David J. Magee

Scales to Assess the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review

Background and Purpose: The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is commonly evaluated in order to assess the risk of biased estimates of treatment effects. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify scales used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs in health care research and summarize the content, construction, development, and psychometric properties of these scales. Methods: Extensive electronic database searches, along with a manual search, were performed. Results: One hundred five relevant studies were identified. They accounted for 21 scales and their modifications. The majority of scales had not been rigorously developed or tested for validity and reliability. The Jadad Scale presented the best validity and reliability evidence; however, its validity for physical therapy trials has not been supported. Discussion and Conclusion: Many scales are used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs, but most of these scales have not been adequately developed and have not been adequately tested for validity and reliability. A valid and reliable scale for the assessment of the methodological quality of physical therapy trials needs to be developed.

The Addition of Manual Lymph Drainage to Compression Therapy For Breast Cancer Related Lymphedema: a Randomized Controlled Trial

AbstractPurpose. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the reduction in arm lymphedema volume achieved from manual lymph drainage massage (MLD) in combination with multi-layered compression bandaging (CB) to that achieved by CB alone. Methods and materials. Fifty women with lymphedema (mean age of 59 years ± 13 years) were randomly assigned to 4 weeks of combined MLD/CB or CB alone. The primary study endpoint was the reduction in arm lymphedema volume, which was determined by water displacement volumetry and measurement of circumference. Independent assessors, blinded to subject treatment assignment, performed the outcome measurements. Results. Arm lymphedema volume decreased significantly after 4 weeks irrespective of treatment assignment (p < 0.001). Individuals with mild lymphedema receiving combined MLD/CB had a significantly larger percentage reduction in volume compared to individuals with mild lymphedema receiving CB alone, and compared to individuals with moderate or severe lymphedema receiving either treatment. Conclusion. These findings indicate that CB, with or without MLD, is an effective intervention in reducing arm lymphedema volume. The findings suggest that CB on its own should be considered as a primary treatment option in reducing arm lymphedema volume. There may be an additional benefit from the application of MLD for women with mild lymphedema; however, this finding will need to be further examined in the research setting.

Effect of Exercise on Upper Extremity Pain and Dysfunction in Head and Neck Cancer Survivors A Randomized Controlled Trial

Shoulder pain and disability are well recognized complications associated with surgery for head and neck cancer. This study was designed to examine the effects of progressive resistance exercise training (PRET) on upper extremity pain and dysfunction in postsurgical head and neck cancer survivors.

Effectiveness of Interferential Current Therapy in the Management of Musculoskeletal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background Interferential current (IFC) is a common electrotherapeutic modality used to treat pain. Although IFC is widely used, the available information regarding its clinical efficacy is debatable. Purpose The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the available information regarding the efficacy of IFC in the management of musculoskeletal pain. Data Sources Randomized controlled trials were obtained through a computerized search of bibliographic databases (ie, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PEDro, Scopus, and Web of Science) from 1950 to February 8, 2010. Data Extraction Two independent reviewers screened the abstracts found in the databases. Methodological quality was assessed using a compilation of items included in different scales related to rehabilitation research. The mean difference, with 95% confidence interval, was used to quantify the pooled effect. A chi-square test for heterogeneity was performed. Data Synthesis A total of 2,235 articles were found. Twenty studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Seven articles assessed the use of IFC on joint pain; 9 articles evaluated the use of IFC on muscle pain; 3 articles evaluated its use on soft tissue shoulder pain; and 1 article examined its use on postoperative pain. Three of the 20 studies were considered to be of high methodological quality, 14 studies were considered to be of moderate methodological quality, and 3 studies were considered to be of poor methodological quality. Fourteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. Conclusion Interferential current as a supplement to another intervention seems to be more effective for reducing pain than a control treatment at discharge and more effective than a placebo treatment at the 3-month follow-up. However, it is unknown whether the analgesic effect of IFC is superior to that of the concomitant interventions. Interferential current alone was not significantly better than placebo or other therapy at discharge or follow-up. Results must be considered with caution due to the low number of studies that used IFC alone. In addition, the heterogeneity across studies and methodological limitations prevent conclusive statements regarding analgesic efficacy.

Enhanced Therapeutic Alliance Modulates Pain Intensity and Muscle Pain Sensitivity in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: An Experimental Controlled Study

Background Physical therapy influences chronic pain by means of the specific ingredient of an intervention as well as contextual factors including the setting and therapeutic alliance (TA) between provider and patient. Objective The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of enhanced versus limited TA on pain intensity and muscle pain sensitivity in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) receiving either active or sham interferential current therapy (IFC). Design An experimental controlled study with repeated measures was conducted. Participants were randomly divided into 4 groups: (1) AL (n=30), which included the application of active IFC combined with a limited TA; (2) SL (n=29), which received sham IFC combined with a limited TA; (3) AE (n=29), which received active IFC combined with an enhanced TA; and (4) SE (n=29), which received sham IFC combined with an enhanced TA. Methods One hundred seventeen individuals with CLBP received a single session of active or sham IFC. Measurements included pain intensity as assessed with a numerical rating scale (PI-NRS) and muscle pain sensitivity as assessed via pressure pain threshold (PPT). Results Mean differences on the PI-NRS were 1.83 cm (95% CI=14.3–20.3), 1.03 cm (95% CI=6.6–12.7), 3.13 cm (95% CI=27.2–33.3), and 2.22 cm (95% CI=18.9–25.0) for the AL, SL, AE, and SE groups, respectively. Mean differences on PPTs were 1.2 kg (95% CI=0.7–1.6), 0.3 kg (95% CI=0.2–0.8), 2.0 kg (95% CI=1.6–2.5), and 1.7 kg (95% CI=1.3–2.1), for the AL, SL, AE, and SE groups, respectively. Limitations The study protocol aimed to test the immediate effect of the TA within a clinical laboratory setting. Conclusions The context in which physical therapy interventions are offered has the potential to dramatically improve therapeutic effects. Enhanced TA combined with active IFC appears to lead to clinically meaningful improvements in outcomes when treating patients with CLBP.

A systematic review of physiotherapy for spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis

The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the evidence concerning the effectiveness of physiotherapy intervention in the treatment of low back pain related to spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis. A literature search of published and unpublished articles resulted in the retrieval of 71 potential studies on the subject area. Fifty-two of the 71 articles were studies, and these studies were reviewed using preset relevance criteria. Given the inclusion and exclusion criteria chosen for this systematic review, there were very few acceptable studies and only two studies met the relevance criteria for the critical appraisal. Both studies provide evidence to suggest that specific exercise interventions, alone or in combination with other treatments, have a positive effect on low-back pain due to spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis; however, the type of exercise used was different in the two studies. In this review, very few prospective studies were found that examined the efficacy of physiotherapy on the topic area; therefore, few conclusions can be made, and further research is warranted.

Clinical relevance vs. statistical significance: Using neck outcomes in patients with temporomandibular disorders as an example

Statistical significance has been used extensively to evaluate the results of research studies. Nevertheless, it offers only limited information to clinicians. The assessment of clinical relevance can facilitate the interpretation of the research results into clinical practice. The objective of this study was to explore different methods to evaluate the clinical relevance of the results using a cross-sectional study as an example comparing different neck outcomes between subjects with temporomandibular disorders and healthy controls. Subjects were compared for head and cervical posture, maximal cervical muscle strength, endurance of the cervical flexor and extensor muscles, and electromyographic activity of the cervical flexor muscles during the CranioCervical Flexion Test (CCFT). The evaluation of clinical relevance of the results was performed based on the effect size (ES), minimal important difference (MID), and clinical judgement. The results of this study show that it is possible to have statistical significance without having clinical relevance, to have both statistical significance and clinical relevance, to have clinical relevance without having statistical significance, or to have neither statistical significance nor clinical relevance. The evaluation of clinical relevance in clinical research is crucial to simplify the transfer of knowledge from research into practice. Clinical researchers should present the clinical relevance of their results.

The association between neck disability and jaw disability

The association between cervical spine disorders (CSD) and temporomandibular disorders (TMD) has been extensively investigated. However, no studies investigating the relationship between the level of jaw disability and neck disability have been published. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine whether there was a relationship between neck disability measured using the neck disability index (NDI) and jaw disability measured through the jaw function scale (JFS). A sample of 154 subjects who attended the TMD/Orofacial Pain clinic and students and staff at the University of Alberta participated in this study. All subjects were asked to complete the NDI, the JFS, the jaw disability checklist (JDC), and the level of chronic disability of TMD (chronic pain grade disability questionnaire used in the RDC/TMD). Spearman rho test was used to analyse the relationship between neck disability and jaw disability. Multiple regression analysis was used to determine the association between the level of chronic disability of TMD and neck disability. A strong relationship between neck disability and jaw disability was found (r = 0.82). A subject with a high level of TMD disability (grade IV) increased by about 19 points on the NDI when compared with a person without TMD disability. These results have implications for clinical practice. If patients with TMD have neck disability in addition to jaw disability, treatment needs to focus on both areas because the improvement of one could have an influence on the other.

Differences in Range of Motion Between Dominant and Nondominant Sides of Upper and Lower Extremities

OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to compare ranges of motion (ROM) between dominant and nondominant sides for the joints of the upper and lower extremities. METHODS Ninety healthy white women from 18 to 59 years of age were measured in this study. Active and passive ROM were measured for the ankle, knee, hip, shoulder, elbow, and wrist using a standard goniometer. The order of the joints, motion, sides, and active or passive motion testing was randomly selected. A paired t test was used for the comparison between sides. RESULTS The results of this study showed a statistically significant difference between dominant and nondominant sides for 34 of the 60 ROM measured. The maximum mean difference between sides for all ROM measured was 7.5 degrees . CONCLUSION The results of this show that some ROM are different between body sides and that when these differences exist they are minimal and may not be clinically insignificant. These results support the practice of using the opposite side of the body as an indicator of preinjury or normal extremity ROM.

Reliability of scapular positioning measurement procedure using the Palpation Meter (PALM)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Observation and measurement of the static position of the scapula is important for investigating both shoulder and neck pathology. Measurement of scapular position is complex and lacks a clinically useful instrument. The objective of this study was to investigate the reliability of the Palpation Meter (PALM) for measuring scapular position when the glenohumeral joint is held in various positions. METHODS Thirty normal subjects were recruited for a test-retest reliability study. Three raters conducted measurements on two different occasions to estimate intra- and inter-rater reliability. The scapular positions evaluated in this study were: (1) the horizontal distance between the scapula and the spine in the scapular resting position and during elevation of the arm in the scapular plane; and (2) the vertical distance between C(7) and the acromion (C(7)-A). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and Bland and Altman limits of agreement were calculated. RESULTS Reliability values for measurements of the horizontal distance between the scapula and the spine were generally good for both intra-rater (ICC 0.81 to 0.89; SEM 0.56 to 1.17cm) and inter-rater (ICC 0.67 to 0.89; SEM 0.59 to 0.98cm) evaluation. Reliability values of measurement of depression of the acromion were also good for both intra-rater (ICC 0.72 to 0.78; SEM 0.66 to 0.79) and inter-rater (ICC 0.76; SEM 0.64) evaluation. No systematic bias was observed with Bland and Altman analysis. CONCLUSIONS The PALM is a reliable tool for the measurement of scapular positioning in a healthy sample. Future studies should be conducted to further investigate the clinometric properties of the PALM in patient populations before its clinical usefulness for measuring scapular position can be established.