Effectiveness of physical therapy treatment of clearly defined subacromial pain: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

AIM: To summarise the current evidence regarding the effectiveness of physical therapy on pain, function and range of motion in individuals with subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS). DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, Lilacs, Ibecs and Scielo databases. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating physical therapy modalities for SAPS on pain, function/disability or range of motion were included. RESULTS: 64 high-quality RCTs were included. Exercise therapy provided high evidence of being as effective as surgery intervention and better than no treatment or placebo treatment to improve pain, function and range of motion in the short, mid and long terms. The combination of mobilisation and exercises provided high evidence to decrease pain and improve function in the short term. There is limited evidence for improvements on the outcomes with the isolated application of manual therapy. High level of evidence was synthesised regarding the lack of beneficial effects of physical resources such as low-level laser, ultrasound and pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) on pain, function or range of motion in the treatment of SAPS. There is limited evidence for microwave diathermy and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. There is moderate evidence to no benefits with taping in the short term. Effects of diacutaneous fibrolysis and acupuncture are not well established yet. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise therapy should be the first-line treatment to improve pain, function and range of motion. The addition of mobilisations to exercises may accelerate reduction of pain in the short term. Low-level laser therapy, PEMF and taping should not be recommended.

Manual therapy for the management of pain and limited range of motion in subjects with signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorder: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

There is a lack of knowledge about the effectiveness of manual therapy (MT) on subjects with temporomandibular disorders (TMD). The aim of this systematic review is to synthetise evidence regarding the isolated effect of MT in improving maximum mouth opening (MMO) and pain in subjects with signs and symptoms of TMD. MEDLINE(®) , Cochrane, Web of Science, SciELO and EMBASE(™) electronic databases were consulted, searching for randomised controlled trials applying MT for TMD compared to other intervention, no intervention or placebo. Two authors independently extracted data, PEDro scale was used to assess risk of bias, and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was applied to synthetise overall quality of the body of evidence. Treatment effect size was calculated for pain, MMO and pressure pain threshold (PPT). Eight trials were included, seven of high methodological quality. Myofascial release and massage techniques applied on the masticatory muscles are more effective than control (low to moderate evidence) but as effective as toxin botulinum injections (moderate evidence). Upper cervical spine thrust manipulation or mobilisation techniques are more effective than control (low to high evidence), while thoracic manipulations are not. There is moderate-to-high evidence that MT techniques protocols are effective. The methodological heterogeneity across trials protocols frequently contributed to decrease quality of evidence. In conclusion, there is widely varying evidence that MT improves pain, MMO and PPT in subjects with TMD signs and symptoms, depending on the technique. Further studies should consider using standardised evaluations and better study designs to strengthen clinical relevance.

Effects of a school based exercise program on children's resistance and flexibility.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the short term effects of an exercise program on abdominal and back muscles resistance and hamstring flexibility among schoolchildren. Fifty eight healthy schoolchildren were divided into two groups: experimental (15 males and 14 females; mean age 12.2(1.8 years) and control (14 males and 15 females; mean age 11.9(2.1 years). The intervention was performed twice a week, on nonconsecutive days, during six weeks. The duration of each session was fifty minutes and they were composed by warming up aerobic exercises, isotonic and isometric abdominal and back muscle exercises and hamstring stretching. The intervention effects were evaluated through Kraus-Weber test (abdominal resistance), modified Biering-Sørensen test (back muscle resistance) and sit and reach test (hamstring flexibility). Data were analyzed by mixed-design two-way ANOVA, with one between-subjects and one within-subject (time) factors. The alpha level was set at P≤0.05. The experimental group improved back muscles resistance and hamstring flexibility, but not abdominal muscles resistance. There was a significant interaction between groups and time for back muscles resistance (P=0.018) and for hamstring flexibility (P=0.017). The 6-week training period showed positive results in improving back muscles resistance and hamstring flexibility of schoolchildren.

Comparison of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials evidence regarding the effectiveness of workplace exercise on musculoskeletal pain control.

Evidence synthesized based on randomized controlled trials (RCT) results are recognized as the pinnacle of research excellence; however, the conduction of RCT in workplace environment is not always possible. This study comparatively reviewed evidence from RCT and non-RCT studies in which participants performed workplace exercise for musculoskeletal pain control. Up to February 2011, PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, PEDro and Web of Science databases were searched. All trials that evaluated workplace exercise interventions for controlling musculoskeletal pain were included. The PEDro scale was used to rate the studies' quality, PRISMA and Cochrane recommendations were applied, and association between frequencies of effect size categories (small, moderate, large) from various outcomes by study type was tested (2x3 contingency table). The search yielded 10239 references in English, from which 21 RCT and 12 non-RCT were selected. Both groups of studies presented methodological flaws including descriptions of randomization, blinding of examiners and absence of intention-to-treat analysis for the RCT, and further absence of controls and blind assessor for the non-RCTs. RCTs had significantly more moderate and large effect size reported in their results compared to non-RCTs (p=0.04). Considering the difficulties in randomizing participants in occupational settings, all studies would benefit from better describing pertinent methodological information.