首页 > 最新文献

Archives of physiotherapy最新文献

英文 中文
How to objectively assess and observe maladaptive pain behaviors in clinical rehabilitation: a systematic search and review. 临床康复中如何客观评估和观察疼痛不良行为:系统的搜索和综述。
Q1 REHABILITATION Pub Date : 2021-06-03 DOI: 10.1186/s40945-021-00109-y
Florian Naye, Chloé Cachinho, Annie-Pier Tremblay, Maude Saint-Germain Lavoie, Gabriel Lepage, Emma Larochelle, Lorijane Labrecque, Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme

Background: Cognitive-affective factors influence the perception of pain and disability. These factors can lead to pain behaviors (PB) that can persist and become maladaptive. These maladaptive PB will further increase the risk of chronicity or persistence of symptoms and disability. Thus, clinicians must be prepared to recognize maladaptive PB in a clinical context. To date, in the context of assessment in a rehabilitation setting, PB in clinical settings are poorly documented. The main objective of this study was to identify direct observation methods and critically appraise them in order to propose recommendations for practice. As a secondary objective, we explored and extracted the different observable PB that patients could exhibit and that clinicians could observe.

Methods: We conducted a comprehensive review on four databases with a generic search strategy in order to obtain the largest range of PB. For the first objective, a two-step critical appraisal used clinical criteria (from qualitative studies on barriers to implement routine measures) and psychometric criteria (from Brink and Louw critical appraisal tool) to determine which observation methods could be recommended for clinical practice. For the second objective, we extracted PB found in the literature to list potential PB that patients could exhibit, and clinicians could observe.

Results: From the 3362 retrieved studies, 47 met the inclusion criteria for the first objective. The clinical criteria allowed us to select three observation methods. After the psychometric step, two observation methods were retained and recommended for clinical practice: the Behavioral Avoidance Test-Back Pain (BAT-Back) and the Pain Behaviour Scale (PaBS). For the second objective, 107 studies met the inclusion criteria. The extraction of the PB allowed us to list a large range of PB and classify the data in 7 categories of PB.

Conclusion: Our results allowed us to recommend two observation methods for clinical practice. However, these methods have limitations and are validated only in chronic low back pain populations. With the extraction of PB presented in the literature, we contribute to better prepare clinicians to recognize PB in all patients who are experiencing pain.

背景:认知情感因素影响疼痛和残疾的感知。这些因素可以导致疼痛行为(PB),可以持续并成为适应不良。这些不适应的PB会进一步增加慢性或持续性症状和残疾的风险。因此,临床医生必须准备在临床环境中认识到不良的PB。迄今为止,在康复环境评估的背景下,临床环境中的PB记录很少。本研究的主要目的是确定直接观察方法,并对其进行批判性评价,以便为实践提出建议。作为次要目标,我们探索并提取了不同的可观察到的PB患者可以表现和临床医生可以观察到。方法:采用通用检索策略对4个数据库进行综合检索,以获得最大范围的PB。对于第一个目标,两步批判性评估使用临床标准(来自实施常规措施的障碍的定性研究)和心理测量标准(来自Brink和low critical评估工具)来确定哪些观察方法可以推荐用于临床实践。对于第二个目标,我们提取了文献中发现的PB,列出了患者可能表现出的、临床医生可以观察到的潜在PB。结果:在3362项被检索的研究中,47项符合第一个目标的纳入标准。临床标准允许我们选择三种观察方法。在心理测量步骤之后,保留并推荐两种观察方法用于临床实践:行为回避测试-背部疼痛(BAT-Back)和疼痛行为量表(pab)。对于第二个目标,107项研究符合纳入标准。通过对PB的提取,我们可以列出大范围的PB,并将数据分为7类PB。结论:本研究结果可为临床实践推荐两种观察方法。然而,这些方法有局限性,并且仅在慢性腰痛人群中得到验证。随着文献中PB的提取,我们有助于临床医生更好地识别所有正在经历疼痛的患者的PB。
{"title":"How to objectively assess and observe maladaptive pain behaviors in clinical rehabilitation: a systematic search and review.","authors":"Florian Naye,&nbsp;Chloé Cachinho,&nbsp;Annie-Pier Tremblay,&nbsp;Maude Saint-Germain Lavoie,&nbsp;Gabriel Lepage,&nbsp;Emma Larochelle,&nbsp;Lorijane Labrecque,&nbsp;Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme","doi":"10.1186/s40945-021-00109-y","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-021-00109-y","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cognitive-affective factors influence the perception of pain and disability. These factors can lead to pain behaviors (PB) that can persist and become maladaptive. These maladaptive PB will further increase the risk of chronicity or persistence of symptoms and disability. Thus, clinicians must be prepared to recognize maladaptive PB in a clinical context. To date, in the context of assessment in a rehabilitation setting, PB in clinical settings are poorly documented. The main objective of this study was to identify direct observation methods and critically appraise them in order to propose recommendations for practice. As a secondary objective, we explored and extracted the different observable PB that patients could exhibit and that clinicians could observe.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a comprehensive review on four databases with a generic search strategy in order to obtain the largest range of PB. For the first objective, a two-step critical appraisal used clinical criteria (from qualitative studies on barriers to implement routine measures) and psychometric criteria (from Brink and Louw critical appraisal tool) to determine which observation methods could be recommended for clinical practice. For the second objective, we extracted PB found in the literature to list potential PB that patients could exhibit, and clinicians could observe.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From the 3362 retrieved studies, 47 met the inclusion criteria for the first objective. The clinical criteria allowed us to select three observation methods. After the psychometric step, two observation methods were retained and recommended for clinical practice: the Behavioral Avoidance Test-Back Pain (BAT-Back) and the Pain Behaviour Scale (PaBS). For the second objective, 107 studies met the inclusion criteria. The extraction of the PB allowed us to list a large range of PB and classify the data in 7 categories of PB.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results allowed us to recommend two observation methods for clinical practice. However, these methods have limitations and are validated only in chronic low back pain populations. With the extraction of PB presented in the literature, we contribute to better prepare clinicians to recognize PB in all patients who are experiencing pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"11 1","pages":"15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40945-021-00109-y","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39055380","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Feasibility of a blended therapy approach in the treatment of patients with inflammatory myopathies. 混合疗法治疗炎症性肌病的可行性。
Q1 REHABILITATION Pub Date : 2021-05-27 DOI: 10.1186/s40945-021-00108-z
Pierrette Baschung Pfister, Ruud H Knols, Rob A de Bie, Eling D de Bruin

Background: Inflammatory myopathies (IMs) are a group of rare conditions characterized by proximal and often symmetrical muscle weakness and reduced muscle endurance. The recommended medical treatment is based on corticosteroids in combination with immunosuppressants. This anti-inflammatory therapy serves to inhibit and prevent inflammation but does not influence impaired muscle strength. Exercise, particularly progressive resistance training, plays therefore an important role in IMs management. Blended therapy, a combination of face-to-face treatment and telerehabilitation, may be a powerful therapy option in improving exercise program adherence in these patients.

Methods: The feasibility of a 12-week interactive tablet-based home exercise program combined with face-to-face therapy sessions - a 'blended therapy' approach - was evaluated using a quasi-experimental one-group pre-post comparison design. Primary outcomes were recruitment, attrition and adherence rates, plus measures of acceptance (Technology Acceptance Model Questionnaire (TAM)) and satisfaction (satisfaction questionnaire). Secondary outcomes comprised potential effects of the intervention on muscle strength and function, activity limitation, disability and health-related quality of life.

Results: Thirteen of the included 14 participants completed the study without any related adverse events. Mean adherence to exercise program was 84% (range: 25-100%) and participants indicated high acceptance of the intervention with mean TAM scores between 6.1 and 6.5 points. Overall satisfaction with the therapy sessions, the home program, and the technology was good. Approximately half the participants wished for longer training periods and more training sessions per week. There were inconsistent effects on muscle strength, muscle function, activity limitation, disability, and health-related quality of life.

Conclusion: Blended therapy combining the use of an interactive tablet-based resistance training program with face-to-face therapy sessions is feasible and safe and participants` acceptance with this approach was high. Furthermore, results were obtained that might be useful in selecting appropriate assessments and sample sizes in future trials.

Trial registration: NCT03713151 .

背景:炎症性肌病(IMs)是一组罕见的疾病,其特征是近端且通常是对称的肌肉无力和肌肉耐力降低。推荐的药物治疗是基于皮质类固醇联合免疫抑制剂。这种抗炎疗法起到抑制和预防炎症的作用,但不影响受损的肌肉力量。因此,运动,特别是渐进式阻力训练,在IMs管理中起着重要作用。混合疗法,面对面治疗和远程康复的结合,可能是一种有效的治疗选择,以提高这些患者的锻炼计划的依从性。方法:采用准实验的一组前后比较设计,评估了一项为期12周的基于平板电脑的互动式家庭锻炼计划与面对面治疗课程(一种“混合治疗”方法)相结合的可行性。主要结果是招募、减员和依从率,加上接受度(技术接受模型问卷(TAM))和满意度(满意度问卷)的测量。次要结局包括干预对肌肉力量和功能、活动限制、残疾和健康相关生活质量的潜在影响。结果:纳入的14名参与者中有13名完成了研究,没有任何相关的不良事件。平均坚持锻炼计划的比例为84%(范围:25-100%),参与者对干预的接受度很高,平均TAM得分在6.1到6.5分之间。对治疗过程、家庭项目和技术的总体满意度都很好。大约一半的参与者希望每周有更长的训练时间和更多的训练课程。对肌肉力量、肌肉功能、活动限制、残疾和健康相关生活质量的影响不一致。结论:将基于片剂的互动式抗阻训练方案与面对面治疗相结合的混合疗法是可行且安全的,参与者对这种方法的接受度很高。此外,获得的结果可能有助于在未来的试验中选择适当的评估和样本量。试验注册:NCT03713151。
{"title":"Feasibility of a blended therapy approach in the treatment of patients with inflammatory myopathies.","authors":"Pierrette Baschung Pfister,&nbsp;Ruud H Knols,&nbsp;Rob A de Bie,&nbsp;Eling D de Bruin","doi":"10.1186/s40945-021-00108-z","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-021-00108-z","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inflammatory myopathies (IMs) are a group of rare conditions characterized by proximal and often symmetrical muscle weakness and reduced muscle endurance. The recommended medical treatment is based on corticosteroids in combination with immunosuppressants. This anti-inflammatory therapy serves to inhibit and prevent inflammation but does not influence impaired muscle strength. Exercise, particularly progressive resistance training, plays therefore an important role in IMs management. Blended therapy, a combination of face-to-face treatment and telerehabilitation, may be a powerful therapy option in improving exercise program adherence in these patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The feasibility of a 12-week interactive tablet-based home exercise program combined with face-to-face therapy sessions - a 'blended therapy' approach - was evaluated using a quasi-experimental one-group pre-post comparison design. Primary outcomes were recruitment, attrition and adherence rates, plus measures of acceptance (Technology Acceptance Model Questionnaire (TAM)) and satisfaction (satisfaction questionnaire). Secondary outcomes comprised potential effects of the intervention on muscle strength and function, activity limitation, disability and health-related quality of life.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen of the included 14 participants completed the study without any related adverse events. Mean adherence to exercise program was 84% (range: 25-100%) and participants indicated high acceptance of the intervention with mean TAM scores between 6.1 and 6.5 points. Overall satisfaction with the therapy sessions, the home program, and the technology was good. Approximately half the participants wished for longer training periods and more training sessions per week. There were inconsistent effects on muscle strength, muscle function, activity limitation, disability, and health-related quality of life.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Blended therapy combining the use of an interactive tablet-based resistance training program with face-to-face therapy sessions is feasible and safe and participants` acceptance with this approach was high. Furthermore, results were obtained that might be useful in selecting appropriate assessments and sample sizes in future trials.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>NCT03713151 .</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"11 1","pages":"14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40945-021-00108-z","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39019944","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Changes in physiotherapy students' beliefs and attitudes about low back pain through pre-registration training. 通过注册前训练改变理疗学生对腰痛的信念和态度。
Q1 REHABILITATION Pub Date : 2021-05-17 DOI: 10.1186/s40945-021-00106-1
Guillaume Christe, Ben Darlow, Claude Pichonnaz

Background: Implementation of best-practice care for patients with low back pain (LBP) is an important issue. Physiotherapists' who hold unhelpful beliefs are less likely to adhere to guidelines and may negatively influence their patients' beliefs. Pre-registration education is critical in moving towards a biopsychosocial model of care. This study aimed to investigate the changes in 2nd year physiotherapy students' beliefs about LBP after a module on spinal pain management and determine whether these changes were maintained at the end of academic training.

Methods: During three consecutive calendar years, this longitudinal cohort study assessed physiotherapy students' beliefs with the Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaires (Back-PAQ) in their 1st year, before and after their 2nd year spinal management learning module, and at the end of academic training (3rd year). Unpaired t-tests were conducted to explore changes in Back-PAQ score.

Results: The mean response rate after the spinal management module was 90% (128/143 students). The mean (± SD) Back-PAQ score was 87.73 (± 14.21) before and 60.79 (± 11.44) after the module, representing a mean difference of - 26.95 (95%CI - 30.09 to - 23.80, p < 0.001). Beliefs were further improved at the end of 3rd year (- 7.16, 95%CI - 10.50 to - 3.81, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: A spinal management learning module considerably improved physiotherapy students' beliefs about back pain. Specifically, unhelpful beliefs about the back being vulnerable and in need of protection were substantially decreased after the module. Improvements were maintained at the end of academic training one-year later. Future research should investigate whether modifying students' beliefs leads to improved clinical practice in their first years of practice.

背景:实施最佳实践护理患者腰痛(LBP)是一个重要的问题。持有无用信念的物理治疗师不太可能遵守指导方针,并可能对患者的信念产生负面影响。注册前教育对于迈向生物心理社会护理模式至关重要。本研究旨在探讨二年级物理治疗学生在完成脊柱疼痛管理模块后对腰痛信念的变化,并确定这些变化是否在学术培训结束时保持不变。方法:在连续三年的时间里,本纵向队列研究在第一年、第二年脊柱管理学习模块前后和学术培训结束时(第三年)用背部疼痛态度问卷(Back- paq)评估物理治疗学生的信念。采用非配对t检验探讨Back-PAQ评分的变化。结果:脊柱管理模块后的平均有效率为90%(128/143)。脊柱管理学习模块前后的back - paq评分平均值(±SD)分别为87.73(±14.21)和60.79(±11.44),平均差异为- 26.95 (95%CI为- 30.09 ~ - 23.80),p结论:脊柱管理学习模块显著提高了理疗学生对背痛的信念。具体来说,关于背部脆弱和需要保护的无用信念在模块后大大减少。一年后,在学术培训结束时,这种改善仍在继续。未来的研究应该调查改变学生的信念是否会导致第一年临床实践的改善。
{"title":"Changes in physiotherapy students' beliefs and attitudes about low back pain through pre-registration training.","authors":"Guillaume Christe, Ben Darlow, Claude Pichonnaz","doi":"10.1186/s40945-021-00106-1","DOIUrl":"10.1186/s40945-021-00106-1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implementation of best-practice care for patients with low back pain (LBP) is an important issue. Physiotherapists' who hold unhelpful beliefs are less likely to adhere to guidelines and may negatively influence their patients' beliefs. Pre-registration education is critical in moving towards a biopsychosocial model of care. This study aimed to investigate the changes in 2nd year physiotherapy students' beliefs about LBP after a module on spinal pain management and determine whether these changes were maintained at the end of academic training.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>During three consecutive calendar years, this longitudinal cohort study assessed physiotherapy students' beliefs with the Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaires (Back-PAQ) in their 1st year, before and after their 2nd year spinal management learning module, and at the end of academic training (3rd year). Unpaired t-tests were conducted to explore changes in Back-PAQ score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean response rate after the spinal management module was 90% (128/143 students). The mean (± SD) Back-PAQ score was 87.73 (± 14.21) before and 60.79 (± 11.44) after the module, representing a mean difference of - 26.95 (95%CI - 30.09 to - 23.80, p < 0.001). Beliefs were further improved at the end of 3rd year (- 7.16, 95%CI - 10.50 to - 3.81, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A spinal management learning module considerably improved physiotherapy students' beliefs about back pain. Specifically, unhelpful beliefs about the back being vulnerable and in need of protection were substantially decreased after the module. Improvements were maintained at the end of academic training one-year later. Future research should investigate whether modifying students' beliefs leads to improved clinical practice in their first years of practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"11 1","pages":"13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8126429/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38916066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Why Measure Patient Experience in Physical Therapy? 为什么要在物理治疗中测量患者体验?
Q1 REHABILITATION Pub Date : 2021-05-03 DOI: 10.1186/s40945-021-00105-2
Jacob Eversole, Ashton Grimm, Nikita Patel, Kelly John, Alessandra N Garcia

Background: Patient experience is an important component of quality and patient centered health care not fully explored in physical therapy.

Main body: This article addresses (1) concept of patient experience, (2) importance of capturing the patient experience, (3) measures to capture patient experience and whether these measures exhibit psychometrically sound measurement properties, (4) relationship between patient experience and clinical effectiveness outcomes, and (5) clinical applications of patient experience measures in the outpatient physical therapy setting, including suggestions for future studies.

Short conclusion: Employing patient experience measures into physical therapy practice may be an important key to improve clinical effectiveness outcomes and provide excellent patient-centered care delivery. An area of continued research should be focused on demonstrating the generalizability and measurement properties of patient reported experience measures for the musculoskeletal outpatient physical therapy population focusing first on the most common musculoskeletal conditions such as cervical, low back, and shoulder pain.

背景:患者体验是质量和以患者为中心的医疗保健的重要组成部分,在物理治疗中尚未得到充分的探讨。正文:本文将阐述(1)患者体验的概念,(2)获取患者体验的重要性,(3)获取患者体验的措施以及这些措施是否具有心理测量学上合理的测量特性,(4)患者体验与临床效果结果之间的关系,以及(5)患者体验措施在门诊物理治疗环境中的临床应用,包括对未来研究的建议。结论:在物理治疗实践中采用患者体验措施可能是提高临床疗效和提供优质以患者为中心的护理服务的重要关键。继续研究的一个领域应该集中在证明肌肉骨骼门诊物理治疗人群的患者报告经验测量的普遍性和测量特性上,首先关注最常见的肌肉骨骼疾病,如颈椎、腰背和肩部疼痛。
{"title":"Why Measure Patient Experience in Physical Therapy?","authors":"Jacob Eversole,&nbsp;Ashton Grimm,&nbsp;Nikita Patel,&nbsp;Kelly John,&nbsp;Alessandra N Garcia","doi":"10.1186/s40945-021-00105-2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-021-00105-2","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient experience is an important component of quality and patient centered health care not fully explored in physical therapy.</p><p><strong>Main body: </strong>This article addresses (1) concept of patient experience, (2) importance of capturing the patient experience, (3) measures to capture patient experience and whether these measures exhibit psychometrically sound measurement properties, (4) relationship between patient experience and clinical effectiveness outcomes, and (5) clinical applications of patient experience measures in the outpatient physical therapy setting, including suggestions for future studies.</p><p><strong>Short conclusion: </strong>Employing patient experience measures into physical therapy practice may be an important key to improve clinical effectiveness outcomes and provide excellent patient-centered care delivery. An area of continued research should be focused on demonstrating the generalizability and measurement properties of patient reported experience measures for the musculoskeletal outpatient physical therapy population focusing first on the most common musculoskeletal conditions such as cervical, low back, and shoulder pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"11 1","pages":"11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40945-021-00105-2","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38938841","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Providing value-based care as a physiotherapist. 作为物理治疗师提供基于价值的护理。
Q1 REHABILITATION Pub Date : 2021-04-20 DOI: 10.1186/s40945-021-00107-0
Chad E Cook, Thomas Denninger, Jeremy Lewis, Ina Diener, Charles Thigpen

Background: Despite millions spent in research funding, studies, and guidelines, outcomes involving musculoskeletal care continue to decline. The purpose of this Viewpoint is to describe value-based care and to suggest measures for its adoption by physiotherapists who manage individuals with musculoskeletal related pain disorders.

Discussion: The provision of value-based care is best defined as care that includes: 1) patient centeredness, 2) guideline-oriented, integrated strategies, 3) measurement of patient outcomes and experiences, and 4) cost effectiveness. Physiotherapists are well positioned to be leaders in the application of value-based care by assuring they address each of the four strategies during the daily patient encounter. This Viewpoint discusses strategies for application to clinical practice.

Conclusion: By implementing value-based care principals, physiotherapists could assure that patients with musculoskeletal related pain disorders receive the right care at the right time, by the right provider.

背景:尽管在研究经费、研究和指南上花费了数百万美元,涉及肌肉骨骼护理的结果仍在下降。本观点的目的是描述基于价值的护理,并建议物理治疗师采用的措施,他们管理与肌肉骨骼相关的疼痛疾病。讨论:提供基于价值的护理最好定义为:1)以患者为中心,2)以指导方针为导向,综合策略,3)衡量患者的结果和经验,4)成本效益。物理治疗师很好地定位为应用基于价值的护理的领导者,确保他们在日常患者接触中解决这四种策略中的每一种。这一观点探讨了在临床实践中应用的策略。结论:通过实施基于价值的护理原则,物理治疗师可以确保患有肌肉骨骼相关疼痛疾病的患者在正确的时间接受正确的护理,由正确的提供者。
{"title":"Providing value-based care as a physiotherapist.","authors":"Chad E Cook,&nbsp;Thomas Denninger,&nbsp;Jeremy Lewis,&nbsp;Ina Diener,&nbsp;Charles Thigpen","doi":"10.1186/s40945-021-00107-0","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-021-00107-0","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite millions spent in research funding, studies, and guidelines, outcomes involving musculoskeletal care continue to decline. The purpose of this Viewpoint is to describe value-based care and to suggest measures for its adoption by physiotherapists who manage individuals with musculoskeletal related pain disorders.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The provision of value-based care is best defined as care that includes: 1) patient centeredness, 2) guideline-oriented, integrated strategies, 3) measurement of patient outcomes and experiences, and 4) cost effectiveness. Physiotherapists are well positioned to be leaders in the application of value-based care by assuring they address each of the four strategies during the daily patient encounter. This Viewpoint discusses strategies for application to clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>By implementing value-based care principals, physiotherapists could assure that patients with musculoskeletal related pain disorders receive the right care at the right time, by the right provider.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"11 1","pages":"12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40945-021-00107-0","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38889610","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11
Graded activity with and without daily-monitored-walking in patients with type 2 diabetes with low back pain: secondary analysis of a randomized-clinical trial. 伴有腰痛的2型糖尿病患者有或没有每日监测步行的分级活动:一项随机临床试验的二次分析
Q1 REHABILITATION Pub Date : 2021-04-15 DOI: 10.1186/s40945-021-00104-3
Opeyemi Ayodiipo Idowu, Ade Fatai Adeniyi, Andrew Edo, Adesoji Fasanmade

Background: Graded activity is gradually emerging as a preferred choice in improving psychosocial outcomes including pain self-efficacy, fear-avoidance beliefs, and back-pain beliefs in the general population with low back pain (LBP). Such evidence is, however, lacking among patients with concomitant LBP and type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This secondary analysis of a randomized control trial aimed to compare the efficacy between graded activity augmented with additional daily-monitored-walking and graded activity alone on disability, pain self-efficacy (PSE), fear-avoidance beliefs (FAB), back-pain beliefs (BPB) and glycaemic control (HbA1c) in patients with concomitant LBP and T2DM.

Methods: Fifty-eight patients with concomitant LBP and T2DM were randomised into two groups, graded activity with daily-monitored-walking group (GAMWG = 29) or (graded activity group (GAG = 29) in this 12-week single-blind trial. Both groups received graded activity (home/work-place visits, back school and sub-maximal exercises) while the GAMWG received additional daily-monitored-walking. Disability and selected psychosocial outcomes were assessed at weeks 0, 4, 8 and 12 using Roland-Morris disability, fear-avoidance behaviour, pain self-efficacy and back belief questionnaires. Glycaemic control was assessed at weeks 0 and 12 using a point-of-care system (In2it, Biorad Latvia). Data were analysed using mean, median, Friedman's ANOVA, Mann-Whitney test and t-tests.

Results: Participants' mean age was 48.3 ± 9.4 years (95%CI: 45.6, 50.9) while 35.3% were males. The GAMWG participants (n = 25) had better outcomes (P < 0.05) than GAG participants (n = 26) on PSE (1.0, 3.0; r = - 0.1) and FAB (0.01, - 2.0; r = - 0.1) at week 4, LBP-related disability (0.01, - 2.0; r = - 0.2) at week 8 and glycaemic control at week 12 (- 0.59 ± 0.51%,-0.46 ± 0.22%). No other between-group comparisons were statistically significant.

Conclusion: Graded activity with daily-monitored-walking provided earlier improvements on disability, pain self-efficacy, fear-avoidance beliefs, and glycaemic control, but not back pain beliefs, in patients with concomitant LBP and T2DM.

Trial registration: PACTR201702001728564 ; 26 July, 2016 (retrospectively registered).

背景:在普通腰痛(LBP)患者中,分级活动逐渐成为改善疼痛自我效能、恐惧回避信念和背痛信念等社会心理结局的首选方法。然而,在伴有腰痛和2型糖尿病(T2DM)的患者中缺乏这样的证据。这是一项随机对照试验的二级分析,旨在比较分级活动增强与额外的每日监测步行和单独分级活动对伴发LBP和T2DM患者的残疾、疼痛自我效能(PSE)、恐惧回避信念(FAB)、背痛信念(BPB)和血糖控制(HbA1c)的疗效。方法:在这项为期12周的单盲试验中,58例伴有LBP和T2DM的患者被随机分为两组,活动分级并每日监测步行组(GAMWG = 29)和活动分级组(GAG = 29)。两组都接受了分级活动(家庭/工作场所访问,回到学校和次极限运动),而GAMWG接受了额外的每日步行监测。在第0、4、8和12周使用Roland-Morris残疾、恐惧回避行为、疼痛自我效能和背部信念问卷评估残疾和选定的社会心理结果。在第0周和第12周使用即时护理系统(In2it, Biorad Latvia)评估血糖控制。数据分析采用均值、中位数、Friedman’s ANOVA、Mann-Whitney检验和t检验。结果:参与者的平均年龄为48.3±9.4岁(95%CI: 45.6, 50.9),其中35.3%为男性。GAMWG参与者(n = 25)有更好的结果(P结论:分级活动与每日监测步行提供早期改善残疾,疼痛自我效能,恐惧回避信念和血糖控制,但没有背部疼痛信念,在伴有腰痛和2型糖尿病的患者。试验注册:PACTR201702001728564;2016年7月26日(追溯注册)。
{"title":"Graded activity with and without daily-monitored-walking in patients with type 2 diabetes with low back pain: secondary analysis of a randomized-clinical trial.","authors":"Opeyemi Ayodiipo Idowu,&nbsp;Ade Fatai Adeniyi,&nbsp;Andrew Edo,&nbsp;Adesoji Fasanmade","doi":"10.1186/s40945-021-00104-3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-021-00104-3","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Graded activity is gradually emerging as a preferred choice in improving psychosocial outcomes including pain self-efficacy, fear-avoidance beliefs, and back-pain beliefs in the general population with low back pain (LBP). Such evidence is, however, lacking among patients with concomitant LBP and type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This secondary analysis of a randomized control trial aimed to compare the efficacy between graded activity augmented with additional daily-monitored-walking and graded activity alone on disability, pain self-efficacy (PSE), fear-avoidance beliefs (FAB), back-pain beliefs (BPB) and glycaemic control (HbA1c) in patients with concomitant LBP and T2DM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fifty-eight patients with concomitant LBP and T2DM were randomised into two groups, graded activity with daily-monitored-walking group (GAMWG = 29) or (graded activity group (GAG = 29) in this 12-week single-blind trial. Both groups received graded activity (home/work-place visits, back school and sub-maximal exercises) while the GAMWG received additional daily-monitored-walking. Disability and selected psychosocial outcomes were assessed at weeks 0, 4, 8 and 12 using Roland-Morris disability, fear-avoidance behaviour, pain self-efficacy and back belief questionnaires. Glycaemic control was assessed at weeks 0 and 12 using a point-of-care system (In2it, Biorad Latvia). Data were analysed using mean, median, Friedman's ANOVA, Mann-Whitney test and t-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants' mean age was 48.3 ± 9.4 years (95%CI: 45.6, 50.9) while 35.3% were males. The GAMWG participants (n = 25) had better outcomes (P < 0.05) than GAG participants (n = 26) on PSE (1.0, 3.0; r = - 0.1) and FAB (0.01, - 2.0; r = - 0.1) at week 4, LBP-related disability (0.01, - 2.0; r = - 0.2) at week 8 and glycaemic control at week 12 (- 0.59 ± 0.51%,-0.46 ± 0.22%). No other between-group comparisons were statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Graded activity with daily-monitored-walking provided earlier improvements on disability, pain self-efficacy, fear-avoidance beliefs, and glycaemic control, but not back pain beliefs, in patients with concomitant LBP and T2DM.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PACTR201702001728564 ; 26 July, 2016 (retrospectively registered).</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"11 1","pages":"10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40945-021-00104-3","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25591966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
The yield and usefulness of PAIN+ and PubMed databases for accessing research evidence on pain management: a randomized crossover trial. PAIN+和PubMed数据库获取疼痛管理研究证据的有效性:一项随机交叉试验。
Q1 REHABILITATION Pub Date : 2021-04-01 DOI: 10.1186/s40945-021-00100-7
Vanitha Arumugam, Joy C MacDermid, Dave Walton, Ruby Grewal
<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>PAIN<sup>+</sup> and PubMed are two electronic databases with two different mechanisms of evidence retrieval. PubMed is used to "Pull" evidence where clinicians can enter search terms to find answers while PAIN<sup>+</sup> is a newly developed evidence repository where along with "Pull" service there is a "Push" service that alerts users about new research and the associated quality ratings, based on the individual preferences for content and altering criteria.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The primary purpose of the study was to compare yield and usefulness of PubMed and PAIN<sup>+</sup> in retrieving evidence to address clinical research questions on pain management. The secondary purpose of the study was to identify what search terms and methods were used by clinicians to target pain research.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Two-phase double blinded randomized crossover trial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Clinicians (n = 76) who were exposed to PAIN<sup>+</sup> for at least 1 year took part in this study. Participants were required to search for evidence 2 clinical question scenarios independently. The first clinical question was provided to all participants and thus, was multi-disciplinary. Participants were randomly assigned to search for evidence on their clinical question using either PAIN<sup>+</sup> or PubMed through the electronic interface. Upon completion of the search with one search engine, they were crossed over to the other search engine. A similar process was done for a second scenario that was discipline-specific. The yield was calculated using number of retrieved articles presented to participants and usefulness was evaluated using a series of Likert scale questions embedded in the testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Multidisciplinary scenario: Overall, the participants had an overall one-page yield of 715 articles for PAIN<sup>+</sup> and 1135 articles for PubMed. The topmost article retrieved by PAIN<sup>+</sup> was rated as more useful (p = 0.001). While, the topmost article retrieved by PubMed was rated as consistent with current clinical practice (p = 0.02). PubMed (48%) was preferred over PAIN<sup>+</sup> (39%) to perform multidisciplinary search (p = 0.02). Discipline specific scenario: The participants had an overall one-page yield of 1046 articles for PAIN<sup>+</sup> and 1398 articles for PubMed. The topmost article retrieved by PAIN<sup>+</sup> was rated as more useful (p = 0.001) and consistent with current clinical practice (p = 0.02) than the articles retrieved by PubMed. PAIN<sup>+</sup> (52%) was preferred over PubMed (29%) to perform discipline specific search.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Clinicians from different disciplines find both PAIN<sup>+</sup> and PubMed useful for retrieving research studies to address clinical questions about pain management. Greater preferences and perceived usefulness of the top 3 retrieved papers was observed for PAIN<sup>+</
简介:PAIN+和PubMed是两个具有两种不同证据检索机制的电子数据库。PubMed用于“拉”证据,临床医生可以输入搜索词来找到答案,而PAIN+是一个新开发的证据存储库,除了“拉”服务之外,还有一个“推送”服务,根据个人对内容的偏好和不断变化的标准,提醒用户新的研究和相关的质量评级。目的:本研究的主要目的是比较PubMed和PAIN+在检索证据以解决疼痛管理的临床研究问题方面的产量和有用性。该研究的第二个目的是确定临床医生在针对疼痛的研究中使用了哪些搜索词和方法。研究设计:两期双盲随机交叉试验。方法:76名接受PAIN+治疗至少1年的临床医生参与本研究。参与者被要求独立搜索证据2临床问题场景。第一个临床问题提供给所有参与者,因此是多学科的。参与者被随机分配到通过电子界面使用PAIN+或PubMed搜索有关其临床问题的证据。在一个搜索引擎完成搜索后,他们被转移到另一个搜索引擎。对第二个特定于学科的场景进行了类似的处理。使用呈现给参与者的检索文章的数量来计算产量,并使用嵌入在测试中的一系列李克特量表问题来评估有用性。结果:多学科场景:总体而言,参与者在PAIN+上有715篇文章,在PubMed上有1135篇文章。被PAIN+检索到的最顶端的文章被认为更有用(p = 0.001)。而PubMed检索到的排名靠前的文章被评为与当前临床实践一致(p = 0.02)。PubMed(48%)优于PAIN+(39%)进行多学科检索(p = 0.02)。特定学科的场景:参与者在PAIN+上有1046篇文章,在PubMed上有1398篇文章。与PubMed检索到的文章相比,通过PAIN+检索到的排名靠前的文章被评为更有用(p = 0.001),与当前临床实践一致(p = 0.02)。在进行学科特定搜索时,PAIN+(52%)优于PubMed(29%)。结论:来自不同学科的临床医生发现PAIN+和PubMed都有助于检索研究结果,以解决有关疼痛管理的临床问题。我们观察到,前3名检索论文对PAIN+有更大的偏好和感知有用性,但其他有用性维度并没有一致地支持任何一个搜索引擎。试验注册:在ClinicalTrials.gov注册编号:NCT01348802,日期:2011年5月5日。
{"title":"The yield and usefulness of PAIN<sup>+</sup> and PubMed databases for accessing research evidence on pain management: a randomized crossover trial.","authors":"Vanitha Arumugam,&nbsp;Joy C MacDermid,&nbsp;Dave Walton,&nbsp;Ruby Grewal","doi":"10.1186/s40945-021-00100-7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-021-00100-7","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Introduction: &lt;/strong&gt;PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; and PubMed are two electronic databases with two different mechanisms of evidence retrieval. PubMed is used to \"Pull\" evidence where clinicians can enter search terms to find answers while PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; is a newly developed evidence repository where along with \"Pull\" service there is a \"Push\" service that alerts users about new research and the associated quality ratings, based on the individual preferences for content and altering criteria.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Purpose: &lt;/strong&gt;The primary purpose of the study was to compare yield and usefulness of PubMed and PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; in retrieving evidence to address clinical research questions on pain management. The secondary purpose of the study was to identify what search terms and methods were used by clinicians to target pain research.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Study design: &lt;/strong&gt;Two-phase double blinded randomized crossover trial.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;Clinicians (n = 76) who were exposed to PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; for at least 1 year took part in this study. Participants were required to search for evidence 2 clinical question scenarios independently. The first clinical question was provided to all participants and thus, was multi-disciplinary. Participants were randomly assigned to search for evidence on their clinical question using either PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; or PubMed through the electronic interface. Upon completion of the search with one search engine, they were crossed over to the other search engine. A similar process was done for a second scenario that was discipline-specific. The yield was calculated using number of retrieved articles presented to participants and usefulness was evaluated using a series of Likert scale questions embedded in the testing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;Multidisciplinary scenario: Overall, the participants had an overall one-page yield of 715 articles for PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; and 1135 articles for PubMed. The topmost article retrieved by PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; was rated as more useful (p = 0.001). While, the topmost article retrieved by PubMed was rated as consistent with current clinical practice (p = 0.02). PubMed (48%) was preferred over PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; (39%) to perform multidisciplinary search (p = 0.02). Discipline specific scenario: The participants had an overall one-page yield of 1046 articles for PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; and 1398 articles for PubMed. The topmost article retrieved by PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; was rated as more useful (p = 0.001) and consistent with current clinical practice (p = 0.02) than the articles retrieved by PubMed. PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; (52%) was preferred over PubMed (29%) to perform discipline specific search.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusion: &lt;/strong&gt;Clinicians from different disciplines find both PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/sup&gt; and PubMed useful for retrieving research studies to address clinical questions about pain management. Greater preferences and perceived usefulness of the top 3 retrieved papers was observed for PAIN&lt;sup&gt;+&lt;/","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"11 1","pages":"9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40945-021-00100-7","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25536130","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Breast edema, from diagnosis to treatment: state of the art. 乳房水肿,从诊断到治疗:最先进的。
Q1 REHABILITATION Pub Date : 2021-03-29 DOI: 10.1186/s40945-021-00103-4
Hanne Verbelen, Wiebren Tjalma, Dorien Dombrecht, Nick Gebruers

Introduction: Breast edema can arise from different etiologies; however, it is mostly seen after breast conserving surgery and/or radiotherapy. Combining breast conserving surgery and radiotherapy can cause damage to the lymphatic system and reactions to surrounding tissues, which can lead to breast edema; hereby, the breast size can increase by more than one cup size. Swelling of the breast is not the only criterion associated with breast edema. Other common criteria found in literature are peau d'orange, heaviness of the breast, skin thickening, breast pain, redness of the skin, hyperpigmented skin pores and a positive pitting sign. Despite the benefits of breast conserving surgery, breast edema can be uncomfortable, and can negatively influence quality of life in suffering patients. In contrast to lymphedema of the arm, which is well known in clinical practice and in research, breast edema is often underestimated and far less explored in literature. Currently, many aspects still need to be reviewed.

Purpose and importance to practice: This masterclass aims at providing the state of the art of breast edema for all health care workers and researchers involved in the treatment and monitoring of breast cancer patients. It includes current and future perspectives on its diagnosis, longitudinal course and treatment. Furthermore, recommendations for clinical practice and future research are discussed.

Clinical implications: It is recommended to closely monitor those patients in whom breast edema symptoms do not decline within 6 months after termination of radiotherapy and provide them with the appropriate therapy. Since evidence concerning the treatment of breast edema is currently lacking, we recommend the complex decongestive therapy (CDT) to the utmost extent, by analogy with the lymphedema treatment of the extremities. This treatment involves skin care, exercise therapy and compression. Additionally, all patients should be informed about the normal course of breast edema development.

Future research priorities: A consensus should be reached among clinicians and researchers concerning the definition, assessment methods and best treatment of breast edema. Furthermore, high quality studies are necessary to prove the effectiveness of the CDT for breast edema.

导读:乳房水肿可以由不同的病因引起;然而,它主要发生在保乳手术和/或放疗后。保乳手术和放疗相结合会对淋巴系统造成损伤,并对周围组织产生反应,从而导致乳房水肿;因此,乳房的尺寸可以增加一个罩杯以上。乳房肿胀并不是与乳房水肿相关的唯一标准。文献中发现的其他常见标准有橘色结节、乳房厚重、皮肤增厚、乳房疼痛、皮肤发红、皮肤毛孔色素沉着和明显的麻点迹象。尽管保乳手术有好处,但乳房水肿可能会让患者感到不舒服,并对患者的生活质量产生负面影响。与临床实践和研究中众所周知的手臂淋巴水肿不同,乳房水肿经常被低估,文献中对其的研究也很少。目前,仍有许多方面需要审查。练习的目的和重要性:本大师班旨在为参与乳腺癌患者治疗和监测的所有卫生保健工作者和研究人员提供乳腺水肿的最新技术。它包括当前和未来的观点,其诊断,纵向过程和治疗。最后,对临床实践和今后的研究提出了建议。临床意义:建议密切监测放疗结束后6个月内乳房水肿症状未减轻的患者,并给予相应的治疗。由于目前缺乏关于乳腺水肿治疗的证据,我们建议最大限度地采用综合减充血疗法(CDT),类似于四肢淋巴水肿的治疗。这种治疗包括皮肤护理、运动疗法和压迫。此外,应告知所有患者乳腺水肿发展的正常过程。未来的研究重点:临床医生和研究人员应该就乳腺水肿的定义、评估方法和最佳治疗达成共识。此外,需要高质量的研究来证明CDT治疗乳腺水肿的有效性。
{"title":"Breast edema, from diagnosis to treatment: state of the art.","authors":"Hanne Verbelen,&nbsp;Wiebren Tjalma,&nbsp;Dorien Dombrecht,&nbsp;Nick Gebruers","doi":"10.1186/s40945-021-00103-4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-021-00103-4","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Breast edema can arise from different etiologies; however, it is mostly seen after breast conserving surgery and/or radiotherapy. Combining breast conserving surgery and radiotherapy can cause damage to the lymphatic system and reactions to surrounding tissues, which can lead to breast edema; hereby, the breast size can increase by more than one cup size. Swelling of the breast is not the only criterion associated with breast edema. Other common criteria found in literature are peau d'orange, heaviness of the breast, skin thickening, breast pain, redness of the skin, hyperpigmented skin pores and a positive pitting sign. Despite the benefits of breast conserving surgery, breast edema can be uncomfortable, and can negatively influence quality of life in suffering patients. In contrast to lymphedema of the arm, which is well known in clinical practice and in research, breast edema is often underestimated and far less explored in literature. Currently, many aspects still need to be reviewed.</p><p><strong>Purpose and importance to practice: </strong>This masterclass aims at providing the state of the art of breast edema for all health care workers and researchers involved in the treatment and monitoring of breast cancer patients. It includes current and future perspectives on its diagnosis, longitudinal course and treatment. Furthermore, recommendations for clinical practice and future research are discussed.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>It is recommended to closely monitor those patients in whom breast edema symptoms do not decline within 6 months after termination of radiotherapy and provide them with the appropriate therapy. Since evidence concerning the treatment of breast edema is currently lacking, we recommend the complex decongestive therapy (CDT) to the utmost extent, by analogy with the lymphedema treatment of the extremities. This treatment involves skin care, exercise therapy and compression. Additionally, all patients should be informed about the normal course of breast edema development.</p><p><strong>Future research priorities: </strong>A consensus should be reached among clinicians and researchers concerning the definition, assessment methods and best treatment of breast edema. Furthermore, high quality studies are necessary to prove the effectiveness of the CDT for breast edema.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"11 1","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40945-021-00103-4","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25537407","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8
Vertical traction for lumbar radiculopathy: a systematic review. 垂直牵引治疗腰椎神经根病:一项系统综述。
Q1 REHABILITATION Pub Date : 2021-03-15 DOI: 10.1186/s40945-021-00102-5
Carla Vanti, Luca Turone, Alice Panizzolo, Andrew A Guccione, Lucia Bertozzi, Paolo Pillastrini

Background: Only low-quality evidence is currently available to support the effectiveness of different traction modalities in the treatment of lumbar radiculopathy (LR). Yet, traction is still very commonly used in clinical practice. Some authors have suggested that the subgroup of patients presenting signs and symptoms of nerve root compression and unresponsive to movements centralizing symptoms may benefit from lumbar traction. The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effects of vertical traction (VT) on pain and activity limitation in patients affected by LR.

Methods: We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, ISI Web of Science and PEDro from their inception to March 31, 2019 to retrieve RCTs on adults with LR using VT to reduce pain and activity limitation. We considered only trials reporting complete data on outcomes. Two reviewers selected the studies, extracted the results, and performed the quality assessment using the Risk of Bias and GRADE tools.

Results: Three studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of the included studies. We found very low quality evidence for a large effect of VT added to bed rest when compared to bed rest alone (g = - 1.01; 95% CI = -2.00 to - 0.02). Similarly, VT added to medication may have a large effect on pain relief when compared to medication alone (g = - 1.13; 95% CI = -1.72 to - 0.54, low quality evidence). Effects of VT added to physical therapy on pain relief were very small when compared to physical therapy without VT (g = - 0.14; 95% CI = -1.03 to 0.76, low quality evidence). All reported effects concerned short-term effect up to 3 months post-intervention.

Conclusions: With respect to short-term effects, VT may have a positive effect on pain relief if added to medication or bed rest. Long-term effects of VT are currently unknown. Future higher quality research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change these conclusions.

背景:目前只有低质量的证据支持不同牵引方式治疗腰椎神经根病(LR)的有效性。然而,牵引在临床实践中仍然非常普遍。一些作者认为,有神经根压迫症状和对运动集中症状无反应的亚组患者可以从腰椎牵引中获益。本研究的目的是对垂直牵引(VT)对LR患者疼痛和活动限制影响的随机对照试验(rct)进行系统回顾。方法:我们检索了Cochrane对照试验注册、PubMed、CINAHL、Scopus、ISI Web of Science和PEDro从成立到2019年3月31日的随机对照试验,检索了成人LR患者使用VT减轻疼痛和活动限制的随机对照试验。我们只考虑了报告完整结果数据的试验。两名审稿人选择研究,提取结果,并使用偏倚风险和GRADE工具进行质量评估。结果:3项研究符合纳入标准。由于纳入研究的异质性,无法进行meta分析。我们发现非常低质量的证据表明,与单独卧床休息相比,卧床休息时添加VT的效果很大(g = - 1.01;95% CI = -2.00 ~ - 0.02)。同样,与单独用药相比,药物中加入VT可能对缓解疼痛有很大的作用(g = - 1.13;95% CI = -1.72 ~ - 0.54,低质量证据)。与不加VT的物理治疗相比,在物理治疗中加入VT对疼痛缓解的影响非常小(g = - 0.14;95% CI = -1.03 ~ 0.76,低质量证据)。所有报告的影响都是干预后3个月的短期影响。结论:就短期效应而言,如果将VT与药物或卧床休息结合使用,可能对缓解疼痛有积极作用。VT的长期影响目前尚不清楚。未来更高质量的研究很可能对我们对效果估计的信心产生重要影响,并可能改变这些结论。
{"title":"Vertical traction for lumbar radiculopathy: a systematic review.","authors":"Carla Vanti,&nbsp;Luca Turone,&nbsp;Alice Panizzolo,&nbsp;Andrew A Guccione,&nbsp;Lucia Bertozzi,&nbsp;Paolo Pillastrini","doi":"10.1186/s40945-021-00102-5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-021-00102-5","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Only low-quality evidence is currently available to support the effectiveness of different traction modalities in the treatment of lumbar radiculopathy (LR). Yet, traction is still very commonly used in clinical practice. Some authors have suggested that the subgroup of patients presenting signs and symptoms of nerve root compression and unresponsive to movements centralizing symptoms may benefit from lumbar traction. The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effects of vertical traction (VT) on pain and activity limitation in patients affected by LR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, ISI Web of Science and PEDro from their inception to March 31, 2019 to retrieve RCTs on adults with LR using VT to reduce pain and activity limitation. We considered only trials reporting complete data on outcomes. Two reviewers selected the studies, extracted the results, and performed the quality assessment using the Risk of Bias and GRADE tools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of the included studies. We found very low quality evidence for a large effect of VT added to bed rest when compared to bed rest alone (g = - 1.01; 95% CI = -2.00 to - 0.02). Similarly, VT added to medication may have a large effect on pain relief when compared to medication alone (g = - 1.13; 95% CI = -1.72 to - 0.54, low quality evidence). Effects of VT added to physical therapy on pain relief were very small when compared to physical therapy without VT (g = - 0.14; 95% CI = -1.03 to 0.76, low quality evidence). All reported effects concerned short-term effect up to 3 months post-intervention.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>With respect to short-term effects, VT may have a positive effect on pain relief if added to medication or bed rest. Long-term effects of VT are currently unknown. Future higher quality research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change these conclusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"11 1","pages":"7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40945-021-00102-5","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25476495","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Early post-immobilization pain at rest, movement evoked pain, and their ratio as potential predictors of pain and disability at six- and 12-months after distal radius fracture. 在桡骨远端骨折后6个月和12个月,早期固定后休息疼痛、运动诱发疼痛及其比值作为疼痛和残疾的潜在预测因素。
Q1 REHABILITATION Pub Date : 2021-03-01 DOI: 10.1186/s40945-021-00101-6
Maryam Farzad, Joy C MacDermid, Saurabh Mehta, Ruby Grewal, Erfan Shafiee

Background: Removal of immobilization is a critical phase of distal radius fracture (DRF) rehabilitation, typically occurring by 2 months post injury. This study examined the extent to which pain at rest (PAR), movement evoked pain (MEP), or the ratio between those (MEPR) assessed at 2-months after DRF predicts the occurrence of chronic pain or disability at 6- and 12-months after the injury.

Methods: This secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study was done at the Hand and Upper Limb Centre (HULC), London, Ontario, Canada. A total of 229 patients with DRF (159 (69.4%) women) were included. Scores for the pain and function subscales of the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) were extracted for 2, 6 and 12 months after DRF. Logistic as well as nonlinear quartile regression examined whether PAR and MEP predicted the severity of chronic pain and disability at 6- and 12-months after DRF. Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve were plotted, where area under the curve (AUC) examined the accuracy of the PAR and MEP scores in classifying those who experienced chronic pain and disability.

Results: Scores of ≥3 (AUC of 0.77) for PAR or ≥ 6 (AUC of 0.78) for MEP at 2 months after DRF predicted moderate to severe wrist pain at 6-months, whereas scores of ≥7 (AUC of 0.79) for MEP at 2-months predicted ongoing wrist disability at 6-months after the injury. The MEPR of 2 ≤ or ≥ 8 at 2-months was associated with adverse pain at 6-months and functional outcomes at 6- and 12-months (R-square = 0.7 and 0.04 respectively), but prediction accuracy was very poor (AUC ≤ 0.50).

Conclusion: Chronic wrist-related pain at 6-months can be predicted by either elevated PAR ≥ 3/10) or MEP (≥ 6/10) reported at 2-months after the injury, while disability experienced at 6-months after DRF is best predicted by MEP (≥7/10) reported at 2-months. The ratio of these two pain indicators increases assessment complexity and reduces classification accuracy.

背景:解除固定是桡骨远端骨折(DRF)康复的关键阶段,通常发生在伤后2个月。这项研究检测了静息疼痛(PAR)、运动诱发疼痛(MEP),或在DRF后2个月评估的两者之间的比率(MEPR)对损伤后6个月和12个月慢性疼痛或残疾发生的预测程度。方法:这项前瞻性队列研究的二次分析是在加拿大安大略省伦敦的手部和上肢中心(HULC)进行的。共纳入229例DRF患者(159例(69.4%)为女性)。提取DRF后2个月、6个月和12个月患者评定腕关节评估(PRWE)疼痛和功能亚量表评分。Logistic和非线性四分位回归检验了PAR和MEP是否预测DRF后6个月和12个月的慢性疼痛和残疾的严重程度。绘制受试者工作特征曲线,曲线下面积(AUC)检验PAR和MEP评分对慢性疼痛和残疾患者进行分类的准确性。结果:DRF后2个月,PAR评分≥3 (AUC为0.77)或MEP评分≥6 (AUC为0.78)预测6个月时中度至重度腕关节疼痛,而2个月MEP评分≥7 (AUC为0.79)预测损伤后6个月持续的腕关节残疾。2个月时MEPR为2≤或≥8与6个月时的不良疼痛和6个月和12个月时的功能结局相关(r方分别= 0.7和0.04),但预测准确性很差(AUC≤0.50)。结论:6个月时的慢性腕关节相关疼痛可以通过损伤后2个月的PAR升高(≥3/10)或MEP升高(≥6/10)来预测,而DRF后6个月的残疾最好通过2个月的MEP(≥7/10)来预测。这两种疼痛指标的比值增加了评估的复杂性,降低了分类的准确性。
{"title":"Early post-immobilization pain at rest, movement evoked pain, and their ratio as potential predictors of pain and disability at six- and 12-months after distal radius fracture.","authors":"Maryam Farzad,&nbsp;Joy C MacDermid,&nbsp;Saurabh Mehta,&nbsp;Ruby Grewal,&nbsp;Erfan Shafiee","doi":"10.1186/s40945-021-00101-6","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-021-00101-6","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Removal of immobilization is a critical phase of distal radius fracture (DRF) rehabilitation, typically occurring by 2 months post injury. This study examined the extent to which pain at rest (PAR), movement evoked pain (MEP), or the ratio between those (MEPR) assessed at 2-months after DRF predicts the occurrence of chronic pain or disability at 6- and 12-months after the injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study was done at the Hand and Upper Limb Centre (HULC), London, Ontario, Canada. A total of 229 patients with DRF (159 (69.4%) women) were included. Scores for the pain and function subscales of the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) were extracted for 2, 6 and 12 months after DRF. Logistic as well as nonlinear quartile regression examined whether PAR and MEP predicted the severity of chronic pain and disability at 6- and 12-months after DRF. Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve were plotted, where area under the curve (AUC) examined the accuracy of the PAR and MEP scores in classifying those who experienced chronic pain and disability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Scores of ≥3 (AUC of 0.77) for PAR or ≥ 6 (AUC of 0.78) for MEP at 2 months after DRF predicted moderate to severe wrist pain at 6-months, whereas scores of ≥7 (AUC of 0.79) for MEP at 2-months predicted ongoing wrist disability at 6-months after the injury. The MEPR of 2 ≤ or ≥ 8 at 2-months was associated with adverse pain at 6-months and functional outcomes at 6- and 12-months (R-square = 0.7 and 0.04 respectively), but prediction accuracy was very poor (AUC ≤ 0.50).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Chronic wrist-related pain at 6-months can be predicted by either elevated PAR ≥ 3/10) or MEP (≥ 6/10) reported at 2-months after the injury, while disability experienced at 6-months after DRF is best predicted by MEP (≥7/10) reported at 2-months. The ratio of these two pain indicators increases assessment complexity and reduces classification accuracy.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":"11 1","pages":"6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40945-021-00101-6","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"25412357","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
期刊
Archives of physiotherapy
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1