effect of exercise and NSAIDs additional to no intervention is approximately a 20 to 30% reduction in pain. These results can inform the interpretation of the effects of NSAIDs and exercise in randomised trials and meta-analyses, incorporating consumers' perspectives. Further research on comparisons between different interventions and on other core LBP outcomes may inform decision-making. REGISTRATION: OSF osf.io/3erjx/.

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

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