Search

Gabriella Bernhoff,1,2 Helena M Huhmar,2 Eva Rasmussen-Barr,3 Lina Bunketorp Käll4,5 1Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; 2ME-Centre, Bragée Clinics, Stockholm, Sweden; 3Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Physiotherapy, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; 4Department of Health and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; 5Centre for Advanced Reconstruction of Extremities, Sahlgrenska University Hospital/Mölndal, Mölndal, SwedenCorrespondence: Gabriella Bernhoff, Karolinska Institute, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Family Medicine and Primary Care, Alfred Nobels allé 23 D2, 141 83 Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden, Tel +46 720 71 33 29, Email gabriella.bernhoff@ki.sePurpose: Patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) present with a broad spectrum of symptoms, including headache. A simple, yet powerful tool – the pain drawing identifies essential aspects such as pain distribution. The aim with this study was to 1) evaluate the significance of pain drawing as a screening tool for cervicogenic headache using a predefined C2 pain pattern, 2) assess whether there was an association between dizziness/imbalance and a C2 pain pattern, and 3) compare subgroups according to the pain drawing with respect to pain characteristics and quality of life.Patients and Methods: Pain drawings and clinical data from 275 patients investigated for ME/CFS were stratified into: 1) cervicogenic headache as determined by a C2 pain pattern, 2) headache with no C2 pain pattern, and 3) no headache. For inference logistic regression presented with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) and Kruskal–Wallis test were applied.Results: One hundred sixteen participants (42%) were stratified to the group for which the pain drawing corresponded to the C2 pain pattern, thus indicating putative cervicogenic origin of the headache. Dizziness/imbalance was strongly associated with a C2 pain pattern; OR 6.50 ([95% CI 2.42– 17.40] p ˂ 0.00), whereas this association was non-significant for patients with headache and no C2 pain pattern. Those demonstrating a C2 pain pattern reported significantly higher pain intensity (p = 0.00) and greater pain extent (p = 0.00) than the other groups, and lower health-related quality of life (p = 0.00) than the group with no headache.Conclusion: For patients with chronic fatigue who present with a C2 pain pattern (interpreted as cervicogenic headache) the pain drawing seems applicable as a screening tool for signs associated with neuropathic and more severe pain, dizziness and reduced quality of life as detection of these symptoms is essential for targeted treatment.Keywords: symptom assessment, questionnaire, primary health care, spine, chronic pain

Purpose: Many systematic reviews have reported on the effectiveness of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) for low back pain (LBP) in adults. Much less is known about the older population regarding the effects of SMT. Objective: To assess the effects of SMT on pain and function in older adults with chronic LBP in an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. Setting: Electronic databases from 2000 until June 2020, and reference lists of eligible trials and related reviews. Design and subjects: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which examined the effects of SMT in adults with chronic LBP compared to interventions recommended in international LBP guidelines. Methods: Authors of trials eligible for our IPD meta-analysis were contacted to share data. Two review authors conducted a risk of bias assessment. Primary results were examined in a one-stage mixed model, and a two-stage analysis was conducted in order to confirm findings. Main outcomes and measures: Pain and functional status examined at 4, 13, 26, and 52 weeks. Results: 10 studies were retrieved, including 786 individuals, of which 261 were between 65 and 91 years of age. There is moderate-quality evidence that SMT results in similar outcomes at 4 weeks (pain: mean difference [MD] − 2.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] − 5.78 to 0.66; functional status: standardized mean difference [SMD] − 0.18, 95% CI − 0.41 to 0.05). Second-stage and sensitivity analysis confirmed these findings. Conclusion: SMT provides similar outcomes to recommended interventions for pain and functional status in the older adult with chronic LBP. SMT should be considered a treatment for this patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

STUDY DESIGN: The study was a randomized controlled trial. Treatment was for 8 weeks, with follow-up posttreatment and at 6-, 12-, and 36- months. OBJECTIVE: The purpose was to evaluate the effect of a graded exercise intervention emphasizing stabilizing exercises in patients with nonspecific, recurrent low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Exercise therapy is recommended and widely used as treatment for LBP. Although stabilizing exercises are reportedly effective in the management of certain subgroups of LBP, such intervention protocols have not yet been evaluated in relation to a more general exercise regimen in patients with recurrent LBP, all at work. METHODS: Seventy-one patients recruited consecutively (36 men, 35 women) with recurrent nonspecific LBP seeking care at an outpatient physiotherapy clinic were randomized into 2 treatment groups; graded exercise intervention or daily walks. The primary outcome was perceived disability and pain at 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included physical health, fear-avoidance, and self-efficacy beliefs. RESULTS: Of the participants, 83% provided data at the 12-month follow-up and 79% at 36 months. At 12 months, between-group comparison showed a reduction in perceived disability in favor of the exercise group, whereas such an effect for pain emerged only immediately postintervention. Ratings of physical health and self-efficacy beliefs also improved in the exercise group over the long term, though no changes were observed for fear-avoidance beliefs. CONCLUSION: A graded exercise intervention, emphasizing stabilizing exercises, for patients with recurrent LBP still at work seems more effective in improving disability and health parameters than daily walks do. However, no such positive results emerged for improvement regarding pain over a longer term, or for fear-avoidance beliefs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a lack of qualitative research on how patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) undergoing surgery perceive their health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Research that increases our understanding in this area could facilitate a biopsychosocial approach to care., Aim: We aimed to investigate the experiences of patients with LSS undergoing decompression surgery regarding their pre- and post-surgery perceptions of HRQOL and the pre-and post-operative information and physiotherapy., Method: We used a qualitative design with semi-structured interviews to perform content analysis using an inductive approach. Twelve patients (7 female, 5 male) were included post-surgery and interviewed by phone. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim., Results: Four distinct categories with nine associated subcategories were identified: Patients' feelings of safety and empowerment are enhanced by healthcare professionals; Divided perceptions of information and physiotherapy in a group context; Health-related quality of life is associated with patients' perceived physical capacity; Patients' optimism and concerns influence health-related quality of life., Conclusion: Both physical and psychological factors pre- and post-surgery appear to influence patients' HRQOL. Inherent optimism and feelings of empowerment in the care process appear to be important factors, regardless of physical health status. A strong patient-provider relationship is important to promote self-efficacy, which may positively affect perceived HRQOL and is in line with the generally recommended biopsychosocial approach in the treatment of people with low back pain. As qualitative studies in this area are scarce, there is a need for further studies to validate our findings., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Single Leg Squat (SLS) test is widely used in the clinical setting to examine and evaluate rehabilitation goals. It is simple to perform and is proposed to have biomechanical and neuromuscular similarities to athletic movements. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether demographics, previous injuries, and biomechanical and psychosocial factors are associated with the outcome of the SLS, assessed as a total score for all segments and as a separate knee segment in elite and sub-elite female soccer players., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study involving 254 female soccer players (22 yrs; SD ± 4, height 1.69 m; SD ± 0.1, weight 64 kg; SD ± 6) from divisions 1-3 of the Swedish Soccer League. During the preseason, we assessed the participants using the SLS and tested their hip strength and ankle mobility. Demographics, previous injury, sleep quality, fear of movement, anxiety, and perceived stress were assessed with questionnaires. Logistic regression models were built to analyse the association between the outcome of the SLS and the independent variables for the dominant and non-dominant leg., Results: Significantly more participants failed the SLS on the dominant leg compared with the non-dominant leg (p < 0.001). The outcome of the SLS associated with various biopsychosocial factors depending on if the dominant or non-dominant leg was tested. The total score associated with hip strength for the dominant (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98-0.99, p = 0.04) and the non-dominant leg (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-0.99, p = 0.03). The knee segment associated with division level for the dominant (div 2; OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.01-5.12, p = 0.033. div 3; OR 3.07, 95% CI 1.61-5.85, p = 0.001) and non-dominant leg (div 2; OR 3.30, 95% CI 1.33-8.00, p = 0.01. div 3; OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.44-6.43, p = 0.003)., Conclusions: This study identified that leg dominance, division level, hip strength, and psychosocial factors were associated with the outcome of the SLS when assessed as a total score and as a separate knee segment. This indicates that clinicians need to understand that movement control is associated with factors from several domains. Whether these factors and, the results of the SLS are related to injury need to be studied prospectively., Trial Registration: Clinical Trials Gov, date of registration 2022-03-01., Clinical Trials Identifier: NCT05289284A., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: To date, no consensus exists as to whether one exercise type is more effective than another in chronic neck pain. This systematic review and meta-analysis of systematic reviews aimed to summarize the literature on the effect of various exercise types used in chronic neck pain and to assess the certainty of the evidence., Methods: We searched the databases Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, SportDiscus, and Web of Science (Core Collection) for systematic reviews and meta-analyses on adults between 18 and 70 years with chronic neck pain lasting ≥ 12 weeks which investigated the effects of exercises on pain and disability. The included reviews were grouped into motor control exercise (MCE), Pilates exercises, resistance training, traditional Chinese exercise (TCE), and yoga. Study quality was assessed with AMSTAR-2 and the level of certainty for the effects of the exercise through GRADE. A narrative analysis of the results was performed and in addition, meta-analyses when feasible., Results: Our database search resulted in 1,794 systematic reviews. We included 25 systematic reviews and meta-analyses including 17,321 participants (overlap not accounted for). The quality of the included reviews ranged from critically low to low (n = 13) to moderate to high (n = 12). We found low to high certainty of evidence that MCE, Pilates exercises, resistance training, TCE, and yoga have short-term positive effects on pain and that all exercise types except resistance training, show positive effects on disability compared to non-exercise controls. We found low to moderate certainty of evidence for conflicting results on pain and disability when the exercise types were compared to other exercise interventions in the short-term as well as in intermediate/long-term apart for yoga, as no long-term results were available., Conclusion: Overall, our findings show low to high certainty of evidence for positive effects on pain and disability of the various exercise types used in chronic neck pain compared to non-exercise interventions, at least in the short-term. Based on our results, no optimal exercise intervention for patients with chronic neck pain can be recommended, since no large differences between the exercise types were shown here. Because the quality of the included systematic reviews varied greatly, future systematic reviews need to increase their methodological quality., Trial Registration: Prospero CRD42022336014., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Injury prevention is important to reduce the high injury risk in youth elite athletes studying at sports high schools. Coaches are considered important in youth elite sports and injury prevention., Objectives: The aim was to investigate perceptions and experiences of injury prevention among coaches at sports high schools., Methods: A manifest qualitative content analysis with an inductive approach was used based on ten semi-structured interviews with coaches who work at sports high schools., Results: An overarching theme "Coaches of youth athletes value injury prevention but have limited knowledge and support" was identified and five main categories were formed. Coaches perceived themselves to play an important role in injury prevention, yet they described limited time for knowledge acquisition and highlighted the close collaboration with other professions as a key in injury prevention., Conclusion: A coach's knowledge and support are critical factors in injury prevention of youth elite athletes. Evidence-based as well as non-evidence-based approaches are used, and the biopsychosocial perspective was not always taken into consideration. A need for more interprofessional collaboration and knowledge acquisition regarding injury prevention is warranted., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None, (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are a common reason for seeking primary health care. The STarT Musculoskeletal (MSK) tool is designed to stratify patients suffering from MSDs to risk groups, based on prognostic factors., Aim: The aim was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the STarT MSK tool in a Swedish primary health care context through testing of reliability and construct validity., Methods: We included consecutive patients with MSDs seeking primary care (n = 99). The STarT MSK was translated using international recommendations. Construct validity was investigated by correlation analysis (Spearmans Rho) with the following reference instruments: the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Questionnaire (ÖMPQ), the EuroQol 5-dimension (EQ-5D) and the Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSKHQ). Reliability was tested using test-retest (Intra Class Correlation, ICC 2.1 ) (n = 31). Known-groups validity was calculated with a difference of 10% between risk groups based on how the participants had answered., Results: The STarT MSK was successfully translated into Swedish. The participants were grouped into low risk (n = 28), medium risk (n = 60) and high risk (n = 11). The construct validity showed a moderate to high correlation with the ÖMPQ (r = .61), EQ-5D (r = .59) and MSK-HQ (r = .56). All separate items except item 2 and 9 correlated according to predefined hypotheses. Test-retest demonstrated an excellent reliability for the total score (ICC 2.1 0.85) (n = 31). The STarT MSK tool was able to differentiate by 10% between the risk groups, based on how the participants had answered., Conclusion: The STarT MSK has been successfully translated and adapted into Swedish and shows acceptable measurement properties regarding test-retest reliability and aspects of validity and seems to be able to discriminate between the proposed risk groups. The tool can therefore be useful in a Swedish primary health care context. A future study needs to determine the tools predictive validity and to investigate if stratification to risk groups leads to a faster recovery and to lower health care costs., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The Lumbar Spine Instability Questionnaire (LSIQ) is a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) suggested to measure clinical instability of the spine., Objective: The aim was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the LSIQ into Swedish and to test its measurement properties., Methods: We included people with low back pain (LBP) seeking primary care (n = 101). The LSIQ was translated using international recommendations. Construct validity was investigated via the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RM) and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). Reliability was tested via test-retest (Intra Class Correlation, ICC 2.1 ) (n = 50) and by analyzing internal consistency (Cronbach Alpha). A suggested cutoff score was used to study discriminative ability., Results: The LSIQ was successfully translated into Swedish. For construct validity, a moderate correlation was shown with the RM (rho 0.58) and the NPRS (rho 0.47). Test-retest demonstrated high reliability for the total score (ICC 2.1 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-0.96). Internal consistency reached a Cronbach Alpha of 0.64. Participants scoring higher on the LSIQ (≥9) showed significantly higher pain and lower disability levels, were of higher age and less physically active., Conclusion: The Swedish LSIQ shows acceptable measurement properties regarding test-retest reliability and validity. To further study the usefulness of the LSIQ and the suggested cutoff score, the dimensionality needs to be investigated.

Background: In chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME/CFS), the capacity for activity and participation is strongly limited. The disease definition is very broad, and considering the lack of evidence for best treatment, it is important to understand what is ME/CFS-specific in the biopsychosocial perspective in comparison with similar syndromes. The objective was to study the difference between those diagnosed with ME/CFS and those with similar symptoms but no ME/CFS diagnosis for self-perceived level of physical activity, work ability, anxiety/depression, and health-related quality of life., Methods: This was a clinical cross-sectional study with data collected from mailed questionnaires. The following variables were compared between patients diagnosed with ME/CFS (n = 205) and those with similar symptoms but no diagnosis (n = 57); level of physical activity, Work ability index (WAI), Hospital anxiety and depression scale (HAD-A/HAD-D), and RAND-36 Physical functioning, Role limitations due to physical health problems, Role limitations due to personal or emotional problems, Social functioning, Energy/fatigue, Bodily pain, Emotional well-being, and General health perceptions. The Chi-squared test (nominal data), the Mann-Whitney U test, the Student's t test and regression analysis were used to analyze the data., Results: The group diagnosed with ME/CFS had a more impaired physical and mental exertion ability as compared to the group that had similar symptoms but was not diagnosed with ME/CFS, shown by a RAND-36 lower index of physical role functioning, social functioning, energy, worse pain and poorer overall health (p ≤ 0.05). In contrast, no significant group differences emerged for weekly level of physical activity, work ability, anxiety/depression, and RAND-36 Emotional role limitation and well-being., Conclusion: Our results indicate that those with a diagnosis of ME/CFS are characterized by an impaired ability for physical or mental exertion, worse pain, and poorer overall health as compared to individuals with similar symptoms but for whom ME/CFS-diagnosis was not established. The results may be cautiously interpreted as support when focusing on patients' self-care in terms of management of energy levels. The results must however be verified in future studies., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: In chronic LBP (CLBP), guideline-endorsed treatment is to stay active, return to normal activity, and to exercise. Several reviews on various exercise types used in CLBP have been published. We aimed to identify systematic reviews of common exercise types used in CLBP, to appraise their quality, and to summarize and compare their effect on pain and disability., Methods: We searched the databases OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, COCHRANE LIBRARY, and WEB OF SCIENCE (Core collection) for systematic reviews and meta-analyses on adults between 18 and 70 years of age suffering from chronic or recurrent LBP for a period of at least 12 weeks, which investigated the effects of exercises on pain and disability. All searches were conducted without language restriction. The search was performed up until 2022-01-26. The included reviews were grouped into nine exercise types: aerobic training, aquatic exercises, motor control exercises (MCE), resistance training, Pilates, sling exercises, traditional Chinese exercises (TCE), walking, and yoga. The study quality was assessed with AMSTAR-2. For each exercise type, a narrative analysis was performed, and the level of evidence for the effects of exercise was assessed through GRADE., Results: Our database search resulted in 3,475 systematic reviews. Out of the 253 full texts that were screened, we included 45 systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The quality of the included reviews ranged from high to critically low. Due to large heterogeneity, no meta-analyses were performed. We found low-to-moderate evidence of mainly short-term and small beneficial effects on pain and disability for MCE, Pilates, resistance training, TCE, and yoga compared to no or minimal intervention., Conclusions: Our findings show that the effect of various exercise types used in CLBP on pain and disability varies with no major difference between exercise types. Many of the included systematic reviews were of low-to-moderate quality and based on randomized controlled trials with high risk of bias. The conflicting results seen, undermine the certainty of the results leading to very-low-to-moderate quality of evidence for our results. Future systematic reviews should be of higher quality to minimize waste of resources., Trial Registration: PROSPERO: Reg no 190409 Registration date 01AUG 2020., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Physiotherapists in primary health care are required to use patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) to manage patients with low back pain (LBP)., Objective: Our aim was to explore and describe how physiotherapists in primary care managing patients with LBP, experience the use of PROMs with a focus on facilitating and hindering factors., Methods: We undertook a qualitative study with semi-structured interviews. Fifteen physiotherapists (9 female and 6 male) were included. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and analysed by inductive manifest content analysis., Results: Our findings resulted in eight main categories: PROMs give structure and increase patient involvement; Patients' motivations to use PROMs; Time and the physiotherapist's clinical priorities; Physiotherapists' routines steer their use of PROMs; Physiotherapists' competences in using PROMs; Organizations and managers steer the use of PROMs; Prerequisites for future use of PROMs; Using PROMs develops the physiotherapy profession., Conclusion: Our findings show that using PROMs gives structure and increases patient involvement, but the patient's motivation to use PROMs needs to be taken into consideration. Time and routines influence the use of PROMs and these factors depend on organizational and managerial levels. Using PROMs is believed to help develop the physiotherapy profession. Prerequisites for future use, such as digitalization and increased competence, need to be fulfilled. Future studies should focus on increasing physiotherapists' knowledge about relevant PROMs, and study implementation in clinical practice, thereby improving the physiotherapy profession's quality of care., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Psychological factors may impact recovery in patients undergoing treatment for shoulder complaints. The aim of this review is to systematically analyse the evidence for the effect of modifiable psychological factors (MPF) on outcome, for patients with musculoskeletal shoulder disorders undergoing conservative or surgical treatment. MPF refers to factors that may change with intervention., Methods: This is a systematic literature review. Five databases searched (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase and PsycInfo), for longitudinal studies investigating the influence of MPF on prognosis of patients with shoulder disorders, all diagnoses, undergoing clinical interventions (conservative or surgical). Level of evidence was determined using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology. Moderate and high quality evidence was included. We extracted all MPF, categorized constructs into the following domains: beliefs (self-efficacy, expectation of recovery), coping (catastrophizing, avoidant coping), and affect (depression, anxiety). We evaluated constructs for its predictive value of at least one outcome. Outcomes were informed by this review. Evidence was classified into three categories: evidence for, inconclusive evidence, and evidence against., Results: Of 1170 references, 40 distinct publications based on 35 datasets were included (intervention type: 20 surgical; 20 conservative). Overall, 22 studies (20 cohort studies and 2 RCTs) were classified as high quality and 18 studies (16 cohort studies, 2 RCTs) were classified as moderate quality. Outcomes reported included pain, disability/function, perceived recovery, physical and mental health, and work status. Based on the review, of the psychological constructs explored, these data would suggest that expectation of recovery, catastrophizing, avoidant coping, depression, and anxiety may predict outcome for patients managed surgically. In patients undergoing conservative intervention the evidence was either against (catastrophizing, depression, anxiety) or inconclusive (self-efficacy, expectation of recovery, avoidant coping) for the predictive value of psychological factors on outcome., Conclusions: Five constructs were predictive of outcome for surgically managed patients. This suggests that implementing the biopsychosocial approach (i.e., preoperative screening, intervention by a trained clinician) may be advantageous for patients recommended for shoulder surgery,,. The same is not indicated for conservatively managed patients as no conclusive association of MPF with outcomes was noted. The importance of other MPF on outcome requires further investigation.

Background: The Single Leg Squat test (SLS) is a common tool used in clinical examination to set and evaluate rehabilitation goals, but there is not one established SLS test used in the clinic. Based on previous scientific findings on the reliability of the SLS test and with a methodological rigorous setup, the aim of the present study was to investigate the intra- and interrater reliability of a standardised multi-segmental SLS test., Methods: We performed a study of measurement properties to investigate the intra- and interrater reliability of a standardised multi-segmental SLS test including the assessment of the foot, knee, pelvis, and trunk. Novice and experienced physiotherapists rated 65 video recorded SLS tests from 34 test persons. We followed the Quality Appraisal for Reliability Studies checklist., Results: Regardless of the raters experience, the interrater reliability varied between "moderate" for the knee variable (ĸ = 0.41, 95% CI 0.10-0.72) and "almost perfect" for the foot (ĸ = 1.00, 95% CI 1.00-1.00). The intrarater reliability varied between "slight" (pelvic variable; ĸ = 0.17, 95% CI -0.22-0.55) to "almost perfect" (foot variable; ĸ = 1.00, 95% CI 1.00-1.00; trunk variable; ĸ = 0.82, 95% CI 0.66-0.97). A generalised kappa coefficient including the values from all raters and segments reached "moderate" interrater reliability (ĸ = 0.52, 95% CI 0.43-0.61), the corresponding value for the intrarater reliability reached "almost perfect" (ĸ = 0.82, 95% CI 0.77-0.86)., Conclusions: The present study shows a "moderate" interrater reliability and an "almost perfect" intrarater reliability for the variable all segments regardless of the raters experience. Thus, we conclude that the proposed standardised multi-segmental SLS test is reliable enough to be used in an active population.

Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) affects mainly elderly patients. To this day, it is unclear whether comorbidities influence treatment success. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of comorbidities on the treatment effectiveness in symptomatic LSS., Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis and reviewed prospective or retrospective studies from Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and CINAHL from inception to May 2020, including adult patients with LSS undergoing surgical or conservative treatment. Main outcomes were satisfaction, functional and symptoms improvement, and adverse events (AE). Proportions of outcomes within two subgroups of a comorbidity were compared with risk ratio (RR) as summary measure. Availability of ≥3 studies for the same subgroup and outcome was required for meta-analysis., Results: Of 72 publications, 51 studies, mostly assessing surgery, there was no evidence reported that patients with comorbidities were less satisfied compared to patients without comorbidities (RR 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.45, I 2 94%), but they had an increased risk for AE (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.01, I 2 72%). A limited number of studies found no influence of comorbidities on functional and symptoms improvement. Older age did not affect satisfaction, symptoms and functional improvement, and AE (age >80 years RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.52, I 2 60%). Diabetes was associated with more AE (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.47, I 2 58%)., Conclusion: In patients with LSS and comorbidities (in particular diabetes), a higher risk for AE should be considered in the treatment decision. Older age alone was not associated with an increased risk for AE, less functional and symptoms improvement, and less treatment satisfaction., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of North American Spine Society.)

Background: Further clinical data how low-back pain (LBP) symptoms and signs manifests in physiotherapy clinical reasoning and treatment decision-making is needed., Objective: The aim was to explore and describe how symptoms and signs portrayed in three case descriptions of LBP influences physiotherapy treatment decision-making., Design: This was an exploratory interview study using inductive content analysis., Method: Fifteen semi-structured individual interviews were used to collect data of physiotherapists' treatment decision-making regrading three diverse LBP case descriptions. The participants were men, women, experienced and novice, working in primary healthcare settings in one sparsely populated region and in one larger city in Sweden., Findings: Two overarching themes were identified influencing decision-making for the treatment of LBP:1) Explicit assessment features distinguish treatment approaches; with categories describing how symptoms and signs were used to target treatment (nature of pain induce reflections on plausible cause; narrative details trigger attention and establishes knowledge-enhancing foci; pain-movement-relationship is essential; diverse emphasis of pain modulation and targeted treatment approaches): and 2) Preconceived notion of treatment, with categories describing personal treatment rationales, unrelated to the presented symptoms and signs (passive treatment avoidance and motor control exercise ambiguity)., Conclusion: This study identifies how assessment details lead to decisions on diverse treatment approaches for LBP, but also that treatment decisions can be based on preconceived beliefs unrelated to the clinical presentation. The results underpin the mix of knowledge sources that clinicians need to balance and the necessity of self-awareness of preconceptions for informed and meaningful clinical decision-making., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Low back pain is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Exercise therapy is widely recommended to treat persistent non-specific low back pain. While evidence suggests exercise is, on average, moderately effective, there remains uncertainty about which individuals might benefit the most from exercise., Methods: In parallel with a Cochrane review update, we requested individual participant data (IPD) from high-quality randomised clinical trials of adults with our two primary outcomes of interest, pain and functional limitations, and calculated global recovery. We compiled a master data set including baseline participant characteristics, exercise and comparison characteristics, and outcomes at short-term, moderate-term and long-term follow-up. We conducted descriptive analyses and one-stage IPD meta-analysis using multilevel mixed-effects regression of the overall treatment effect and prespecified potential treatment effect modifiers., Results: We received IPD for 27 trials (3514 participants). For studies included in this analysis, compared with no treatment/usual care, exercise therapy on average reduced pain (mean effect/100 (95% CI) -10.7 (-14.1 to -7.4)), a result compatible with a clinically important 20% smallest worthwhile effect. Exercise therapy reduced functional limitations with a clinically important 23% improvement (mean effect/100 (95% CI) -10.2 (-13.2 to -7.3)) at short-term follow-up. Not having heavy physical demands at work and medication use for low back pain were potential treatment effect modifiers-these were associated with superior exercise outcomes relative to non-exercise comparisons. Lower body mass index was also associated with better outcomes in exercise compared with no treatment/usual care. This study was limited by inconsistent availability and measurement of participant characteristics., Conclusions: This study provides potentially useful information to help treat patients and design future studies of exercise interventions that are better matched to specific subgroups. PROTOCOL PUBLICATION: https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-64., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MvT and the members of the Chronic LBP IPD Meta-analysis Group are investigators of the individual trials included in the IPD data set., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: There is a wide selection of instruments and questionnaires available, but many are time consuming in their administration, for patients, practitioners and researchers alike. The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) is a short, self-administrated, multidimensional instrument translated into several languages that covers five domains recommended in the assessment of outcome in patients with low-back pain. The purpose of this study was to cross-culturally adapt the COMI from English to Swedish and to test the face and construct validity and reproducibility of its results in patients with low-back pain., Methods: Participants (n = 102) were included from primary and secondary care. The participants reported moderate pain and disability levels. All participants filled in the COMI, the Oswestry Disability Index and the EQ5D at baseline. Forty-nine filled in the COMI again after 7 days for the reproducibility part of the study., Results: The instrument was successfully forward and back-translated. In the validation process, there were low floor/ceiling effects, with the exception of the symptom-specific well-being (floor) and work disability (ceiling) items. The specific COMI domains and whole score correlated significantly with the chosen reference scale scores to the hypothesised extent (Rho 0.30-0.60 and > 0.60 respectively). COMI reached ICC 0.63 (95% CI 0.42-0.77) in the reproducibility test and the separate items, ICC 0.41-0.78., Conclusions: The Swedish COMI shows acceptable psychometric properties and is thus suitable to use as a short instrument for measuring important domains in patients with low-back pain. A future study should investigate the instrument's sensitivity to measure change after treatment. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Background: The Single leg squat (SLS) is a movement screening test widely used in clinical settings. The SLS is highly subjective in its nature. Objective measures, such as 3D-motion analyses, are seldom used in daily clinical work. An interactive, Kinect-based 3D-movement analysis system, the Qinematic™, is proposed to be easily used in clinical settings to assess the SLS. The aim of this study was to establish the test-retest reliability and construct validity of Qinematic™ for assessing the SLS. A further aim was to identify angles of medial knee displacement, to summarise the discriminative ability of the SLS measured by Qinematic™., Methods: We performed a test-retest reliability study ( n  = 37) of the SLS using Qinematic™ and a construct validity study, in which Qinematic™ data were compared with visual assessment of video-recorded SLS., Results: Three variables (left knee down, right knee up and down) reached "substantial reliability" (ICC = 0.64-0.69). One variable, "left knee up", showed a significant difference between the two test occasions (T1-6.34°, T2 0.66°, p  = 0.013, ICC = 0.50), and "poor absolute reliability" was seen for all variables (SEM = 9.04-10.66, SDC = 25.06-29.55). A moderate agreement between the visual assessment and Qinematic™ data for various knee angles was shown (Kappa = 0.45-0.58). The best discriminative ability of the SLS was found at a knee angle of 6° (AUC = 0.82, sensitivity = 0.86, specificity = 0.78, PPV = 0.58, NPV = 0.94)., Conclusions: Qinematic™ shows a poor absolute reliability, and a substantial relative reliability, in measuring a SLS at the way down. This indicates that Qinematic™ should not be recommended for the use on an individual level, but it can possibly be used on a group level. The merged results of the construct validity study indicate that Qinematic™ at 6° of medial displacement can identify subjects with a knee over foot position. In summary, the use of the Qinematic™ net trajectory angle, which estimates the "line of best fit" cannot be recommended to assess a knee medial to foot position and should be reconsidered., Competing Interests: Competing interestsThe authors declare that they are not system developers of the Qinematic™ system nor affiliated to the company, and there is no further competing interest whatsoever. The company provided permission to reprint the “biomechanical report” in Additional file 1., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

Background: Very little evidence is available on the prevalence of serious spinal pathologies and the diagnostic accuracy of red flags in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED). This systematic review aims to investigate the prevalence of serious spinal pathologies and the diagnostic accuracy of red flags in patients presenting with low back pain to the ED., Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS from inception to January 2019. Two reviewers independently reviewed the references and evaluated methodological quality., Results: We analyzed 22 studies with a total of 41,320 patients. The prevalence of any requiring immediate/urgent treatment was 2.5%-5.1% in prospective and 0.7%-7.4% in retrospective studies (0.0%-7.2% for vertebral fractures, 0.0%-2.1% for spinal cancer, 0.0%-1.9% for infectious disorders, 0.1%-1.9% for pathologies with spinal cord/cauda equina compression, 0.0%-0.9% for vascular pathologies). Examples of red flags which increased the likelihood for a serious condition were suspicion or history of cancer (spinal cancer); intravenous drug use, indwelling vascular catheter, and other infection site (epidural abscess)., Conclusion: We found a higher prevalence of serious spinal pathologies in the ED compared to the reported prevalence in primary care settings. As the diagnostic accuracy of most red flags was reported only by a single study, further validation in high-quality prospective studies is needed., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives : Health care is undergoing changes and this requires the participation and leadership of all health-care professions. While numerous studies have explored leadership competence among physicians and nurses, the physiotherapy profession has received but limited attention. The aim of this study was to explore how leadership manifests in the patient-therapist interaction among physiotherapists in primary health care and how the physiotherapists themselves relate their perception of leadership to their clinical practice. Methods : A qualitative study with semi-structured interviews was conducted with a purposive sample of 10 physiotherapists working in primary health care. The interviews were analyzed using inductive qualitative content analysis. Results : Five themes were identified related to how leadership manifests in the patient-therapist interaction: (1) establishing resonant relationships; (2) engaging patients to build ownership; (3) drawing on authority; (4) building on professionalism; and (5) relating physiotherapists clinical practice to leadership. Conclusion : This study describes how leadership manifests in the patient-physiotherapist interaction. The findings can be used to empower physiotherapists in their clinical leadership and to give them confidence in taking on formal leadership roles, thus becoming active participants in improving health care. Future studies are needed to explore other aspects of leadership used in physiotherapy clinical practice.

Low back pain (LBP) varies over time. Consumers, clinicians, and researchers use various terms to describe LBP fluctuations, such as episodes, recurrences and flares. Although "flare" is use commonly, there is no consensus on how it is defined. This study aimed to obtain consensus for a LBP flare definition using a mixed-method approach. Step 1 involved the derivation of a preliminary candidate flare definition based on thematic analysis of views of 130 consumers in consultation with an expert consumer writer. In step 2, a workshop was conducted to incorporate perspectives of 19 LBP experts into the preliminary flare definition, which resulted in 2 alternative LBP flare definitions. Step 3 refined the definition using a 2-round Delphi consensus with 50 experts in musculoskeletal conditions. The definition favored by experts was further tested with 16 individuals with LBP in step 4, using the definition in three scenarios. This multiphase study produced a definition of LBP flare that distinguishes it from other LBP fluctuations, represents consumers' views, involves expert consensus, and is understandable by consumers in clinical and research contexts: "A flare-up is a worsening of your condition that lasts from hours to weeks that is difficult to tolerate and generally impacts your usual activities and/or emotions." Perspective: A multiphase process, incorporating consumers' views and expert consensus, produced a definition of LBP flare that distinguishes it from other LBP fluctuations., (Copyright © 2019 the American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: We aimed to map the physiotherapy practice in Sweden of clinical tests and patient-reported outcome measures in low-back pain (LBP), and to study advantages and barriers in using patient-reported outcome measures. Methods: An online survey was mailed to 4934 physiotherapists in primary health care in Sweden. Multiple choice questions investigated the use of clinical tests and patient-reported outcome measures in assessing patients with LBP. Open questions investigating the advantages and barriers to the use of patient-reported outcome measures were analyzed with content analysis. Results: The response rate was 25% ( n  = 1217). Clinical tests were used "always/often" by >60% of the participants, while most patient-reported outcome measures were used by <15%. Advantages in using patient-reported outcome measures were: the clinical reasoning process, to increase the quality of assessment, to get the patient's voice, education and motivation of patients, and communication with health professionals. Barriers were lack of time and knowledge, administrative aspects, the interaction between physiotherapist and patient and, the applicability and validity of the patient-reported outcome measures. Conclusion: Our findings show that physiotherapists working in primary health care use clinical testing in LBP to a great extent, while various patient-reported outcome measures are used to a low-to-very-low extent. Several barriers to the use of patient-reported outcome measures were reported such as time, knowledge, and administrative issues, while important findings on advantages were to enhance the clinical reasoning process and to educate and motivate the patient. Barriers might be changed through education or organizational change-work. To enhance the use of patient-reported outcome measures and thus person-centered care in low-back pain, recommendation, and education on various patient-reported outcome measures need to be advocated. Implications for rehabilitation To increase the effects of rehabilitation in low-back pain, yellow flags, and other factors need to be taken into the consideration in the assessment which means the use of patient-reported outcome measures in addition to clinical testing. The use of patient-reported outcome measures is an advantage in the clinical reasoning process to enhance the quality of assessment and to educate and motivate the patient. Barriers to use patient-reported outcome measures are mainly lack of time and knowledge, and administrative aspects. Through education or organizational change-work, barriers to the use of patient-reported outcome measures might be changed.

Single leg squat (SLS) is a common tool used in clinical examination to set and evaluate rehabilitation goals, but also to assess lower extremity function in active people., Objectives: To conduct a review and meta-analysis on the inter-rater and intrarater reliability of the SLS, including the lateral step-down (LSD) and forward step-down (FSD) tests., Design: Review with meta-analysis., Data Sources: CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline (OVID) and Web of Science was searched up until December 2018., Eligibility Criteria: Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were methodological studies which assessed the inter-rater and/or intrarater reliability of the SLS, FSD and LSD through observation of movement quality., Results: Thirty-one studies were included. The reliability varied largely between studies (inter-rater: kappa/intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) = 0.00-0.95; intrarater: kappa/ICC = 0.13-1.00), but most of the studies reached 'moderate' measures of agreement. The pooled results of ICC/kappa showed a 'moderate' agreement for inter-rater reliability, 0.58 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.65), and a 'substantial' agreement for intrarater reliability, 0.68 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.74). Subgroup analyses showed a higher pooled agreement for inter-rater reliability of ≤3-point rating scales while no difference was found for different numbers of segmental assessments., Conclusion: Our findings indicate that the SLS test including the FSD and LSD tests can be suitable for clinical use regardless of number of observed segments and particularly with a ≤3-point rating scale. Since most of the included studies were affected with some form of methodological bias, our findings must be interpreted with caution.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018077822., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Competing interest.

Background: It is unclear how physiotherapists match treatment to patients with low-back pain (LBP) in primary healthcare. A further exploration of physiotherapists' perspective of matching treatments to the individual patient in this setting is needed., Objective: The aim of this study was to explore and describe aspects influencing physiotherapists' clinical reasoning in the decision-making on individualized treatment of LBP in primary healthcare., Design: This was an explorative study using qualitative content analysis., Method: Fifteen semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with physiotherapists, men and women, experienced and novice, working in primary healthcare settings in one sparsely populated region and in one larger city in Sweden., Findings: Two overarching themes were identified influencing decision-making for individualized treatment of LBP: 1) Matching requires differentiation and adaptation, with categories describing specific patient characteristics, assessment findings and treatment adaptations (classification of pain and bodily findings; patient physical capacity and emotions; patient awareness and motivation; treatment combinations and atypical treatment rationales): and 2) The tension between trust and barriers; with categories describing aspects of physiotherapists' convictions, constraints and working environment (confidence in treatments and oneself; physiotherapists' terms overrule patients' preferences; personal constraints and workplace approach and priorities)., Conclusion: This study describes aspects of the patients, the physiotherapists and their workplaces that influence decisions for individualized treatment of LBP. The findings underpin the need for clinician self-reflection, initiatives for skilled clinical competence and the weight clinician observations carry on the complex treatment selection process which need to be appreciated when implementing evidence-based recommendations in clinical practice., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Comparisons across studies of generalized joint hypermobility are often difficult since there are several classification methods and methodological differences in the performance exist. The Beighton score is most commonly used and has been tested for inter- and intra-rater reliability. The Contompasis score and the Hospital del Mar criteria have not yet been evaluated for reliability. The aim of this study was to investigate the inter- and intra-rater reliability for measurements of range of motion in joints included in these three hypermobility assessment methods using a structured protocol., Methods: The study was planned in accordance with guidelines for reporting reliability studies. Healthy adults were consecutively recruited (49 for inter- and 29 for intra-rater assessments). Intra-class correlations, two-way random effects model, (ICC 2.1) with 95% confidence intervals, standard error of measurement, percentage of agreement, Cohen's Kappa (κ) and prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa were calculated for single-joint measured in degrees and for total scores., Results: The inter- and intra-rater reliability in total scores were ICC 2.1: 0.72-0.82 and 0.76-0.86 and for single-joint measurements in degrees 0.44-0.91 and 0.44-0.90, respectively. The difference between ratings was within 5 degrees in all but one joint. Standard error of measurement ranged from 1.0 to 6.9 degrees. The inter- and intra-rater reliability for prevalence of positive hypermobility findings the Cohen's κ for total scores were 0.54-0.78 and 0.27-0.78 and in single joints 0.21-1.00 and 0.19-1.00, respectively. The prevalence- and bias adjusted Cohen's κ, increased all but two values., Conclusions: Following a structured protocol, the inter- and intra-rater reliability was good-to-excellent for total scores and in all but two single joints, measured in degrees. The inter- and intra-rater reliability for prevalence of positive hypermobility findings was fair-to-almost perfect for total scores and slight-to-almost-perfect in single joints. By using a structured protocol, we attempted to standardize the assessment of range of motion in clinical and in research settings. This standardization could be helpful in the first part of the process of standardizing the tests thus avoiding that assessment of GJH is based on chance.

Neck pain is common and often becomes chronic. Various clinical tests of the cervical spine are used to direct and evaluate treatment. This systematic review aimed to identify studies examining the intra- and/or interrater reliability of tests used in clinical examination of patients with neck pain. A database search up to April 2016 was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, and AMED. The Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies Checklist (QAREL) was used to assess risk of bias. Eleven studies were included, comprising tests of active and passive movement and pain evaluating participants with ongoing neck pain. One study was assessed with a low risk of bias, three with medium risk, while the rest were assessed with high risk of bias. The results showed differing reliabilities for the included tests ranging from poor to almost perfect. In conclusion, active movement and pain for pain or mobility overall presented acceptable to very good reliability (Kappa >0.40); while passive intervertebral tests had lower Kappa values, suggesting poor reliability. It may be a coincidence that the studies indicating very good reliability tended to be of higher quality (low to moderate risk of bias), while studies finding poor reliability tended to be of lower quality (high risk of bias). Regardless, the current recommendation from this review would suggest the clinical use of tests with acceptable reliability and avoiding the use of tests that have been shown to not be reliable. Finally, it is critical that all future reliability studies are of higher quality with low risk of bias.

Background: Clinical examinations are subjective and often show a low validity and reliability. Objective and highly reliable quantitative assessments are available in laboratory settings using 3D motion analysis, but these systems are too expensive to use for simple clinical examinations. Qinematic™ is an interactive movement analyses system based on the Kinect camera and is an easy-to-use clinical measurement system for assessing posture, balance and side-bending. The aim of the study was to test the test-retest the reliability and construct validity of Qinematic™ in a healthy population, and to calculate the minimal clinical differences for the variables of interest. A further aim was to identify the discriminative validity of Qinematic™ in people with low-back pain (LBP)., Methods: We performed a test-retest reliability study (n = 37) with around 1 week between the occasions, a construct validity study (n = 30) in which Qinematic™ was tested against a 3D motion capture system, and a discriminative validity study, in which a group of people with LBP (n = 20) was compared to healthy controls (n = 17). We tested a large range of psychometric properties of 18 variables in three sections: posture (head and pelvic position, weight distribution), balance (sway area and velocity in single- and double-leg stance), and side-bending., Results: The majority of the variables in the posture and balance sections, showed poor/fair reliability (ICC < 0.4) and poor/fair validity (Spearman <0.4), with significant differences between occasions, between Qinematic™ and the 3D-motion capture system. In the clinical study, Qinematic™ did not differ between people with LPB and healthy for these variables. For one variable, side-bending to the left, there was excellent reliability (ICC =0.898), excellent validity (r = 0.943), and Qinematic™ could differentiate between LPB and healthy individuals (p = 0.012)., Conclusion: This paper shows that a novel software program (Qinematic™) based on the Kinect camera for measuring balance, posture and side-bending has poor psychometric properties, indicating that the variables on balance and posture should not be used for monitoring individual changes over time or in research. Future research on the dynamic tasks of Qinematic™ is warranted.

The aim of this study was to determine whether job strain, i.e. a combination of job demands and decision latitude (job control), and sleep disturbances among persons with occasional low-back pain are prognostic factors for developing troublesome low-back pain; and to determine whether sleep disturbances modify the potential association between job strain and troublesome low-back pain. A population-based cohort from the Stockholm Public Health Cohort surveys in 2006 and 2010 (= 25,167) included individuals with occasional low-back pain at baseline 2006 (= 6,413). Through logistic regression analyses, potential prognostic effects of job strain and sleep disturbances were studied. Stratified analyses were performed to assess modification of sleep disturbances on the potential association between job strain and troublesome low-back pain. Those exposed to job strain; active job (odds ratio (OR) 1.3, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.1-1.6), or high strain (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.9-2.4) and those exposed to severe sleep disturbances (OR 3.0, 95% CI 2.3-4.0), but not those exposed to passive jobs (OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.9-1.4) had higher odds of developing troublesome low-back pain. Sleep disturbances did not modify the association between job strain and troublesome low-back pain. These findings indicate that active job, high job strain and sleep disturbances are prognostic factors for troublesome low-back pain. The odds of developing troublesome low-back pain due to job strain were not modified by sleep disturbance.

This study evaluated inter- and intra-observer reliability and discriminative validity of three movement control tests: 1) standing knee-lift test; 2) static lunge test; and 3) dynamic lunge test. Thirty-eight subjects, 21 with low-back pain and 17 healthy, were video-recorded while performing the tests. Four physical therapists scored the tests according to a standardized protocol and calculated a composite score for each test based on the number of incorrect test components. Inter-observer reliability for the composite scores ranged between 0.68 and 0.80 (ICC 2,k) and intra-observer reliability between 0.54 and0.82 (ICC 2,1). The separate test components ranged between 0.32 and 0.91 (κ free ) for inter-observer reliability and 0.42 and1.00 for intra-observer reliability. Test components showing the highest values were: back extension; arm lowering; and shoulders moving backwards. Components hip hitch, trunk lateral flexion, knee not lifted straight up and hips moving backwards did not reach accepted thresholds. Discriminative validity ranged between 0.47 and 0.56 (AUC). As our results showed an overall good agreement for the composite, scores and for the majority of the included test components the tests can be considered reliable enough. As the tests' discriminative ability was close to "none", they should, however, not be used for diagnostic purposes but should be further evaluated toward predicted validity.

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis., Objective: To determine the efficacy of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on pain reduction, overall improvement, and reported adverse effects in people with sciatica., Summary of Background Data: NSAIDs are one of the most frequently prescribed drugs for sciatica., Methods: We updated a 2008 Cochrane Review through June 2015. Randomized controlled trials that compared NSAIDs with placebo, with other NSAIDs, or with other medication were included. Outcomes included pain using mean difference (MD, 95% confidence intervals [95% CI]). For global improvement and adverse effects risk ratios (RR, 95% CI) were used. We assessed level of evidence using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach., Results: Ten trials were included (N = 1651). Nine out of 10 trials were assessed at high risk of bias. For pain reduction (visual analog scale, 0 to 100) NSAIDs were no more effective than placebo (MD -4.56, 95% CI -11.11 to 1.99, quality of evidence: very low). For global improvement NSAIDs were more effective than placebo (RR 1.14 [95% CI 1.03 to 1.27], low quality of evidence). One trial reported the effect of NSAIDs on disability with very low-quality evidence that NSAIDs are no more effective than placebo. There was low-quality evidence that the risk for adverse effects is higher for NSAID than placebo (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.93)., Conclusion: Our findings show very low-quality evidence that the efficacy of NSAIDs for pain reduction is comparable with that of placebo, low-quality evidence that NSAIDs is better than placebo for global improvement and low-quality evidence for higher risk of adverse effects using NSAIDs compared with placebo. The findings must be interpreted with caution, due to small study samples, inconsistent results, and a high risk of bias in the included trials., Level of Evidence: 1.

Purpose: Patient satisfaction is an outcome measure for low-back pain (LBP) interventions which allows clinicians to design patient-oriented treatments. The Treatment Outcome Satisfaction Questionnaire (TOSQ) is an English instrument constructed for such evaluations, and no equivalent instruments exist for the Swedish population. This study, therefore, translated TOSQ into Swedish and assessed the translated version's psychometric properties for patients with LBP., Methods: A cross-cultural adaptation was used to translate TOSQ into Swedish. Subsequently, data from 131 patients with LBP whom undergone physiotherapy were consecutively aggregated and analyzed in a Rasch rating scale model with person measures standardized at 0-100 logits to evaluate the translated scale's validity. Finally, test-retest reliability of the Swedish version of TOSQ (TOSQ-S) was quantified via an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the standard error of measurement (SEM) in 41 patients., Results: TOSQ was successfully translated into Swedish; however, while some Rasch model indices supported the translated scale's unidimensionality, one out of eight items and 12 out of 131 subjects misfitted the model. Scale optimization resulted in a 6-item subconfiguration, for which all items fitted the model, person misfits were reduced to ten subjects, and the person separation index increased from 1.86 to 2.04. ICC and SEM estimates suggested acceptable reliability for the six-item TOSQ-S at 0.66 and 6.6 logits, respectively., Conclusions: A six-item TOSQ-S configuration showed acceptable psychometric properties and is suitable for measuring treatment outcome satisfaction of physiotherapy in patients with LBP.

Purpose: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) are used to measure treatment efficacy in clinical trials. The impact of the choice of a PROM and the cut-off values for 'meaningful important differences' (MID) on the study results in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is unclear., Objective: The objective is to study the consequences of applying different PROMs and values for MID for pain and disability on the proportions of patients with improvement., Design: Prospective multi-center cohort study., Methods: Proportions of patients with improvement using established MID cut-off values were calculated and compared for PROMs for pain and disability., Results: 466 patients with LSS completed a baseline and 6-month follow-up assessment and were analyzed. Treatment modalities included surgery (65 %), epidural steroid injections (15 %), or conservative care (20 %). The prevalence of patients fulfilling the criteria for MID ranged from 40 to 70 % across all outcome measures and cut-offs. The agreement of the spinal stenosis outcome measure (SSM) symptom subscale with other pain scales, and the SSM function subscale with other function scales was fair to moderate (Cohen's κ value between 0.24 and 0.5). Disagreement in the assessment of MID (MID reported by patients in one scale but not the other) was found in at least one-third of the patients., Conclusion: The MID in outcome scores for this population varied from 40 to 70 %, depending on the measure or cut-off score used. Further, the disagreement between domain specific measures indicates that differences between studies may be also related to the choice of an outcome measures. An international consensus on the use and reporting of outcome measures in studies on lumbar spinal stenosis is needed.

Background: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are one of the most frequently prescribed drugs for the treatment of sciatica. A previous Cochrane review on the efficacy of NSAIDs summarised findings for acute and chronic low back pain (LBP) and sciatica. This is an update of the original review (2008) focusing on people suffering from sciatica., Objectives: To determine the efficacy of NSAIDs in pain reduction, overall improvement, and reported side effects in people with sciatica., Search Methods: We performed electronic searches up to 24 June 2015 in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and two trials registers. We searched reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews on the topics for additional trials., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (double-blind, single-blind, and open-label) that assessed the efficacy of NSAIDs in sciatica. We included all trials that compared NSAIDs to placebo, to other NSAIDs, or to other medication. Additional interventions were allowed if there was a clear contrast for the treatment with NSAIDs in the trial., Data Collection and Analysis: Three review authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted the data. Where feasible we calculated pooled results using Review Manager 5.3. We reported pain relief outcomes using mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). We used risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI to report global improvement of treatment, adverse effects, and additional medication. We performed a meta-analysis if possible. We assessed level of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used standard methodological procedures recommended by The Cochrane Collaboration., Main Results: We included 10 trials reported in 9 publications (N = 1651). Only one trial out of 10 was assessed at low risk of bias. Five trials used the currently recommended daily dose for the drug, and two trials used lower daily doses available over the counter. Three trials investigated NSAIDs no longer approved for human use. The follow-up duration was short in all studies but one.Three trials (n = 918) compared the effects of NSAIDs to those of placebo on pain reduction. The pooled mean difference showed comparable pain reduction (visual analogue scale, 0 to 100) in the NSAIDs and placebo groups (MD -4.56, 95% CI -11.11 to 1.99). Heterogeneity was high (I 2 = 82%), and the quality of the evidence was very low. When we excluded one trial with a short follow-up of eight hours, the mean difference further decreased (MD -0.09, 95% CI -9.89 to 9.71). Three trials (n = 753) compared NSAIDs to placebo regarding global improvement. We found low-quality evidence that NSAIDs are more effective than placebo with a risk ratio of 1.14 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.27). One trial (n = 214) studied the effect of NSAIDs on disability, finding very low-quality evidence that NSAIDs are no more effective than placebo on disability. Four trials (n = 967) comparing NSAIDs to placebo reported adverse effects, with low-quality evidence that the risk for adverse effects is higher in the NSAID group than in the placebo group (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.93). The adverse effects reported in this review are consistent with those previously reported in the literature., Authors' Conclusions: This updated systematic review including 10 trials evaluating the efficacy of NSAIDs versus placebo or other drugs in people with sciatica reports low- to very low-level evidence using the GRADE criteria. The efficacy of NSAIDs for pain reduction was not significant. NSAIDs showed a better global improvement compared to placebo. These findings must be interpreted with caution, as the level of evidence according to the GRADE classification was very low for the outcome pain reduction and low for global improvement due to small study samples, inconsistent results, imprecision, and a high risk of bias in the included trials. While the trials included in the analysis were not powered to detect potential rare side effects, we found an increased risk for side effects in the short-term NSAIDs use. As NSAIDs are frequently prescribed, the risk-benefit ratio of prescribing the drug needs to be considered.