Prognosis of acute idiopathic neck pain is poor: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the prognosis of acute idiopathic neck pain and disability. DATA SOURCES: EMBASE, CINAHL, Medline, AMED, PEDro, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to July 2009, limited to human studies. Reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were searched by hand. Search terms included: neck pain, prognosis, inception, cohort, longitudinal, observational, or prospective study and randomized controlled trial. STUDY SELECTION: Eligible studies were longitudinal cohort studies and randomized controlled trials with a no treatment or minimal treatment arm that recruited an inception cohort of acute idiopathic neck pain and reported pain or disability outcomes. Eligibility was determined by 2 authors independently. Seven of 20,085 references were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Pain and disability data were extracted independently by 2 authors. Risk of bias was assessed independently by 2 authors. DATA SYNTHESIS: Statistical pooling showed a weighted mean pain score (0-100) of 64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 61-67) at onset and 35 (95% CI, 32-38) at 6.5 weeks. At 12 months, neck pain severity remained high at 42 (95% CI, 39-45). Disability reduced from a pooled weighted mean score (0-100) at onset of 30 (95% CI, 28-32) to 17 (95% CI, 15-19) by 6.5 weeks, without further improvement at 12 months. Studies varied in length of follow-up, design, and sample size. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides Level I evidence that the prognosis of acute idiopathic neck pain is worse than currently recognized. This evidence can guide primary care clinicians when providing prognostic information to patients. Further research to identify prognostic factors and long-term outcomes from inception cohorts would be valuable.

EXACT: exercise or advice after ankle fracture. Design of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Ankle fractures are common. Management of ankle fractures generally involves a period of immobilisation followed by rehabilitation to reduce pain, stiffness, weakness and swelling. The effects of a rehabilitation program are still unclear. However, it has been shown that important components of rehabilitation programs may not confer additional benefits over exercise alone. The primary aim of this trial is to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an exercise-based rehabilitation program after ankle fracture, compared to advice alone. METHODS/DESIGN: A pragmatic randomised trial will be conducted. Participants will be 342 adults with stiff, painful ankles after ankle fracture treated with immobilisation. They will be randomly allocated using a concealed randomisation procedure to either an Advice or Rehabilitation group. Participants in the Advice group will receive verbal and written advice about exercise at the time of removal of immobilisation. Participants in the Rehabilitation group will be provided with a 4-week rehabilitation program that is designed, monitored and progressed by a physiotherapist, in addition to verbal and written advice. Outcomes will be measured by a blinded assessor at 1, 3 and 6 months. The primary outcomes will be activity limitation and quality-adjusted life years. DISCUSSION: This pragmatic trial will determine if a rehabilitation program reduces activity limitation and improves quality of life, compared to advice alone, after immobilisation for ankle fracture.

Effectiveness of joint mobilisation after cast immobilisation for ankle fracture: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial [ACTRN012605000143628].

BACKGROUND: Passive joint mobilisation is a technique frequently used by physiotherapists to reduce pain, improve joint movement and facilitate a return to activities after injury, but its use after ankle fracture is currently based on limited evidence. The primary aim of this trial is to determine if adding joint mobilisation to a standard exercise programme is effective and cost-effective after cast immobilisation for ankle fracture in adults. METHODS/DESIGN: Ninety participants will be recruited from the physiotherapy departments of three teaching hospitals and randomly allocated to treatment or control groups using a concealed procedure. All participants will perform an exercise programme. Participants in the treatment group will also receive joint mobilisation twice a week for four weeks. Blinded follow-up assessments will be conducted four, 12 and 24 weeks after randomisation. The primary outcome measures will be the Lower Extremity Functional Scale and the Assessment of Quality of Life. Secondary outcomes will include measures of impairments, activity limitation and participation. Data on the use of physiotherapy services and participants' out-of-pocket costs will be collected for the cost-effective and cost-utility analyses. To test the effects of treatment, between-group differences will be examined with analysis of covariance using a regression approach. The primary conclusions will be based on the four-week follow-up data. DISCUSSION: This trial incorporates features known to minimise bias. It uses a pragmatic design to reflect clinical practice and maximise generalisability. Results from this trial will contribute to an evidence-based approach for rehabilitation after ankle fracture.