A modern way to teach and practice manual therapy.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal conditions are the leading contributor to global disability and health burden. Manual therapy (MT) interventions are commonly recommended in clinical guidelines and used in the management of musculoskeletal conditions. Traditional systems of manual therapy (TMT), including physiotherapy, osteopathy, chiropractic, and soft tissue therapy have been built on principles such as clinician-centred assessment, patho-anatomical reasoning, and technique specificity. These historical principles are not supported by current evidence. However, data from clinical trials support the clinical and cost effectiveness of manual therapy as an intervention for musculoskeletal conditions, when used as part of a package of care. PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to propose a modern evidence-guided framework for the teaching and practice of MT which avoids reference to and reliance on the outdated principles of TMT. This framework is based on three fundamental humanistic dimensions common in all aspects of healthcare: safety, comfort, and efficiency. These practical elements are contextualised by positive communication, a collaborative context, and person-centred care. The framework facilitates best-practice, reasoning, and communication and is exemplified here with two case studies. METHODS: A literature review stimulated by a new method of teaching manual therapy, reflecting contemporary evidence, being trialled at a United Kingdom education institute. A group of experienced, internationally-based academics, clinicians, and researchers from across the spectrum of manual therapy was convened. Perspectives were elicited through reviews of contemporary literature and discussions in an iterative process. Public presentations were made to multidisciplinary groups and feedback was incorporated. Consensus was achieved through repeated discussion of relevant elements. CONCLUSIONS: Manual therapy interventions should include both passive and active, person-empowering interventions such as exercise, education, and lifestyle adaptations. These should be delivered in a contextualised healing environment with a well-developed person-practitioner therapeutic alliance. Teaching manual therapy should follow this model.

Frozen shoulder.

Frozen shoulder is a common debilitating disorder characterized by shoulder pain and progressive loss of shoulder movement. Frozen shoulder is frequently associated with other systemic conditions or occurs following periods of immobilization, and has a protracted clinical course, which can be frustrating for patients as well as health-care professionals. Frozen shoulder is characterized by fibroproliferative tissue fibrosis, whereby fibroblasts, producing predominantly type I and type III collagen, transform into myofibroblasts (a smooth muscle phenotype), which is accompanied by inflammation, neoangiogenesis and neoinnervation, resulting in shoulder capsular fibrotic contractures and the associated clinical stiffness. Diagnosis is heavily based on physical examination and can be difficult depending on the stage of disease or if concomitant shoulder pathology is present. Management consists of physiotherapy, therapeutic modalities such as steroid injections, anti-inflammatory medications, hydrodilation and surgical interventions; however, their effectiveness remains unclear. Facilitating translational science should aid in development of novel therapies to improve outcomes among individuals with this debilitating condition.

Reliability of the Shoulder Symptom Modification Procedure and association of within-session and between-session changes with functional outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Despite being a common problem, there is considerable diagnostic uncertainty with regard to shoulder pain. This uncertainty relates to the reliability and validity of current examination tests. The Shoulder Symptom Modification Procedure (SSMP) has been proposed as an alternative to existing approaches. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate interclinician reliability of the SSMP and the association of within-session and between-session changes on clinical outcome at 1 week, and at 1 and 3 months. DESIGN: A single-centre reliability study, with prospective follow-up. METHODS: Twenty-six patients with shoulder pain were recruited. Following an initial SSMP-based examination, a second examination was performed by a second physiotherapist, blinded to the results of the first examination. Clinical outcome data were completed after 1 week, 1 month and 3 months via theNumeric Pain Rating Scale and the Shoulder PainandDisability Index. Reliability was evaluated using kappa and associations were evaluated using Spearman's r. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability of the SSMP was moderate (κ=0.47). Association of within-session changes ranged from fair to poor in the short term (r=0.24-0.01) to poor in the mid-term (r=-0.03). The association of between-session changes ranged from substantial to moderate in the short term (r=0.74-0.47) but slight in the mid-term (r=0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, we cannot recommend the SSMP as a reliable tool for physical examination of patients with shoulder pain. The importance of within-session and between-session changes remains uncertain.