Surgery is no more effective than conservative treatment for Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the effects of surgical treatment compared to conservative treatment in femoroacetabular impingement syndrome in the short, medium, and long term. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: The following databases were searched on 14/09/2020: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and PEDro. There were no date or language limits. The methodological quality assessment was performed using the PEDro scale and the quality of the evidence followed the GRADE recommendation. The outcomes pain, disability, and adverse effects were extracted. RESULTS: Of 6264 initial studies, three met the full-text inclusion criteria. All studies were of good methodological quality. Follow up ranged from six months to two years, with 650 participants in total. The meta-analyses found no difference in disability between surgical versus conservative treatment, with a mean difference (MD) between groups of 3.91 points (95% CI -2.19 to 10.01) at six months, MD of 5.53 points (95% CI -3.11 to 14.16) at 12 months and 3.8 points (95% CI -6.0 to 13.6) at 24 months. The quality of the evidence (GRADE) varied from moderate to low across all comparisons. CONCLUSION: There is moderate-quality evidence that surgical treatment is not superior to conservative treatment for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome in the short term, and there is low-quality evidence that it is not superior in the medium term. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 1a. REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42019134118.

Treatment-based classification for low back pain: systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the effects of treatment-based classification (TBC) in patients with specific and nonspecific acute, subacute and chronic low back pain. METHODS: The following databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Global Health, CENTRAL, Web of Science, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PEDro and WHO from inception up to December 2021. We used the PEDro scale, the TIDieR checklist and the GRADE approach to evaluate the risk of bias, quality on reporting and the certainty of the evidence, respectively. RESULTS: Twenty-three trials (pooled n = 2,649) met the inclusion criteria. We have identified a total of 22 comparisons and 134 estimates of treatment effects. There was a very large heterogeneity with regards to the comparison groups. Most of individual trials had low risk of bias with a mean score of 6.8 (SD = 1.3) on a 0-10 scale. The certainty of evidence for most comparisons was low, which indicates that more high quality and robust trials are needed. We were able to pool the data using a meta-analysis approach for only two comparisons (TBC versus mobility exercises in patients with acute low back pain and traction for patients with sciatica). In general, the TBC approach seems to be useful for patients with acute low back pain, sciatica and with spinal stenosis. We strongly suggest readers to carefully read our summary of findings table for further details on each comparison. CONCLUSION: The TBC approach seems to be useful for patients with acute low back pain, sciatica and with spinal stenosis.

Commentary on: Kinesio taping in treatment of chronic non-specific low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Missing (Letter).