Search

In response to the World Health Organization (WHO) statements and international concerns regarding the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology (ISUOG) is issuing the following guidance for management during pregnancy and puerperium. The epidemics of the two -coronaviruses, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), have caused more than 10 000 cumulative cases in the past two decades, with mortality rates of 10% for SARS-CoV and 37% for MERS-CoV[[5], [7]]. Breslin I et al i .[18] observed similar COVID-19 severity in pregnant patients (86.0% mild disease, 9.3% severe disease and 4.7% critical disease) to that reported in non-pregnant patients[16]. Because of the logistics involved in performing a CT scan on critically ill patients, and the need for thorough cleaning of the CT unit after imaging a COVID-19 patient, a portable chest X-ray is an acceptable alternative to a CT scan. When concern is raised about a potential COVID-19 patient, i.e. due to symptoms and/or TOCC risk factors, a surgical facemask should be put on the patient and she should be separated from other patients, preferably in an isolated COVID-19 unit. [Extracted from the article]

Abstract Background Altered lower back muscle activity is proposed as a contributing factor to the reoccurrence and chronicity of low back pain (LBP). This study compared lumbar muscle activity during trunk extension in patients with continuous chronic LBP (CLBP), non-continuous CLBP, recurrent LBP (RLBP) and healthy subjects. Methods In 75 subjects (16 continuous CLBP, 15 non-continuous CLBP, 23 RLBP, 21 healthy controls), surface electromyographic (EMG) activity of the lumbar erector spinae (ES), multifidus (MF), latissimus dorsi (LD) and gluteus maximus (GM) was recorded during the concentric, holding and eccentric phase of a modified Biering Sorenson exercise. Results Continuous CLBP patients showed higher EMG activity in the ES and MF muscles compared to healthy controls in the concentric (p = 0.011; p = 0.009 respectively) and the holding phase (p = 0.015; p = 0.013). Higher EMG activity was observed in continuous CLBP compared to RLBP in the ES and MF muscles in the holding phase (p = 0.035; p = 0.037), and in the MF in the concentric phase (p = 0.046), but not in the ES (p = 0.062). No differences in muscle activity were established in either the concentric, holding, and eccentric phase for the LD and GM muscles. No differences were found between non-continuous CLBP and the other groups. Conclusions An enhanced muscle activity of the lumbar muscles during the concentric and holding phase was observed during trunk extension in patients with continuous CLBP compared to patients with RLBP and healthy subjects. No differences between groups are present in the GM and LD muscles during concentric and holding phases and for any muscle in the eccentric phase.

Introduction: In 2013, a study showed low guideline adherence regarding chronic low back pain (CLBP) in physiotherapy students concerning activity and work recommendations (47% and 16%)1. The aim of this study is to investigate if the 2020' physiotherapy students'attitudes and beliefs regarding CLBP and osteoarthritis (OA) and the guideline adherence have changed since 2013, by using the same protocol. Methods: Physiotherapy students in their 2nd and 4th year of education from 6 Belgian and 2 Dutch institutions participated. The attitudes and beliefs regarding CLBP and OA were measured using the Pain attitudes and beliefs scale (BAPS), the Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS) and a questionnaire regarding therapeutic exercise and knee OA. A clinical case vignette was used to measure the guideline adherence regarding CLBP. Results: In total, 2738 students participated, 1624 in 2013 and 1114 in 2020. Compared to 2013, students in 2020 scored lower on a biomedical orientation (p < 0.001) and higher on psychosocial orientations (p < 0.001) regarding CLBP and OA. Medium effect size (cohens'd = 0.548) was found on the psychosocial orientation of the PABS, other differences only had small effect sizes. In 2020, 54% provided clinical guidelines' consistent recommendations for activity and 28% for work, which significantly improved compared to 2013. Discussion: A positive shift occurred towards a more biopsychosocial approach between students of 2013 and 2020. However, the improved guideline adherence concerning activity and work recommendations remains low. Process evaluation: Additional clinical case vignette to measure clinical recommendations regarding OA would have strengthen this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Although a positive correlation between patients' expectations and outcome after surgery appears evident, evidence is rather conflicting. This can be attributed to the lack of uniform, validated, and reliable methods to assess patients' expectations. A valid and reliable questionnaire to assess patients' expectations of lumbar spine surgery is not yet available in Dutch. Methods: The forward-backward translation method will be applied to the original Hospital for Special Surgery Lumbar Spine Surgery Expectations Survey [1]. The translations will be revised by an expert committee, including translators, methodologist, spinal surgery experts and psychology experts. The pre-final Dutch survey will be piloted in a sample (n = 50) of patients scheduled for lumbar surgery. Based on these results, the expert committee will improve the survey. The final survey will then be administered in a sample (n = 300) of patients twice before their spinal surgery. Based on the acquired data, validity (i.e. content, construct, and discriminative validity) and reliability (i.e. internal consistency and test-retest reliability) will determined. Results: Not applicable. Discussion: A Dutch validated survey for assessment of expectations of lumbar surgery patients may assist clinicians in determining the quality of spinal surgical care and any discrepancies that might exist between clinician and patient. Researchers will benefit as well, as uniform and valid surveys are essential to unravel the relation between pre-surgical patients' expectations and satisfaction following spinal surgery. Process evaluation: The study is currently in the backward-translation stage. Finding translators with the appropriate requirements according to the WHO guidelines proves to be challenging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Chronic Whiplash Associated Disorders (CWAD) are characterized by long-lasting symptoms of neck pain occurring after an acceleration-deceleration injury. Central sensitization (CS) has been suggested as the possible underlying mechanism for these symptoms, and is characterized by changes in the central nervous system. Besides CS, psychological factors are believed to play an important role in the experience of (chronic) pain. Methods: 72 CWAD patients and 55 healthy controls underwent electrical stimuli-based quantitative sensory testing (QST). Detection and pain thresholds (EPT), temporal summation (TS) and conditioned pain modulation (CPM) were examined. Spearman correlations and linear mixed models analyses were performed to assess respectively the hypothesized associations with and group differences in QST. Results: The Pain Catastrophizing magnification subscale correlated with left wrist EPT (r = -0.332; p = 0.004), and the Pain Anxiety Symptom Scale-20 with left wrist (r = -0.325; p = 0.005) and ankle (r = -0.330; p = 0.005) EPT. TS at the ankle correlated with the CS Inventory (r = 0.303; p = 0.010), Short Form 36 pain subscale (r = -0.325; p = 0.005), and Illness Perception Questionnaire revised consequences subscale (r = 0.325; p = 0.005). EPTs of left (p = 0.011) and right wrist (p = 0.023) were lower in the CWAD group, but CPM and TS did not differ between groups. Discussion: QST outcomes relate to psychological constructs, rather than to self-reported pain intensity and distribution. Local hyperalgesia was found in CWAD patients, but no differences in endogenous pain facilitation nor inhibition. Process evaluation: Both CWAD patients reporting unilateral as bilateral neck pain were included, which complicated the interpretation of distal hyperalgesia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: There is abundant evidence for compromised movement performance in non-specific low back pain (NSLBP)1,2. It has been proposed that not only pain severity, but also cognitive-affective factors such as attention might influence movement3. The objective of this study is to review current knowledge concerning the effects of attention on movement-related outcomes in NSLBP. Methods: A systematic search was performed and reported following the PRISMA-guidelines. A comprehensive search strategy was used by using five electronic databases. Possible risk-of-bias was evaluated by using the adjusted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Levels of evidence and conclusion were assigned according to guidelines of the Dutch Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Results: Twenty-two articles were included (ROB 18.2% -72.7%), the majority (77%) performed in chronic LBP.Limited evidence indicated attentional suppression (measured with coping strategy questionnaire) to be negatively associated with activity of the trunk muscles in acute NSLBP. Furthermore, limited evidence indicated that when attention is divided over tasks (i.e. dual-tasks) this results in lower variability of postural strategies in recurrent NSLBP and lower/delayed anticipatory trunk muscle activation in chronic NSLBP. Discussion: Ignoring pain effects trunk muscle activity in acute NSLBP. When attention is divided (i.e. dual-tasks), individuals with recurrent/chronic NSLBP are less capable to control their trunk muscles. Process evaluation: The different possibilities to operationalize 'attention' posed a difficulty. Included studies used two main operationalizations: 'attentional control of pain' (i.e. attention focus, attentional suppression/distraction) and 'attention as a capacity' (i.e. cognitive load of pain competes for available attentional resources for postural control). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Up to 37% of lumbar radiculopathy patients experience residual pain and disability following lumbar discectomy. Although it is assumed that dysfunctional pain processing may play a mechanistic role in symptom persistence, research in this area is lacking. Therefore, this study will evaluate pain processing in lumbar radiculopathy patients prior to and 3 months following lumbar discectomy. Methods: Lumbar radiculopathy patients (n = 122) scheduled for discectomy will be recruited through Flemish hospitals. At follow-up, patients with =1.5/10 average pain intensity on a visual analogue scale and <20% improvement on the Oswestry Disability Index will be categorized as having residual complaints. These will be compared to matched patients without residual complaints and pain-free controls. Pain sensitivity will be evaluated using Quantitative Sensory Testing including thermal, mechanical, and electrical perception and pain thresholds. Spinal modulation will be assessed using nociceptive flexion reflex thresholds; pain facilitation by the presence of psychocognitive factors through questionnaires and temporal summation of mechanical stimuli and the NFR; and pain inhibition using a conditioned pain modulation paradigm. Results: Not applicable. Discussion: We hypothesize that pre-operative pain characteristics are predictive of residual complaints and that patients with residual complaints exhibit dysfunctional pain processing compared to individuals without residual complaints as expressed by impaired pain inhibition and enhanced spinal modulation, pain sensitivity and facilitation. The findings will provide the potential to identify patients at risk of poor surgical outcome and explore treatment strategies according to dysfunctions in pain processing. Process evaluation: Currently recruiting and completing ethical committee applications for multicentric recruitment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Individuals with movement coordination impairment (MCI) experience poor control of spine and pelvis and often develop a compensatory movement strategy. Currently there is a paucity of information on differences in segmental kinematics to help understand the adopted movement strategy and its link to commonly used clinical assessment. Objective: The current pilot study is aimed at investigating the usability of a cluster spine model to assess the clinically relevant assessment, such as one-leg standing. Methods: After necessary ethical approval, nine healthy subjects, (6 men, 3 female, 22±2.0 years, 177±7.4 cm, 69±8.7 kg) were recruited to participate in the study. The marker configuration was in accordance with Needham et al.[1]. Subjects were instructed to complete 2 variants of a one-leg standing task. In both tasks they stood relaxed on both feet and were either instructed to flex the knee (90°) without hip extension (backward lifting) or to flex both hip and knee to 90° (forward lifting), starting with the right leg and followed by the left leg. Data were collected with an 8 camera opto-electronic system (Oqus, Qualisys, Göteborg, Sweden) at 100 HZ and processed in Visual3D (C-Motion Inc., Germantown, MD, USA). Motion from the upper (T3) versus lower thoracic spine (T8), from lower thoracic versus lumbar spine (L3) and between the lumbar spine and the pelvis was analyzed for 3 valid trials per subject. Results and Discussion: In the sagittal plane the main differences are seen (Figure 1) in the lumbar spine versus the pelvis, while at the higher regions, the spine is quite stable only showing minor differences. In the frontal plane the upper thoracic region shows (Figure 1) little movement, where the lower thoracic and the lumbar regions bend to the opposite side of the lifted leg. This is more pronounced during forward lifting. Rotational movements are seen in all three regions. The direction of rotation for forward leg lifting is opposed to the one during backward lifting. This is the first study to document the spine kinematics of different regions during tasks suggested for clinical assessment, e.g. two variants of one-leg standing. Future research should aim at testing more subjects, other clinically relevant movements and comparing healthy subjects with patient populations. Conclusions and Significance: Whilst the 3D cluster spine model seems to be a useful tool to document the spine kinematics, the results highlight quantitative differences which needs be considered to develop effective clinical management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Movement control (MC) tests are used in clinical practice to subgroup patients with non-specific chronic low back pain to adapt the treatment strategy based on whether they have a flexion or extension pattern. The underlying hypothesis is that impaired movement control and a lack of awareness of mal-adaptive movement pattern perpetuates LBP. It has already been shown that patients with LBP have impaired movement control.[1] Although these patterns can be assessed by some clinical tests, the validity of those tests has never been described by means of kinematics. Hence the purpose of this study was to examine the validity of these tests and to elucidate differences in spinal kinematics across participants. This will help explore if we can possibly use flexion MC tests from the Luomajoki test-battery to identify a Flexion Movement Pattern (FMP) in a wider population. Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare spinal and pelvic kinematics between healthy participants with and without a FMP when completing a “waiters bow” assessment. Methods: After necessary ethical approval, a sample of 29 adults (n=29, 14♀, 15♂, age 23.34 ± 2.32 year) were recruited to participate in this study. Based on a test-battery of 6 movement control tests designed by Luomajoki [1] they were divided into two groups: FMP group (n=16, 6♀, 10♂); No FMP group (n=13, 8♀,5♂). Spinal kinematics whilst the participants performing a waiters bow (WB) were collected using a previously published protocol.[2] Results and Discussion: There are differences in MC when the FMP and no-FMP group were compared (Figure 1). The lower thoracic region is more flexed in the FMP group during WB. Nevertheless, the results contradict the hypothesis that an earlier and more distinct flexion would show up in the lumbar region WB. In addition, there are clear variances in coordination pattern. Findings of the lumbar region contradict the hypothesis of a more flexed spine in the FMP since the FMP has more extension than the no-FMP. Conclusion and Significance: Differences in spinal kinematics between participants of the FMP group and the non-FMP group exist, which demonstrate that the flexion MC tests from the Luomajoki test-battery could be used to identify a FMP in a wider group of patients. In addition, the individual variances could be used to design effective clinical management and assess the clinical outcome in a quantitative fashion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to investigate the long-term effectiveness of a spine care education programme conducted in 9- to 11-year-old schoolchildren. The study sample included 96 intervention subjects and 98 controls (9- to 11-year-olds at baseline). Intervention consisted of a 6-week school-based back education programme (predominantly biomechanically oriented) and was implemented by a physical therapist. Self-reported outcomes on back care knowledge, spinal care behaviour, self-efficacy towards favourable back care behaviour, prevalence of back and neck pain during the week and fear-avoidance beliefs were evaluated by the use of questionnaires. Post-tests were performed within 1 week after programme completion, after 1 year and after 8 years. Whereas the educational back care programme resulted in increased back care knowledge up to adulthood (P < 0.001), intervention did not change spinal care behaviour or self-efficacy. Pain prevalence figures increased less in the experimental group compared to the controls over the 8-year time span, yet statistical significance was not reached. Dropout analysis revealed spinal pain prevalence rates to be different in both groups throughout the study, including at baseline. Back education at young age did not reinforce fear-avoidance beliefs up to adulthood. Predominantly biomechanical oriented back education in elementary schoolchildren is effective in improving the cognitive aspect of back care up to adulthood, yet not in changing actual behaviour or self-efficacy. The current study does not provide evidence that educational back care programmes have any impact on spinal pain in adulthood. The true long-term impact of school-based spinal health interventions on clinically relevant outcome measures merits further attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Muscular tightness is frequently postulated as an intrinsic risk factor for the development of a muscle injury. However, very little prospective data exist to prove this. HYPOTHESIS: Increased muscle tightness identifies a soccer player at risk for a subsequent musculoskeletal lesion. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: We examined 146 male professional soccer players before the 1999-2000 Belgian soccer competition. None of the players had a history of muscle injury in the lower extremities in the previous 2 years. The flexibility of the hamstring, quadriceps, adductor, and calf muscles of these players was measured goniometrically before the start of the season. All of the examined players were monitored throughout the season to register subsequent injuries. RESULTS: Players with a hamstring (N = 31) or quadriceps (N = 13) muscle injury were found to have significantly lower flexibility in these muscles before their injury compared with the uninjured group. No significant differences in muscle flexibility were found between players who sustained an adductor muscle injury (N = 13) or a calf muscle injury (N = 10) and the uninjured group. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that soccer players with an increased tightness of the hamstring or quadriceps muscles have a statistically higher risk for a subsequent musculoskeletal lesion. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Preseason hamstring and quadriceps muscle flexibility testing can identify male soccer players at risk of developing hamstring and quadriceps muscle injuries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]