Intervention reporting and dissemination of information for the management of hand osteoarthritis.

INTRODUCTION: A variety of exercise programs are recognized to be effective for the management of hand osteoarthritis (HOA). It is important to report the essential elements of these exercise programs for clinicians to replicate properly and facilitate their implementation with individuals who suffers from HOA, especially if they are found to be effective programs. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The objective of this article was to assess content reporting using three exercise reporting standardized assessment tools among exercise interventions randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving individuals with HOA. STUDY DESIGN: A descriptive study was used. METHODS: Two pairs of trained assessors independently identified, selected, and scored the reporting quality of the exercise programs of RCTs on the management of HOA using three standardized assessment tools: the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklist, Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise Training (CONTENT) scale, and Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist to review the quality of reporting of 11 RCTs included in a recent Ottawa Panel guideline. RESULTS: Based on consensus reached by two different pairs of reviewers and an arbitrator, the mean total scores for the 11 included exercise programs were reported as follows: the mean total score for the CERT, CONTENT, and TIDieR was 10.58/19 ± 4.34, 3.27/9 ± 1.90, and 5.92/12 ± 2.54, respectively. The overall Pearson's Correlation (r) between the methodological quality and intervention reporting was 0.86, 0.71, and 0.54 for moderate-to-high RCTs and 0.47, 0.79, and 0.42 for fair-to-poor methodological quality for the CERT checklist, CONTENT scale, and TIDieR checklist, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention reporting in the management of HOA is poor among low-, moderate-, and high-quality clinical trials. The least reported information was intervention parameters related to behavior change. Improving reporting is recommended to ensure replication of effective exercise programs to enhance quality of life of individuals with HOA.

The management of lower back pain using pilates method: assessment of content exercise reporting in RCTs.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the quality of the reporting of exercise interventions with Pilates method for the treatment of lower back pain (LBP) in adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two independent evaluators selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of moderate and high methodological quality included in a Cochrane Systematic Review (SR) and from an additional updated search in the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and SPORTDiscus. Three assessment tools (Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise Training (CONTENT) scale, Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklist) were utilized by three pairs of two independent researchers trained. The scales' concordance was measured using the Kappa coefficient. RESULTS: Ten RCTs were included. The CONTENT scale score was 5.3 (± 1.33) out of 9 points; the TIDieR checklist was 8.5 (± 1.71) out of 12 points and the CERT checklist was 9.5 (± 3.62) out of 19 points. The CONTENT and CERT had moderate concordance, while there was fair concordance between the other tools. CONCLUSIONS: The overall reporting quality for the Pilates exercises in ten moderate-to-high quality RTCs for the management of LBP was low according to CONTENT scale and CERT checklist and high according to TIDieR checklist.Implications for RehabilitationReporting of Pilates exercise program in moderate-to-high quality RCTs for the management of lower back pain remains incomplete.Pilates exercise program should be personalized and contextualized to individual participants.There may be a need to consider adding to or combining the information available from various trials.

Traduction franco-canadienne de l'Assessment of Systematic Reviews Revised (AMSTAR 2) : validation transculturelle et fidélité interjuges.

Objective: Produce a French-Canadian translation of AMSTAR 2, affirm its content validity, and examine interrater reliability. Methods: Based on Vallerand's methodological approach, we conducted forward and parallel inverse-translations. Subsequently, an expert panel evaluated the translations to create a preliminary experimental French-Canadian version. A second expert panel examined this version and proposed additional modifications. Twenty future health professionals then rated the second experimental version for ambiguity on a scale (from 1 to 7). The principal co-investigators then reviewed the problematic elements and proposed a pre-official version. To ascertain content validity, a final back-translation was conducted resulting in the official version. Four judges evaluated 13 systematic reviews using the official French-Canadian version of AMSTAR 2. The Kappa coefficient was used to evaluate interrater reliability. Results: This rigorous adaptation enabled the development of a Franco-Canadian version of AMSTAR 2. Its application demonstrated low ambiguity (mean 1.15; SD 0.26) as well as good overall interrater reliability (total κ > 0.64) across all items. Conclusion: The French-Canadian version of AMSTAR 2 can now support francophone clinicians, educators, and managers in Canada as they undertake evidence-based practice.

Assessing the reporting quality of physical activity programs in randomized controlled trials for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis using three standardized assessment tools.

BACKGROUND: The reporting quality of physical activity (PA) programs in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) remains unknown. This study aimed to assess and compare the reporting quality of PA programs in RCTs for the management of JIA using three difference standardized assessment tools, and to describe the elements that were similar and different between these tools. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted for moderate-to high-quality RCTs of PA programs in JIA, published up until January 2019. Two reviewers independently included 10 RCTs and scored the reporting quality of PA programs using the following tools: Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklist, Consensus on Therapeutic Exercise Training (CONTENT) scale, and Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist. RESULTS: Results showed that reporting of PA programs in 10 moderate- to high-quality RCTs for JIA management remains incomplete. The average reporting quality (± standard deviation) for all RCTs combined was moderate for the three standardized assessment tools with 70.8 (±14.3)% for the TIDieR checklist, 53.2 (±20.2)% for the CERT checklist, and 70.0 (±18.9)% for the CONTENT scale. Despite some overlap, the three standardized assessment tools (TIDieR, CERT, CONTENT) included different elements resulting in different scores. All tools assess elements linked to PA programs (provider, location, timing, personalization and adherence), but the CERT checklist includes other essential elements (e.g., additional resources, motivational strategies, adverse events). CONCLUSIONS: The lack of complete reporting of PA programs in RCTs for the management of JIA and the variation in scores and assessed elements among standardized assessment tools show the need to improve reporting. Using the most comprehensive standardized tool (i.e., the CERT) and providing accessible supplemental information on PA programs may improve the reporting quality of PA programs in RCTs and help reproduce PA programs in research and clinical practice.