Search

Background The Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index (MFPDI, 19 items) was developed to measure functional limitations, pain and appearance for patients with foot pain and is frequently used in both observational studies and randomised controlled trials. A Dutch version of the MFPDI was developed. The aims of this study were to evaluate all the measurement properties for the Dutch version of the MFPDI and to evaluate comparability to the original version. Method The MFPDI was translated into Dutch using a forward/backward translation process. The dimensionality was evaluated using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Measurement properties were evaluated per subscale according to the COSMIN taxonomy consisting of: reliability (internal consistency, test-retest reliability and measurement error), validity (structural validity, content validity and cross-cultural validity comparing the Dutch version to the English version) responsiveness and interpretation. Results The questionnaire consists of three scales, measuring foot function, foot pain and perception. The reliability of the foot function scale is acceptable (Cronbach’s α > 0.7, ICC = 0.7, SEM = 2.2 on 0-18 scale). The construct validity of the function and pain scale was confirmed and only the pain scale contains one item with differential item functioning (DIF). The responsiveness of the function and pain scale is moderate when compared to anchor questions. Conclusion Results using the Dutch MFPDI version can be compared to results using the original version. The foot function sub-scale (items 1-9) is a reliable and valid sub-scale. This study indicates that the use of the MFPDI as a longitudinal instrument might be problematic for measuring change in musculoskeletal foot pain due to moderate responsiveness.

Background Previously two prediction rules identifying children at risk of hearing loss and academic or behavioral limitations after bacterial meningitis were developed. Streptococcus pneumoniae as causative pathogen was an important risk factor in both. Since 2006 Dutch children receive seven-valent conjugate vaccination against S. pneumoniae. The presumed effect of vaccination was simulated by excluding all children infected by S. pneumoniae with the serotypes included in the vaccine, from both previous collected cohorts (between 1990-1995). Methods Children infected by one of the vaccine serotypes were excluded from both original cohorts (hearing loss: 70 of 628 children; academic or behavioral limitations: 26 of 182 children). All identified risk factors were included in multivariate logistic regression models. The discriminative ability of both new models was calculated. Results The same risk factors as in the original models were significant. The discriminative ability of the original hearing loss model was 0.84 and of the new model 0.87. In the academic or behavioral limitations model it was 0.83 and 0.84 respectively. Conclusion It can be assumed that the prediction rules will also be applicable on a vaccinated population. However, vaccination does not provide 100% coverage and evidence is available that serotype replacement will occur. The impact of vaccination on serotype replacement needs to be investigated, and the prediction rules must be validated externally.

Table of contents S1 Criteria for exercises selection in subjects with low back pain Alessandro Aina S2 Recent advances in pathophysiology and treatment of myofascial trigger points Marco Barbero S3 Rehabilitation of scapular dyskinesia Barbara Cagnie S4 Musculoskeletal rehabilitation in subjects affected by neurological disorders Elena Castelli S5 Which examination tests suggest the best candidates for manual therapy Chad Cook S6 Case study: the role of the measurements for the identification of targets and guidance of the treatment Silvano Ferrari S7 Assessment of joint mobility: state of the art Andrea Foglia, Paolo Bizzarri S8 Core stabilization exercises in the treatment of urinary incontinence Donatella Giraudo S9 Preventing surgical subacromial decompression through rotator cuff rehabilitation Chris Littlewood S10 Methodological aspects of Clinical Prediction Rules in the rehabilitation of Low Back Pain Paolo Pillastrini S11 Interpretability of outcome measures in musculoskeletal rehabilitation Daniele Piscitelli S12 Conservative treatment of the misalignment of the spine: state of the art and perspectives Michele Romano S13 Balance training in subjects with musculoskeletal disorders Andrea Tettamanti S14 Dosage of manual therapy: principles for clinical practice Carla Vanti S15 Are there speed limits in post-surgery lower limb rehabilitation? Stefano Vercelli S16 Classification of predominant neuropathic, nociceptive or central sensation pain Lennard Voogt P1 A wearable proprioceptive stabilizer (Equistasi®) for rehabilitation of balance disorders in multiple sclerosis patients: preliminary results of a randomized, double-blind, versus placebo controlled study Aceto Maria, Spina Emanuele, Paone Paolo, Silvestre Francesco, Carotenuto Antonio, Cerillo Ilaria, Orefice Giuseppe P2 Effect of repeated neck retraction movements on strength and EMG activity of the upper limbs, range of motion and cervical posture Bassi Raffaele, Fiorito Serena, Aina Alessandro P3 Hamstring injuries: clinical assessment or image evaluation? Bonfanti M., Pasquetti M. P4 Effectiveness of the physical therapy treatment on pelvic floor muscles in pelvic girdle pain. A literature review Bortolami Arianna, Pillastrini Paolo, Vanti Carla P5 Scapulo-humeral muscles electromiographic activity during the elevation movement of the upper limb in subjects with rotator cuff lesion Brioschi D, Vitali M, Pedretti A, Fraschini G, Tettamanti A P6 Mechanical low back pain: secular trend and intervention topics of randomized controlled trials Castellini G, Gianola S, Bonovas S, Banfi G, Moja L P7 Quality of reporting in rehabilitation interventions for low back pain: a review of published randomised controlled trials Greta Castellini, Silvia Gianola, Pamela Frigerio, Michela Agostini, Rosa Bolotta, Davide Corbetta, Monica Gasparini, Paolo Gozzer, Erica Guariento, Linda Li, Valentina Pecoraro, Valeria Sirtori, Andrea Turolla, Andreano A, Lorenzo Moja P8 Power analysis and sample size reporting in rehabilitation of low back pain: review of randomized controlled trials included in Cochrane systematic review Castellini G, Gianola S, Bonovas S, Moja L P9 A core outcome set for clinical trials in non-specific low back pain Alessandro Chiarotto, Caroline B. Terwee, Maarten Boers, Raymond W. Ostelo P10 Roland & Morris Disability Questionnaire and Oswestry Disability Index: which has better measurement properties? A systematic review and meta-analysis Alessandro Chiarotto, Lara J. Maxwell, Caroline B. Terwee, George A. Wells, Peter Tugwell, Raymond W. Ostelo P11 Prevalence of myofascial trigger points in spinal pain disorders: systematic review and meta-analysis Alessandro Chiarotto, Ron Clijsen, Cesar Fernandez-de-las-Penas, Marco Barbero P12 Post-surgical scar rating scales in physiotherapy: a systematic review Ciceri Matteo, Rossetti Sara, Vercelli Stefano P13 Efficacy of action observation pre-operative training in functional recovery after hip and knee prosthesis Cislaghi M, Penone G, Marinelli G, Rezzan G, Melegati G, Gatti R P14 The use of Kinesio Taping in the treatment of hematomas: can we distinguish fancy from the effects? Colombo Claudio, Tolosa Francesca, Andrea Moriondo, Vercelli Stefano P15 Who is able to perform explicit motor imagery after stroke? Stefano Doronzio, Matteo Paci P16 Responsiveness of the Bridge tests in Symptomatic Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Silvano Ferrari, Carla Vanti, Marco Monticone P17 The relationship between number of sessions and clinical results in lumbar symptomatic spondylolisthesis Silvano Ferrari, Carla Vanti, Marco Monticone P18 Conservative treatments for upper extremity tendinopathies in occupational medicine: narrative review Garzonio Fabiola, Zanetta Anna, Bargeri Serena, Cerone Giorgia, Sartorio Francesco P19 The time-related effect of roller-massager on extensibility of the hamstring muscles Filippo Ghirlanda, Alessandro Schneebeli, Corrado Cescon, Marco Barbero P20 Effect of two different exercise programs on pain, disability and quality of life in people with subacute and chronic nonspecific neck pain Gioia G, Faccendini S, Aina A, Tettamanti A P21 A bridge between clinical practice and research: how health professionals can study literature and learn on the job Granzotto G, Coppola L, Gava I, Frassinelli M, Gattinoni F P22 Walking capacity improves after neuromotor physiotherapy in stroke patients Lorenzo Guidotti, Marco Postiglione, Bruna Lombardi, Matteo Paci P23 Intra and inter-session reliability of the angle between pain onset and submaximal pain during upper limb neurodynamics test 1: a study in healty individuals Diego Leoni, Davide Storer, Roberto Gatti, Michele Egloff, Marco Barbero P24 Effects of an AO-MI training on balance task in patients affected by multiple sclerosis Magno Tiziano, Tettamanti Andrea P25 Outcomes of treatment with neuromuscular stimulator for chronic anterior knee pain: a clinical case Daniele Maremmani, Sebastiano Cencini, Giuseppe Plebani P26 Consistency in locating pressure stimuli over the lumbar spine on a digital body chart: a comparison between chronic low back pain patients and healthy subjects Federica Moresi, Marco Barbero, Matteo Isnardi, Alberto Gallace, Corrado Cescon, Roberto Gatti P27 Malignant Cord Compression in the thoraco-lumbar spine. Early signs and symptoms in the differential diagnosis of low back pain Moretti N, Maselli, Testa M. P28 End growth results of exercise treatment to avoid bracing in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis: a prospective cohort controlled study Stefano Negrini, Sabrina Donzelli, Francesco Saveri, Alessandra Negrini, Silvana Parzini, Michele Romano, Fabio Zaina P29 Reliability of the Ashworth scale and its modified versions: systematic review and meta-analysis Leonardo Nesi, Francesco Ferrarello, Valeria Anna Maria Bianchi, Matteo Paci P30 Differences in motor recovery between upper and lower limbs in stroke subtypes Matteo Paci, Luca Nannetti, Bruna Lombardi P31 Influence of clinical experience on the reliability of the Salford Gait Tool Giuditta Mini, Mariangela Marchettini, Francesco Ferrarello, Matteo Paci P32 A somatosensory discrimination training induces brain functional changes in healthy young subjects Fabio Piccolo, Federica Agosta, Elisabetta Sarasso, Paola Adamo, Federico Temporiti, Andrea Falini, Roberto Gatti, Massimo Filippi P33 Effects of dynamic tilt-table with integrated robotic stepping associated with functional electrical stimulation: a cross-over study Daniele Piscitelli, Roberto Meroni, Leonardo Pellicciari, Marco A. Mondelli, Thomas Favaron, Cesare G. Cerri, Enrico A. Tallarita P34 Manual therapy techniques in the treatment of whiplash and its associated disorders: a systematic review Ravizzotti Elisa, Vercelli Stefano P35 The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) as a screening tool for early detection of pathologic post-surgical scars in physiotherapy Rossetti Sara, Ciceri Matteo, Vercelli Stefano P36 The anatomical basis of genetic dystonia: a multimodal MRI study Elisabetta Sarasso, Federica Agosta, Aleksandra Tomić, Silvia Basaia, Nataša Dragašević, Marina Svetel, Massimiliano Copetti, Vladimir S. Kostic, Massimo Filippi P37 The relative inclination of the end vertebrae of a scoliotic single curve can influence the results of the conservative treatment? A pilot study Francesco Saveri, Michele Romano, Matteo Mastrantonio, Alessandra Negrini, Fabio Zaina, Negrini Stefano P38 Physiotherapy for myofascial pain syndromes: reported methodological quality of randomized controlled trials indexed in the PEDro database Alessandro Schneebeli, Greta Castellini, Valentina Redaelli, Emiliano Soldini, Marco Barbero P39 Is the patellar pubic percussion test useful to diagnose only femur fractures or something else? Two case reports Segat M, Casonato O, Margelli M, Pillon S. P40 Effectiveness of new rehab method for MDI Spunton V, Fenini R, Garofalo R, Conti M P41 Toe walking and autism: cross-sectional study on clinical presentation patterns and correlation with language delay Valagussa G, Balatti V, Trentin L, Melli S, Norsi M, and Grossi E P42 Active Kyphosis Value (AKV): a new test for the evaluation of the kyphotisation mobility of the thoracic spine Massimiliano Vanossi, Francesco Saveri, Michele Romano P43 Pain Drawing and psychological distress in low back pain - systematic review and meta-analysis Carla Vanti, Sara Taioli, Ivan Gardenghi, Lucia Bertozzi, Anna Rosso, Antonio Romeo, Paolo Pillastrini P44 Responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index in symptomatic lumbar spondylolisthesis Carla Vanti, Silvano Ferrari, Martina Ruggeri, Marco Monticone P45 The relationship between instability tests, pain and disability in non-specific low back pain Carla Vanti, Bellini Filippo, Cristina Conti, Federica Faresin, Martina Ruggeri, Raffaella Piccarreta, Silvano Ferrari P46 Smartphone applications (apps) for physical therapists: a review Villanova Luca, Vercelli Stefano P47 A randomized controlled pilot trial of hand robotic training compared with a sensory-motor training program in post stroke patients Violini Claudia, Cenci Marco Joseph, Delconte Carmen, Pisano Fabrizio P48 Critical Illness PolyNeuroMyopathy (CIPNM): chance for a good prognosis Youssef S, Montesano M, Picardi M, De Giampaulis P, Corbo M, Pisani L. P49 The EdUReP approach plus manual therapy for the management of insertional Achilles tendinopathy: a case study Zanetta Anna, Garzonio Fabiola, Ruella Carolina, Sartorio Francesco

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most disabling and costly disorders affecting modern society, and approximately 90% of patients are labelled as having non-specific LBP (NSLBP). Several interventions for patients with NSLBP have been assessed in clinical trials, but heterogeneous reporting of outcomes in these trials has hindered comparison of results and performance of meta-analyses. Moreover, there is a risk of selective outcome reporting bias. To address these issues, the development of a core outcome set (COS) that should be measured in all clinical trials for a specific health condition has been recommended. A standardized set of outcomes for LBP was proposed in 1998, however, with evolution in COS development methodology, new instruments, interventions, and understanding of measurement properties, it is appropriate to update that proposal. This protocol describes the methods used in the initial step in developing a COS for NSLBP, namely, establishing a core domain set that should be measured in all clinical trials. Methods/Design: An International Steering Committee including researchers, clinicians, and patient representatives from four continents was formed to guide the development of this COS. The approach of initiatives like Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) was followed. Participants were invited to participate in a Delphi study aimed at generating a consensus-based core domain set for NSLBP. A list of potential core domains was drafted and presented to the Delphi participants who were asked to judge which domains were core. Participant suggestions about overlap, aggregation, or addition of potential core domains were addressed during the study. The patients' responses were isolated to assess whether there was substantial disagreement with the rest of the Delphi panel. A priori thresholds for consensus were established before each Delphi round. All participants' responses were analysed from a quantitative and qualitative perspective to ascertain that no substantial discrepancies between the two approaches emerged. Discussion: We present the initial step in developing a COS for NSLBP. The next step will be to determine which measurement instruments adequately cover the domains.

Background In cooperation with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative, the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) initiative aimed to develop a guideline on how to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes (i.e., constructs or domains) included in a “Core Outcome Set” (COS). A COS is an agreed minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials of a specific disease or trial population. Methods Informed by a literature review to identify potentially relevant tasks on outcome measurement instrument selection, a Delphi study was performed among a panel of international experts, representing diverse stakeholders. In three consecutive rounds, panelists were asked to rate the importance of different tasks in the selection of outcome measurement instruments, to justify their choices, and to add other relevant tasks. Consensus was defined as being achieved when 70 % or more of the panelists agreed and when fewer than 15 % of the panelists disagreed. Results Of the 481 invited experts, 120 agreed to participate of whom 95 (79 %) completed the first Delphi questionnaire. We reached consensus on four main steps in the selection of outcome measurement instruments for COS: Step 1, conceptual considerations; Step 2, finding existing outcome measurement instruments, by means of a systematic review and/or a literature search; Step 3, quality assessment of outcome measurement instruments, by means of the evaluation of the measurement properties and feasibility aspects of outcome measurement instruments; and Step 4, generic recommendations on the selection of outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a COS (consensus ranged from 70 to 99 %). Conclusions This study resulted in a consensus-based guideline on the methods for selecting outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a COS. This guideline can be used by COS developers in defining how to measure core outcomes. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1555-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Food allergy may constitute a major burden to children and their families. A 3-year-old girl was intolerant to milk, sugar, egg white, pork meat, and other foods, causing eczema and dyspnoe. She was treated with Nambudripad's Allergy Elimnation Technique (NAET), a combination of kinesiology and acupressure. After 7 treatment sessions (within 4 weeks) she was free of symptoms. After three years, she can still eat everything without symptoms. This case report highlights the possible benefit of NAET for children with food allergy. Randomized clinical trials should be encouraged to study the effectiveness of NAET in treating food allergy.

Background To assess a pulmonary function change over time the mass flow sensor and the pneumotachograph are widely used in commercially available instruments. However, the smallest detectable change for both devices has never been compared. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine the smallest detectable change in vital capacity (VC) and single-breath diffusion parameters measured by mass flow sensor and or pneumotachograph. Method In 28 healthy pulmonary function technicians VC, transfer factor for carbon monoxide (DLCO) and alveolar volume (VA) was repeatedly (10×) measured. The smallest detectable change was calculated by 1.96 x Standard Error of Measurement ×√2. Findings The mean (range) of the smallest detectable change measured by mass flow sensor and pneumotachograph respectively, were for VC (in Liter): 0.53 (0.46-0.65); 0.25 (0.17-0.36) (p = 0.04), DLCO (in mmol*kPa-1*min-1): 1.53 (1.26-1.7); 1.18 (0.84-1.39) (p = 0.07), VA (in Liter): 0.66. (0.53-0.82); 0.43 (0.34-0.53) (p = 0.04) and DLCO/VA (in mmol*kPa-1*min-1*L-1): 0.22 (0.19-0.28); 0.19 (0.14-0.22) (p = 0.79). Conclusions Smallest detectable significant change in VC and VA as measured by pneumotachograph are smaller than by mass flow sensor. Therefore, the pneumotachograph is the preferred instrument to estimate lung volume change over time in individual patients.