Anamaria Jones
Federal University of São Paulo
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Anamaria Jones.
Physical Therapy | 2008
Luciana Oliveira e Silva; Valéria Valim; Ana Paula Pessanha; Leda M Oliveira; Samira Myamoto; Anamaria Jones; Jamil Natour
Background and Purpose: This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of hydrotherapy in subjects with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee compared with subjects with OA of the knee who performed land-based exercises. Subjects and Methods: Sixty-four subjects with OA of the knee were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups that performed exercises for 18 weeks: a water-based exercise group and a land-based exercise group. The outcome measures included a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain in the previous week, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), pain during gait assessed by a VAS at rest and immediately following a 50-foot (15.24-m) walk test (50FWT), walking time measured at fast and comfortable paces during the 50FWT, and the Lequesne Index. Measurements were recorded by a blinded investigator at baseline and at 9 and 18 weeks after initiating the intervention. Results: The 2 groups were homogenous regarding all parameters at baseline. Reductions in pain and improvements in WOMAC and Lequesne index scores were similar between groups. Pain before and after the 50FWT decreased significantly over time in both groups. However, the water-based exercise group experienced a significantly greater decrease in pain than the land-based exercise group before and after the 50FWT at the week-18 follow-up. Discussion and Conclusion: Both water-based and land-based exercises reduced knee pain and increased knee function in participants with OA of the knee. Hydrotherapy was superior to land-based exercise in relieving pain before and after walking during the last follow-up. Water-based exercises are a suitable and effective alternative for the management of OA of the knee.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases | 2012
Anamaria Jones; P G Silva; A C Silva; M Colucci; A Tuffanin; J R Jardim; Jamil Natour
Objective To assess the impact of daily cane use during gait in relation to pain, function, general health and energy expenditure among patients with knee osteoarthritis. Method Sixty-four patients were randomly assigned to an experimental group (EG) or control group (CG). The EG used a cane every day for 2 months, whereas the CG did not use a cane in this period. The first outcome was pain and the second were function (Lequesne and WOMAC), general health (SF-36) and energy expenditure (gas analysis during the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) with and without a cane). Evaluations were performed at baseline, 30 and 60 days. Results The groups were homogeneous for all parameters at baseline. Compared with the CG, the EG significantly improved pain (ES 0.18), function - Lequesne (ES 0.13), some domains of SF-36 (role physical, ES 0.07 and bodily pain, ES 0.08) and distance on the 6MWT with the cane (ES 0.16). At the end of the 6MWT with the cane, the EG significantly improved energy expenditure (ES 0.21), carbon dioxide production (ES 0.12) and metabolic equivalents (ES 0.15) compared with the CG. Conclusion A cane can be used to diminish pain, improve function and some aspects of quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis. The prescription of a cane should take into account the substantial increase in energy expenditure in the first month of use, whereas energy expenditure is no longer a factor for concern by the end of the second month due to adaptation to cane use. The trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00698412).
Clinics | 2010
Renata Alqualo Costa; Leda M Oliveira; Sandra Watanabe; Anamaria Jones; Jamil Natour
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the difference in isokinetic strength of hip muscles between patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and matched healthy controls, and to establish the correlation between this isokinetic strength and pain and function in patients with knee OA. METHODS: 25 patients with a diagnosis of unilateral knee OA, 25 patients with bilateral knee OA, and 50 matched controls were evaluated using the visual analog scale for pain, knee Lequesne index, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities questionnaire and an isokinetic test. RESULTS: The groups were matched for age, gender and body mass index. The results of the isokinetic test revealed lower peak torque of the hip in patients with OA of the knee than in the control group for all movements studied. Strong correlations were found between the peak torque, visual analog scale and function. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with OA of the knee exhibit lower isokinetic strength in the hip muscles than healthy control subjects. Strengthening the muscles surrounding the hip joint may help to decrease pain in people with knee OA. Some correlations between pain/function and peak torque were found.
Clinical Rehabilitation | 2015
Jamil Natour; Luciana de Araujo Cazotti; Luiza Helena Ribeiro; Andréia Salvador Baptista; Anamaria Jones
Objective: To assess the effectiveness of pilates method on patients with chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP). Method: A randomized controlled trial was carried out in sixty patients with a diagnosis of chronic non-specific LBP. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups: Experimental Group (EG) that maintained medication treatment with use of NSAID and underwent treatment with the pilates method and Control Group (CG) that continue medication treatment with use of NSAID and did not undergo any other intervention. A blinded assessor performed all evaluations at baseline (T0), after 45, 90, and 180 days (T45, T90 and T180) for: pain (VAS), function (Roland Morris questionnaire), quality of life (SF-36), satisfaction with treatment (Likert scale), flexibility (sit and reach test) and NSAID intake. Results: The groups were homogeneous at baseline. Statistical differences favoring the EG were found with regard to pain (P < 0.001), function (P < 0.001) and the quality of life domains of functional capacity (P < 0.046), pain (P < 0.010) and vitality (P < 0.029). Statistical differences were also found between groups regarding the use of pain medication at T45, T90 and T180 (P < 0.010), with the EG taking fewer NSAIDs than the CG. Conclusions: The pilates method can be used by patients with LBP to improve pain, function and aspects related to quality of life (functional capacity, pain and vitality). Moreover, this method has no harmful effects on such patients.
Rheumatology | 2011
Emalie J. Hurkmans; Anamaria Jones; Linda C. Li; Theodora P. M. Vliet Vlieland
OBJECTIVE To assess the quality of guidelines published in peer-reviewed literature concerning the role of physiotherapy in the management of patients with RA. METHODS A systematic literature search for clinical practice guidelines that included physiotherapy interventions was performed in four electronic databases. We assessed the quality of the selected guidelines using the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation (AGREE) instrument. In addition, the recommendations of guidelines with the highest quality scores were summarized. RESULTS Eight clinical practice guidelines fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Scope/purpose was the most often adequately addressed AGREE domain (in seven of the eight guidelines) and applicability the least (in two of the eight guidelines). Based on the AGREE domain scores, six guidelines could be recommended or strongly recommended for clinical use. Five out of these six (strongly) recommended guidelines included a recommendation on exercise therapy and/or patient education, with these interventions being recommended in every case. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and thermotherapy were recommended in four of these six guidelines. US, thermotherapy, low-level laser therapy, massage, passive mobilization and balneotherapy were addressed in one or two of these six guidelines. CONCLUSION Six of eight clinical practice guidelines addressing physiotherapy interventions were recommended or strongly recommended according to the AGREE instrument. In general, guideline recommendations on physiotherapy intervention, from both the recommended guidelines as well as from the not recommended guidelines, lacked detail concerning mode of delivery, intensity, frequency and duration.
Arthritis Care and Research | 2008
Linda C. Li; Elizabeth M. Badley; Crystal MacKay; Dianne Mosher; Shahin (Walji) Jamal; Anamaria Jones; Claire Bombardier
Introduction Providing adequate care for persons with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an ongoing challenge. Although the current evidence supports the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) within the first 3 months of symptoms appearing (1–3), delay in DMARD use and other gaps in care have been reported across communities (4–9). The situation has worsened due to the shortage of specialists (10). The process of seeking medical treatment begins with the person’s recognition of the symptoms and the action of visiting a family physician (FP) (Figure 1, levels A and B). The FP then performs the appropriate investigations, and if RA is suspected, the FP refers the person to a rheumatologist (levels B and C) who then conducts further tests, provides a diagnosis, and prescribes DMARDs and other appropriate medications (level D). Next, the person may be referred to the available community resources and/or rehabilitation programs that enable self-management (levels E1–E4), and will be periodically assessed by a rheumatologist (level F). Successful delivery of these interventions is largely dependent on the availability of local programs and the coordination among the rheumatologist, the FP, and other health professionals. In the case of severe joint damage, the person is referred for an orthopedic consultation and surgery may be considered (levels G1–G4). Moving from one level to the next involves a potential wait period, which may be caused by, for example, delays in patients’ and health professionals’ recognition of RA symptoms, delays in referral to rheumatologists, lack of access to specialist care or community resources, or patients’ own choices. Delays may occur at any of the following periods (Figure 1): Wait 1: the time between a person’s development and awareness of the seriousness of the symptoms and the first visit with an FP; Wait 2: the time between the first visit with an FP and the first visit with a rheumatologist; Wait 3: from the first rheumatology visit to the date the patient starts the appropriate therapy; Wait 4: from a patient starting medication to the date when he or she has access to adequate resources that enable self-management; andWait 5: from the decision date for an orthopedic consultation to the date of the patient’s first visit with a surgeon and, subsequently, the date of surgery. The delay between symptom onset and DMARD prescription for individuals with RA is a problem across countries (Waits 1–3), with a median lag time ranging from 6.5 to 19 months (5–9). A few studies have attempted to estimate the length of Wait 1, but the findings are inconsistent. Two studies, a retrospective cohort from the US (11) and a prospective study from Norway (12), estimated a median delay of 4 weeks for the first FP visit. However, more recent research from the UK estimated 12 weeks (13), with 38% of people waiting more than 3 months before seeing an FP (14). The lag time from FP visit to rheumatologist consultation is believed to be a major source of the delay (Wait 2). In a UK study, 44% waited more than 3 months for a specialist referral (14). Recent research from Canada also found a median lag time of 79 days between the FP visit and the first rheumatologist visit (15). In contrast, the Linda C. Li, PT, PhD: University of British Columbia and Arthritis Research Centre of Canada, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Elizabeth M. Badley, DPhil: Arthritis Community Research and Evaluation Unit, Toronto Western Research Institute and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Crystal MacKay, PT, MHSc: Arthritis Community Research and Evaluation Unit, Toronto Western Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Dianne Mosher, MD, FRCP(C): Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada; Shahin (Walji) Jamal, MD, FRCP(C): St. Michael’s Hospital and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Anamaria Jones, PT, PhD(Candidate): Arthritis Research Centre of Canada, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, and Federal University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil; Claire Bombardier, MD, FRCP(C): University Health Network, University of Toronto, Institute for Work & Health, and Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Dr. Mosher has received honoraria (less than
Clinics | 2009
Simone Carazzato Maciel; F. Jennings; Anamaria Jones; Jamil Natour
10,000) from serving on the advisory board for Pfizer, and has received speaking fees (less than
Sao Paulo Medical Journal | 2008
Renata Trajano Borges Jorge; Miguel Sabino Neto; Jamil Natour; Daniela Francescato Veiga; Anamaria Jones; Lydia Masako Ferreira
10,000 each) from Schering, Amgen, and Wyeth. Address correspondence to Linda C. Li, PT, PhD, Arthritis Research Centre of Canada, 895 West 10th Avenue, Room 324, Vancouver, British Columbia V5Z 1L7, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]. Submitted for publication December 27, 2007; accepted in revised form April 22, 2008. Arthritis & Rheumatism (Arthritis Care & Research) Vol. 59, No. 8, August 15, 2008, pp 1171–1183 DOI 10.1002/art.23931
Clinical Rehabilitation | 2015
Renata Trajano Borges Jorge; Marcelo Cardoso de Souza; Aline Chiari; Anamaria Jones; Artur da Rocha Corrêa Fernandes; Império Lombardi Júnior; Jamil Natour
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop and validate a questionnaire on specific knowledge about low back pain entitled “The Low Back Pain Knowledge Questionnaire”. INTRODUCTION: There is a need for instruments to assess patient knowledge regarding chronic illness. Such methods can contribute to the education of patients. METHODS: The Low Back Pain Knowledge Questionnaire was developed through five focus groups. The questionnaire was distributed to 50 patients to assess their comprehension of the terms. To assess the reproducibility, 20 patients were surveyed by two different interviewers on the same day and twice by a single interviewer with a one-to-two week interval. For the construct validation, the Low Back Pain Knowledge Questionnaire was given to 20 healthcare professionals with knowledge on low back pain and 20 patients to determine whether the questionnaire would discriminate between the two different populations. To assess the sensitivity of the questionnaire to changes in the knowledge level of the patients, it was given to 60 patients who were randomly assigned to the Intervention Group and the Control Group. The Intervention Group answered the questionnaire both before and after attending a chronic back pain educational program (back school), whereas the Control Group answered the questionnaire twice with an interval of one month and no educational intervention. RESULTS: The focus groups generated a questionnaire with 16 items. The Spearman’s correlation coefficient and the intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.61 to 0.95 in the assessments of the intra-observer and inter-observer reproducibility (p< 0.01). In the construct validation, the healthcare professionals and patients showed statistically different scores (p< 0.001). In the phase regarding the sensitivity to change, the Intervention Group exhibited a significant increase in their specific knowledge over the Control Group (p< 0.001). CONCLUSION: The Low Back Pain Knowledge Questionnaire was validated and proved to be reproducible, valid and sensitive to changes in patient knowledge.
Clinics | 2008
Anamaria Jones; Ana Claudia Monteiro Alves; Leda M Oliveira; Marcelo Saad; Jamil Natour
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE Body image improvement is considered to be the main reason for undergoing plastic surgery. The objective was to translate the Body Dysmorphic Disorder Examination (BDDE) into Brazilian Portuguese and to adapt and validate this questionnaire for use in Brazil. DESIGN AND SETTING Cross-sectional survey, at the Department of Plastic Surgery of Universidade Federal de São Paulo. METHODS The BDDE was first translated into Portuguese and then back-translated into English. These translations were then discussed by healthcare professionals in order to establish the final Brazilian version. In a second stage, the validity and reliability of the BDDE were assessed. For this, patients were initially interviewed by two interviewers and subsequently, by only one of these interviewers. On the first occasion, in addition to the BDDE, the body shape questionnaire (BSQ) and the Rosenberg self-esteem scale were also applied. These questionnaires were applied to 90 patients. RESULTS Six questions were modified during the assessment of cultural equivalence. Cronbachs alpha was 0.89 and the intraclass correlation coefficients for interobserver and test-retest reliability were 0.91 and 0.87, respectively. Pearsons coefficient showed no correlation between the BDDE and the Rosenberg self-esteem scale (0.22), whereas there was a moderate correlation between the BDDE and the BSQ (0.64). CONCLUSIONS The BDDE was successfully translated and adapted, with good internal consistency, reliability and construct validity.