Search

Objective: To reach consensus on the core domains to be included in a core domain set for clinical trials of shoulder disorders using the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.1 Core Domain Set process., Methods: At OMERACT 2018, the OMERACT Shoulder Working Group conducted a workshop that presented the OMERACT 2016 preliminary core domain set and its rationale based upon a systematic review of domains measured in shoulder trials and international Delphi sessions involving patients, clinicians, and researchers, as well as a new systematic review of qualitative studies on the experiences of people with shoulder disorders. After discussions in breakout groups, the OMERACT core domain set for clinical trials of shoulder disorders was presented for endorsement by OMERACT 2018 participants., Results: The qualitative review (n = 8) identified all domains included in the preliminary core set. An additional domain, cognitive dysfunction, was also identified, but confidence that this represents a core domain was very low. The core domain set that was endorsed by the OMERACT participants, with 71% agreement, includes 4 "mandatory" trial domains: pain, function, patient global - shoulder, and adverse events including death; and 4 "important but optional" domains: participation (recreation/work), sleep, emotional well-being, and condition-specific pathophysiological manifestations. Cognitive dysfunction was voted out of the core domain set., Conclusion: OMERACT 2018 delegates endorsed a core domain set for clinical trials of shoulder disorders. The next step includes identification of a core outcome measurement set that passes the OMERACT 2.1 Filter for measuring each domain.

Objective: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Shoulder Core Outcome Set Special Interest Group (SIG) was established to develop a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials of shoulder disorders., Methods: In preparation for OMERACT 2016, we systematically examined all outcome domains and measurement instruments reported in 409 randomized trials of interventions for shoulder disorders published between 1954 and 2015. Informed by these data, we conducted an international Delphi consensus study including shoulder trial experts, clinicians, and patients to identify key domains that should be included in a shoulder disorder COS. Findings were discussed at a stakeholder premeeting of OMERACT. At OMERACT 2016, we sought consensus on a preliminary core domain set and input into next steps., Results: There were 13 and 15 participants at the premeeting and the OMERACT 2016 SIG meeting, respectively (9 attended both meetings). Consensus was reached on a preliminary core domain set consisting of an inner core of 4 domains: pain, physical function/activity, global perceived effect, and adverse events including death. A middle core consisted of 3 domains: emotional well-being, sleep, and participation (recreation and work). An outer core of research required to inform the final COS was also formulated., Conclusion: Our next steps are to (1) analyze whether participation (recreation and work) should be in the inner core, (2) conduct a third Delphi round to finalize definitions and wording of domains and reach final endorsement for the domains, and (3) determine which instruments fulfill the OMERACT criteria for measuring each domain.

Background: A higher level of kinesiophobia appears to be associated with poor recovery in patients with sciatica., Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate whether kinesiophobia modifies the effect of physical therapy on outcomes in patients with sciatica., Design: This was a subgroup analysis from a randomized controlled trial., Setting: The study was conducted in a primary care setting., Patients: A total of 135 patients with acute sciatica participated., Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned to groups that received (1) physical therapy plus general practitioners' care (intervention group) or (2) general practitioners' care alone (control group)., Measurements: Kinesiophobia at baseline was measured with the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK) and a single substitute question for kinesiophobia (SQK). Pain and recovery were assessed at 3- and 12-month follow-ups. Regression analysis was used to test for interaction between the level of kinesiophobia at baseline and treatment allocation. Subgroup results were calculated for patients classified with high fear of movement and for those classified with low fear of movement., Results: Kinesiophobia at baseline interacted with physical therapy in the analysis with leg pain intensity at 12-month follow-up. Kinesiophobia at baseline did not interact with physical therapy regarding any outcome at 3-month follow-up or recovery at 12-month follow-up. When comparing both treatment groups in the subgroup of patients with high fear of movement (n=73), the only significant result was found for leg pain intensity difference from baseline at 12-month follow-up (intervention group: X̅=-5.0, SD=2.6; control group: X̅=-3.6, SD=2.7)., Limitations: The post hoc study design and relatively small sample size were limitations of the study., Conclusions: In 135 patients with sciatica, evidence shows that patients with a higher level of kinesiophobia at baseline may particularly benefit from physical therapy with regard to decreasing leg pain intensity at 12-month follow-up., (© 2015 American Physical Therapy Association.)