Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy最新文献

OBJECTIVE: To estimate anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) return-to-play (RTP) factors and proportions across all National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) sports. DESIGN: Systematic review with prognosis and etiology components. LITERATURE SEARCH: Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases using terms related to RTP, ACLR, and NCAA for articles published up to June 30, 2023. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Articles were included if RTP proportions or factors affecting RTP were reported and if the study population included NCAA collegiate athletes recovering from an ACLR. DATA SYNTHESIS: The proportion represents the total number of athletes who returned to play after ACLR over the total number of ACLR athletes from each cohort. The cumulative proportion represents the aggregated total from each included study. When eligibility information was available (ie, athletes in their final year of eligibility), RTP proportions were adjusted. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the study quality and scored by 2 raters. RESULTS: Nine studies were included. RTP criteria varied across the studies. Proportions of RTP ranged from 69% to 92%, with a cumulative RTP proportion after ACLR of 84% (628/745). The primary factors associated with the proportion of RTP were scholarship status, competitive eligibility remaining, depth chart position, and surgical graft type. CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative proportion of RTP was 84% and was associated with patient-specific and operative factors. Psychological and functional factors were not routinely reported, and rehabilitation protocols were unknown. Data were not explicitly available for any athletes outside of Division I. The criteria for RTP after ACLR varied. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(10):1-9. Epub 10 September 2024. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2024.12483.

SYNOPSIS: This Viewpoint provides practical guidance for early-career musculoskeletal clinicians who are navigating the complexities of clinical practice. Key themes are embracing uncertainty, seeing and treating the whole person, avoiding judgemental mindsets, embracing shared decision-making, focusing on building strong therapeutic relationships and finding a work-related niche that resonates with one's own passions and strengths. We encourage clinicians to consume information carefully in an era of social media health influencers, and suggest ways of accurately identifying reliable sources of information. We do not presume to inoculate against all challenges that clinicians will encounter. Instead, we strive to help early-career clinicians navigate potential friction points in clinic and research based on our collective experience. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(10):621-624. Epub 17 September 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12676.

Correction to an article that was published in the March 2024 issue of JOSPT: Piussi R, Simonson R, Zsidai B, Grassi A, Karlsson J, Della Villa F, Samuelsson K, Senorski EH. Better Safe Than Sorry? A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis on Time to Return to Sport After ACL Reconstruction as a Risk Factor for Second ACL Injury. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(10):679. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.54.10.679.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the Fragility Index of hamstring injury risk factors, defined as the minimum number of participants who would need to change classification to make a hamstring injury risk factor statistically nonsignificant. DESIGN: Retrospective secondary data analysis. METHODS: Studies that investigated 1 or more risk factors for hamstring injury, and presented sufficient data to develop a 2 × 2 contingency table were included. A systematic literature search and reference screening of a recent hamstring injury systematic review were conducted to identify 78 articles. Relative risk and 95% confidence intervals were determined and then systematically recalculated by removing 1 observation from the high-risk injury count and adding it to the high-risk noninjury count. The Fragility Index for a risk factor was the number of observations required to be moved between groups until the relative risk was no longer significant. RESULTS: The median Fragility Index of all hamstring injury risk factors was 3 (Q1-Q3 = 2-6). The Fragility Index for nonmodifiable risk factors was 3 (Q1-Q3 = 2-6) and 3 (Q1-Q3 = 2-5) for modifiable risk factors. Over 35% of all included hamstring injury risk factors had a Fragility Index of ≤2. CONCLUSION: Most statistically significant hamstring injury risk factors are fragile associations. The interpretation of significant hamstring injury risk factors should consider a range of statistical metrics, and while the Fragility Index should never be considered in isolation, it is an intuitive measure to help assess the robustness of findings. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(10):672-678. Epub 4 September 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12300.

Distal radius fracture (DRF) is arguably the most common upper extremity fracture resulting from a fall accident. These clinical practice guidelines (CPG) were developed to guide all aspects of the management of DRF by physical therapists and other rehabilitation practitioners, such as certified hand therapists. This CPG employed a systematic review methodology to locate, appraise, and synthesize contemporary evidence while developing practice recommendations for determining the prognosis of outcomes, examination, and interventions while managing individuals with DRF. The quality of the primary studies found in the literature search was appraised using standardized tools. The strength of the available evidence for a particular practice domain (e.g., prognosis or intervention) was graded as strong, moderate, weak, or conflicting, where such gradings guided the level of obligation for each practice recommendation. Lastly, the CPG also provided the gaps in the evidence pool for the rehabilitation of DRF that future research efforts can address. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(9):CPG1-CPG78. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.0301.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate what concerns people with acute low back pain (LBP) and explore whether demographic and clinical factors were associated with having concerns about LBP. DESIGN: Mixed-methods study. METHODS: We included participants aged ≥18 years with acute LBP (LBP≤6 weeks). We collected demographic and clinical characteristics via an online survey and asked one open-ended question to elicit participants' concerns about their LBP. We investigated concerns about LBP using inductive content analysis. Using multivariable logistic regression, we explored associations between demographic and clinical characteristics and having concerns about LBP. RESULTS: We included 2025 participants, a majority of whom (n = 1200, 59.3%) reported having at least 1 concern about their LBP. There were 34 unique concerns, which mapped to 5 themes: causes of LBP (n = 393, 19.4%), future consequences of LBP (n = 390, 19.3%), psychosocial consequences of LBP (n = 287, 14.2%), physical consequences of LBP (n = 210, 10.4%), and health consequences of LBP (n = 84, 4.2%). Demographic and clinical characteristics were associated with having concerns about LBP: participants with university education, having previously received advice for LBP, with higher LBP intensity, interference, and higher anxiety symptoms were more likely to have concerns about their LBP. CONCLUSION: Most people with acute LBP had at least 1 concern about their LBP, more commonly centered around the causes of and the future consequences of LBP. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(9):1-9. Epub 7 August 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12571.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of exercise interventions with differing frequency, intensity, type, and time (FITT) on shoulder pain and disability in people with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain (RCRSP). DESIGN: Intervention systematic review with meta-analyses. LITERATURE SEARCH: Electronic searches were conducted up to May 2023. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of exercise interventions differing in prescription according to the FITT principle, in people with RCRSP. DATA SYNTHESIS: Separate meta-analyses comparing exercise type (specific versus nonspecific exercise) and intensity (high versus low) were conducted. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Twenty-two RCTs (n = 1281) were included. There was moderate-certainty evidence that motor control exercise programs, when compared to nonspecific exercise programs, significantly reduced disability in the short (SMD: -0.29; 95% CI: -0.51, -0.07; n = 323; 7 RCTs) and medium terms (SMD: -0.33; 95% CI: -0.57, -0.09; n = 286; 5 RCTs), but not pain in the short term (SMD: -0.19; 95% CI: -0.41, 0.03; n = 323; 7 RCTs). Uncertainties remained regarding other exercise types (eccentric and scapula-focused exercise programs) versus nonspecific exercise programs, and exercise intensity due to low- to very low-certainty evidence. No trials were identified that compared different frequencies or times. CONCLUSION: For adults with RCRSP, motor control exercise programs were probably slightly superior to nonspecific exercise programs. However, it is unclear if the effects were due to motor control exercise or to other program characteristics such as progression and tailoring. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(8):499-512. Epub 7 June 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12453.

OBJECTIVE: Can physical therapists who are treating patients with patellofemoral pain (PFP) predict the outcome of a 12-week exercise intervention based on initial assessment, and what are the physical therapists' reasons for prediction? DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a randomized trial. METHODS: After the initial assessment, physical therapists were asked to predict the prognosis of 200 patients with PFP who were allocated to 12 weeks of quadriceps exercises (QEs) or hip exercises (HEs) on a 1-to-10 Likert scale, and to describe their reasoning for the prediction score. OUTCOMES: measures were changes from baseline to weeks 12 and 26 on the Anterior Knee Pain Scale (range 0-100) and a transition questionnaire (TransQ). Linear mixed-effects models were used to assess the prediction. Secondly, we used a qualitative approach to summarize the physical therapists' reasoning (written notes) when predicting the outcome. RESULTS: There was no association between physical therapists' prognosis and changes in Anterior Knee Pain Scale for QE or HE at weeks 12 and 26 (slopes: -0.14 to -0.51 with wide 95% confidence intervals). There was no association between physical therapists' assessment of prognosis using TransQ for QE or HE at weeks 12 and 26 (odds ratio: 0.99 to 1.17 with wide 95% confidence intervals). CONCLUSION: Physical therapists' prognosis based on initial assessment was not associated with outcomes after 12 weeks of either quadriceps or hip exercise therapy among patients with PFP. Physical therapists' prognoses were not useful as a source of information and to identify PFP patients with poor or good projected outcomes. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(8):541-550. Epub 6 June 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12258.

This infographic accompanies the editorial which critically evaluates how hip-related pain is currently managed, highlighting the limitations of traditional biomedical interventions alone in restoring optimal function and well-being. Psychological factors are key determinants of outcomes after surgical and nonsurgical treatment. We highlight the need for a holistic, patient-centered approach in evaluating and treating hip-related pain. Shifting to a holistic, patient-centered approach can improve treatment outcomes and reduce patient suffering. We guide readers to the impact of psychological factors on treatment outcomes, provide clinical considerations for how clinicians might approach psychologically informed practice, and outline future research directions. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(8):573. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.9003.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate analgesic use in a cohort of Danish youth elite athletes and compare weekly analgesic use over 36 weeks to student controls. We also investigated and compared reasons for analgesic use and types of analgesics used. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: Six hundred ninety youth elite athletes (44% females) and 505 student controls (59% females) (aged 15-20 years) provided weekly reports on analgesic use over 36 weeks. We asked about the number of days with analgesic use, reasons for use, and types of analgesics used. Prevalence and frequency of analgesic use was compared between youth elite athletes and student controls using mixed-effects logistic regression and mixed-effects Poisson regression models. Reasons for and types of analgesics used were compared between groups using chi-square tests. Subgroup analyses were performed, stratified by sex. RESULTS: Overall, athletes had lower odds of analgesic use (odds ratio = 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.95) compared with student controls. The overall usage rate was similar between the groups (incidence rate ratio = 1.04; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.11). Subgroup analyses suggested no statistically significant differences in the odds of analgesic use. Significantly more athletes reported using analgesics to prevent or treat pain or injury in relation to sports participation and to use topical gels compared with student controls. CONCLUSION: Participating in youth elite sports was associated with lower odds of analgesic use compared to student controls, but usage rate was similar between the groups. Reasons for use and types of analgesics used differed between athletes and student controls. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(8):551-559. Epub 9 May 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12407.