Measurement properties of cervical joint position error in people with and without neck pain: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

INTRODUCTION: Proprioception can be impaired in people with neck pain. The cervical joint position sense test, which measures joint position error (JPE), is the most common test used to assess neck proprioception. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the measurement properties of this test for the assessment of people with and without neck pain. METHODS: This systematic review was registered prospectively on Prospero (CRD42020188715). It was designed using the COSMIN guidelines and reported in line with the PRISMA checklist. Two reviewers independently searched Medline, Embase, SportDiscus, and CINAHL Plus databases from inception to the 24th July 2022 with an update of the search conducted until 14th of October 2023. The COSMIN risk of bias checklist was used to assess the risk of bias in each study. The updated criteria for good measurement properties were used to rate individual studies and then the overall pooled results. The level of evidence was rated by two reviewers independently using a modified GRADE approach. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included in this review, 13 reporting absolute JPE and 2 reporting constant JPE. The measurement properties assessed were reliability, measurement error, and validity. The measurement of JPE showed sufficient reliability and validity, however, the level of evidence was low/very low for both measurement properties, apart from convergent validity of the constant JPE, which was high. CONCLUSION: The measure of cervical JPE showed sufficient reliability and validity but with low/very low levels of evidence. Further studies are required to investigate the reliability and validity of this test as well as the responsiveness of the measure.

Implementation of back to living well, a community-based program for the tertiary prevention of low back pain: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The current literature supports the effectiveness of exercise, education, and self-management interventions for the long-term management of persistent low back pain. However, there is significant uncertainty about the implementation of interventions related to barriers, facilitators, and patient's preferences. This study will evaluate the Back to Living Well program implementation from a participant and organizational perspective. More specifically we address the following objectives: 1) identify program barriers and facilitators from participants' perspectives, 2) identify factors related to program, personal and contextual factors that contribute to negative and positive outcomes, and outcome trajectories, 3) identify factors influencing participants' selection of an in-person or e-health program, and 4) evaluate program specific barriers and facilitators from the organization and care delivery perspectives. METHODS: This study will utilize a mixed-method convergent design including a longitudinal cohort strand and a longitudinal qualitative interview strand. The RE-AIM framework will be used to assess program implementation. Participants (n = 90, 1:1: in person or virtual) who choose to register in the program as well as staff (n = 10 to 15) involved in the delivery of the program will be invited to participate. Participants will participate in a 12-week physical activity, education, and self-management program. Implementation outcomes will be measured at 3-, 6-, 12-months, and six months after the end of the follow-ups. Interview scripts and directed content analysis will be constructed based on the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Neuromatrix Model of Pain, Theoretical Domains Framework. Staff interviews will be constructed and analyzed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Participants will also complete pain, disability, quality of life and psychological questionnaires, wear an activity tracker at all time points, and complete weekly pain and activity limitation questions using a mobile application. DISCUSSION: The study results will provide evidence to inform potential future implementation of the program. An effective, appropriately targeted, and well implemented exercise program for the long-term management (i.e., tertiary prevention) of LBP could minimize the burden of the condition on patients, the health care system and society. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05929846. This (Registration Date: July 3 2023) study has been approved by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board Project ID#15,354.

Use of the International IFOMPT Cervical Framework to inform clinical reasoning in postgraduate level physiotherapy students: a qualitative study using think aloud methodology.

BACKGROUND: Vascular pathologies of the head and neck are rare but can present as musculoskeletal problems. The International Federation of Orthopedic Manipulative Physical Therapists (IFOMPT) Cervical Framework (Framework) aims to assist evidence-based clinical reasoning for safe assessment and management of the cervical spine considering potential for vascular pathology. Clinical reasoning is critical to physiotherapy, and developing high-level clinical reasoning is a priority for postgraduate (post-licensure) educational programs. OBJECTIVE: To explore the influence of the Framework on clinical reasoning processes in postgraduate physiotherapy students. METHODS: Qualitative case study design using think aloud methodology and interpretive description, informed by COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research. Participants were postgraduate musculoskeletal physiotherapy students who learned about the Framework through standardized delivery. Two cervical spine cases explored clinical reasoning processes. Coding and analysis of transcripts were guided by Elstein's diagnostic reasoning components and the Postgraduate Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy Practice model. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis (inductive and deductive) for individuals and then across participants, enabling analysis of key steps in clinical reasoning processes and use of the Framework. Trustworthiness was enhanced with multiple strategies (e.g., second researcher challenged codes). RESULTS: For all participants (n = 8), the Framework supported clinical reasoning using primarily hypothetico-deductive processes. It informed vascular hypothesis generation in the patient history and testing the vascular hypothesis through patient history questions and selection of physical examination tests, to inform clarity and support for diagnosis and management. Most participant's clinical reasoning processes were characterized by high-level features (e.g., prioritization), however there was a continuum of proficiency. Clinical reasoning processes were informed by deep knowledge of the Framework integrated with a breadth of wider knowledge and supported by a range of personal characteristics (e.g., reflection). CONCLUSIONS: Findings support use of the Framework as an educational resource in postgraduate physiotherapy programs to inform clinical reasoning processes for safe and effective assessment and management of cervical spine presentations considering potential for vascular pathology. Individualized approaches may be required to support students, owing to a continuum of clinical reasoning proficiency. Future research is required to explore use of the Framework to inform clinical reasoning processes in learners at different levels.

PREHAB FAI- Prehabilitation for patients undergoing arthroscopic hip surgery for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome -Protocol for an assessor blinded randomised controlled feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: The past decade has seen an exponential growth of minimally invasive surgical procedures. Procedures such as hip arthroscopy have rapidly grown and become the standard of care for patients with Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome (FAIS). Although, the results of such procedures are encouraging, a large proportion of patients do not achieve optimal outcomes due to chronicity and deconditioning as a result of delay in diagnosis and increased waiting times amongst other factors. In a recent systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials, moderate certainty evidence supported prehabilitation over standard care in optimising several domains including muscle strength, pain and health related quality of life in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgical interventions. However, the role of prehabilitation in patients with FAI syndrome undergoing hip arthroscopy has received little attention. AIM: To evaluate the feasibility, suitability, acceptability and safety of a prehabilitation programme for FAI to inform a future definitive randomised control trial to assess effectiveness. METHODS: A systematically developed prehabilitation intervention based on a literature review and international consensus will be utilised in this study. A mixed methodology encompassing a two-arm randomised parallel study alongside an embedded qualitative component will be used to answer the study objectives. Patients will be recruited from a tertiary referral NHS centre for young adult hip pathology in the UK. Patient reported outcomes such as iHOT-12, Brief Pain Inventory Scale (Short form), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Patient Global Impression of Change score will be obtained alongside objective measurements such as Muscle Strength and Star Excursion Balance Test at various time points. Outcome measures will be obtained at baseline (prior to prehabilitation intervention), after prehabilitation before surgery, and at 6 weeks+/- 4 weeks and 6 months +/- 4 weeks (planned primary endpoint for definitive RCT) postoperatively when participants attend the research site for clinical care and remotely at 12 months +/- 4 weeks postoperatively. Mean change and 95% CI, and effect size of outcome measures will be used to determine the sample size for a future RCT. For the qualitative component, in depth face-to-face semi-structured interviews with physiotherapists and focus groups with participants will be conducted to assess the feasibility, suitability, and acceptability of the prehabilitation intervention using a predetermined success criteria. All qualitative data will be recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. DISCUSSION: This study will be first of its kind to evaluate a systematically developed prehabilitation intervention for patients with FAIS undergoing hip arthroscopy. This study will provide important preliminary data to inform feasibility of a definitive RCT in the future to evaluate effectiveness of a prehabilitation intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 15371248, 09/03/2023. TRIAL PROTOCOL: Version 2.3, 26th June 2023.

Patients' experiences with musculoskeletal spinal pain: A qualitative systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal (MSK) spinal pain encapsulates various conditions including lumbar (low back), cervical (neck), and thoracic pain that significantly impact individual and global health. While clinical aspects of spinal pain have been well-studied, understanding patients' personal narratives and lived experiences remains essential for enhancing patient-centered care, improving treatment adherence, and informing healthcare policies. It provides deep insights into the impacts of spinal pain, guiding more effective and empathetic treatment approaches. This systematic review aims to synthesize qualitative evidence on patients' experiences with MSK spinal pain, providing insight into the challenges faced, coping strategies, daily life impacts, and healthcare interactions. The objective of this review is to synthesize the qualitative evidence regarding the lived experiences of patients with MSK spinal pain. METHODS: This systematic review will use a meta-aggregation approach to synthesize data from qualitative studies, that will be identified through a comprehensive search of electronic databases and supplemented by grey literature searches. Two independent reviewers will screen, identify, and extract data from eligible studies. In cases of disagreement, conflicts will be resolved by consulting a third reviewer. These same reviewers will then use the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) qualitative quality assessment tool to evaluate the methodological quality of the identified studies, with the derived scores informing the synthesis process, that will involve extracting each study's findings along with their supporting illustrations, then grouped into categories based on similarity in meaning. These categories will then be aggregated to form synthesized findings. IMPLICATIONS: Synthesized findings on patients' lived experiences with MSK spinal pain including key themes, patterns, and insights will be presented. By emphasizing patient narratives, the results of the review can contribute to the optimization of outcomes, and to enhance patient-provider relations and improve quality of care in MSK spinal health.

The biopsychosocial factors associated with development of chronic musculoskeletal pain. An umbrella review and meta-analysis of observational systematic reviews.

AIM: The aim of this umbrella review was to establish which biopsychosocial factors are associated with development of chronic musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: Ovid Medline, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PEDro, PROSPERO, Google Scholar and grey literature were searched from database inception to 4th April 2023. Systematic reviews of observational prospective longitudinal studies, including populations with <3 months (not chronic) musculoskeletal pain, investigating biopsychosocial factors that contribute to development of chronic (>3 months) musculoskeletal pain. Two reviewers searched the literature, assessed risk of bias (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews-2), and evaluated quality (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to provide an overall statement on the certainty of evidence for each biopsychosocial factor. Data analysis was performed through random effects meta-analysis (including meta-analysis of meta-analyses where possible) and descriptive synthesis. RESULTS: 13 systematic reviews were included comprising 185 original research studies (n = 489,644 participants). Thirty-four biopsychosocial factors are associated with development of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Meta-analyses of odds and/or likelihood ratios were possible for 25 biopsychosocial factors. There is moderate certainty evidence that smoking (OR 1.24 [95%CI, 1.14-1.34), fear avoidance (LR+ 2.11 [95%CI, 1.59-2.8]; LR- 0.5 [95%CI, 0.35-0.71]) poorer support networks (OR 1.21 [95%CI, 1.14-1.29]), lower socioeconomic status (OR 2.0 [95%CI, 1.64-2.42]), and high levels of pain (OR 5.61 [95%CI, 3.74-8.43]) are associated with development of chronic musculoskeletal pain (all P<0.001). Remaining factors are of low or very low certainty evidence. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: There is moderate certainty evidence that smoking, fear avoidance, poorer support networks, lower socioeconomic status, and high levels of pain are associated with development of chronic musculoskeletal pain. High risk of bias was evident in most included reviews; this highlights the need for higher quality systematic reviews.

Patients' and therapists' perspective of integrating home and family work roles into rehabilitation following distal radius fracture.

PURPOSE: To explore distal radius fracture (DRF) patients' and hand therapist/occupational therapist/physiotherapists' perceptions of integrating home and family work roles (HFWR) into rehabilitation. METHODS: Eighteen patients and eleven therapists completed a semi-structured telephone interview three months after DRF. Reflexive thematic analysis of the interviews and triangulation of patients' and therapists' themes was performed. RESULTS: The patient interview yielded five themes: the experience of rehabilitation; predetermined expectations of rehabilitation; incorporating HFWR into therapy sessions; varying patient needs for addressing HFWR; and determination to return to valued activities drives behavioral choices. The therapists' interview yielded five themes: The challenges in integrating HFWR into rehabilitation; HFWR addressed when brought up by a patient; working context and referral sources influence the rehabilitation plan; rehabilitation is not explicitly tailored according to sex and gender; and utilizing HFWR as a rehabilitation strategy is perceived beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: Patients have predetermined rehabilitation expectations primarily focused on mobility and strengthening exercises. Therapists and patients agree that adapting home and family work roles is beneficial but was not a major focus for either therapists' or patients' expectations during therapy. An unfavourable environment, patient budget constraints, and limited time were identified as challenges to integrating family roles.

Therapists should proactively discuss and address home and family work roles with patients with distal radius fractures when appropriate.Therapists should tailor rehabilitation plans according to the individual needs and expectations of the patients.Hospitals and clinics should create an environment conducive to addressing home and family work roles, and resources should be allocated for comprehensive rehabilitation programmes.

Association between clinical biomechanical metrics of cervical spine function and pain or disability in people with neuromusculoskeletal neck pain: Protocol for a systematic review and planned meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Neck pain is a burdensome condition associated with pain, disability, and economic cost. Neck pain has been associated with observable changes in neuromuscular function and biomechanics. Prior research shows impairments in kinematic control, including reduced mobility, velocity, and smoothness of cervical motion. However, the strength of association between these impairments and patient-reported pain and disability is unclear rendering development of novel and relevant rehabilitation strategies difficult. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize existing evidence on the strength of association between clinical biomechanical metrics of neck function (ROM, strength, acceleration, accuracy, smoothness, etc.) and patient-reported neck pain and disability. METHODS/ANALYSIS: This protocol follows Cochrane guidelines and adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science and Scopus will be searched, along with the gray literature, up to 20 November 2023, using terms and keywords derived from initial scoping searches. Observational studies, including cohorts and cross-sectional studies, that explore associations between clinical biomechanics of the neck and patient-reported outcomes of neck pain or disability will be included. Two reviewers will independently perform study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment (National Institute of Health tool). Data will be synthesized using either a random effects meta-analytic approach or qualitatively using a modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, dependent on the homogeneity of data available. DISCUSSION AND RELEVANCE: This review addresses a gap in the literature by systematically synthesizing findings on the relationship between neck function impairments and patient-reported outcomes. It will identify priorities for neck pain rehabilitation and gaps in current knowledge. DISSEMINATION: The results of this review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, conference presentation, and lay language summaries posted on an open-access website. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42023417317. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023417317.

Association between physical measures of spinopelvic alignment and physical functioning with patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) after total hip arthroplasty: Protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Prevalence of total hip arthroplasty (THA) has trended upwards over past decades and is projected to increase further. Optimizing outcomes after surgery is essential to avoid surgical revision and maximize outcomes. Low back pain is reported as a problem post THA. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used to evaluate THA outcomes but have limitations (e.g., ceiling effects). It is therefore important to assess a comprehensive range of outcomes. Physical outcome measures of spinopelvic alignment and physical functioning demonstrate potential value, but no evidence synthesis has investigated their association with PROMs. The objectives of this systematic review are to evaluate the association between spinopelvic alignment and physical outcome measures of physical functioning with PROMs and characteristics of low back pain after THA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol is aligned with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. Cross-sectional and longitudinal cohort studies evaluating the association between the physical outcome measures and PROMs (any outcome measures reported) following THA by any approach/implant will be included except surface replacement and revision THA. Studies investigating THA for developmental pathology and inflammatory conditions will be excluded. A systematic search in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and the grey literature will be carried out from inception to July 31, 2023. Two independent reviewers will evaluate eligibility of retrieved articles, extract data and assess risk of bias (NIH quality assessment tool) of included studies. A third reviewer will mediate disagreements. Random-effects meta-analyses will be conducted if studies are sufficiently homogeneous in design, population, physical measures and PROMs; reporting odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Where meta-analyses are not possible, a narrative synthesis will be conducted. Confidence in cumulative evidence will be assessed using a modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO Registration number CRD42023412744.

Diagnostic utility of diagnostic investigations to identify neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain: protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain has gained increasing interest in contemporary research. Identification of neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain is essential to inform precision management. Diagnostic investigations are commonly used to identify neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain; yet the diagnostic utility of these investigations is unknown. This systematic review aims to investigate the diagnostic utility of diagnostic investigations to identify neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol has been designed and reported in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Diagnostic Test Accuracy studies, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols checklist, respectively. The search strategy will involve two independent reviewers searching electronic databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, AMED, Pedro), key journals (Spine, The Clinical Journal of Pain, PAIN, European Journal of Pain, The Journal of Pain, Musculoskeletal Science and Practice) and grey literature (British National Bibliography for report literature, OpenGrey, EThOS) from inception to 31 July 2023 to identify studies. Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of diagnostic investigation to identify neuropathic pain in patients with low back-related leg pain will be eligible, studies not written in English will be excluded. The reviewers will extract the data from included studies, assess risk of bias (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2) and determine confidence in findings (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines). Methodological heterogeneity will be assessed to determine if a meta-analysis is possible. If pooling of data is not possible then a narrative synthesis will be done. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at relevant conferences and shared with the Patient Partner Advisor Group at Western University, Canada. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023438222.

Outcome measures for young people with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: A qualitative exploration of healthcare professionals' perceptions and practices.

BACKGROUND: Limited knowledge exists on current use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and performance measures for adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), as well as health care professionals' (HCPs) perceived barriers and facilitators towards their use. This study's objectives were: 1) to explore current practice of HCPs when assessing outcomes for AIS 2) to understand perceived barriers and facilitators of HCPs to use PROMs 3) to understand perceived barriers and facilitators of HCPs to use performance measures. METHODS: A qualitative study recruited a purposive sample of HCPs from a tertiary hospital in the United Kingdom. Mean years of experience managing individuals with AIS was 11.8 years; and included surgeons, physiotherapists and nurses, educated at Bachelor, Masters and Doctoral level. Consent to participate and demographic information were collected in advance of the interviews. In-depth, virtual semi-structured interviews were informed by a topic guide based on current evidence. Interviews of approximately 45 minutes were audio and video recorded and transcribed verbatim alongside written field notes. Data were coded and analysed using inductive thematic analysis, involving researchers with topic and methodological expertise and input from a patient representative. RESULTS: Two themes emerged regarding current practice of using PROMs routine practice and personal evaluations. Four themes emerged as barriers to using PROMs for individuals with AIS: priority and support (e.g., HCPs focus on providing care), practical challenges (e.g., inadequate PROMs), patient-related challenges (e.g., patient preferences) and knowledge, education, and perceived value. Two themes emerged as facilitators: quality existing measure (e.g., sufficient psychometric properties), and priority and support (e.g., research department/culture). Themes for barriers to use performance measures were practicality (e.g., need physical space) and perceived value and knowledge (e.g., PROMs are more important), while the one theme for facilitators was practical consideration (e.g., acceptability). CONCLUSIONS: Although HCPs perceived the value of using outcome measures, current practice indicates limited use for individuals with AIS. The findings revealed different barriers and facilitators to implement PROMs in practice. Adopting performance measure are limited due to lack of knowledge and perceived value alongside the practicality, while considering practical factors can improve the use of these measures in practice.