Peter J Heine

Should we abandon cervical spine manipulation for mechanical neck pain? Yes.

Benedict Wand and colleagues argue that the risks of cervical spine manipulation are not justified, but David Cassidy and colleagues (doi:10.1136/bmj.e3680) think it is a valuable addition to patient care

Exercises to improve function of the rheumatoid hand (SARAH): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND Disease-modifying biological agents and other drug regimens have substantially improved control of disease activity and joint damage in people with rheumatoid arthritis of the hand. However, commensurate changes in function and quality of life are not always noted. Tailored hand exercises might provide additional improvements, but evidence is lacking. We estimated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tailored hand exercises in addition to usual care during 12 months. METHODS In this pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-group trial, at 17 National Health Service sites across the UK we randomly assigned 490 adults with rheumatoid arthritis who had pain and dysfunction of the hands and had been on a stable drug regimen for at least 3 months, to either usual care or usual care plus a tailored strengthening and stretching hand exercise programme. Participants were randomly assigned with stratification by centre. Allocation was computer generated and unmasked to participants and therapists delivering treatment after randomisation. Outcome assessors and all investigators were masked to allocation. Physiotherapists or occupational therapists gave the treatments. The primary outcome was the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire overall hand function score at 12 months. The analysis was by intention to treat. We calculated cost per quality-adjusted life-year. This trial is registered as ISRCTN 89936343. FINDINGS Between Oct 5, 2009, and May 10, 2011, we screened 1606 people, of whom 490 were randomly assigned to usual care (n=244) or tailored exercises (n=246). 438 of 490 participants (89%) provided 12 month follow-up data. Improvements in overall hand function were 3·6 points (95% CI 1·5-5·7) in the usual care group and 7·9 points (6·0-9·9) in the exercise group (mean difference between groups 4·3, 95% CI 1·5-7·1; p=0·0028). Pain, drug regimens, and health-care resource use were stable for 12 months, with no difference between the groups. No serious adverse events associated with the treatment were recorded. The cost of tailored hand exercise was £156 per person; cost per quality-adjusted life-year was £9549 with the EQ-5D (£17,941 with imputation for missing data). INTERPRETATION We have shown that a tailored hand exercise programme is a worthwhile, low-cost intervention to provide as an adjunct to various drug regimens. Maximisation of the benefits of biological and DMARD regimens in terms of function, disability, and health-related quality of life should be an important treatment aim. FUNDING UK National Institute of Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme (NIHR HTA), project number 07/32/05.

Development and delivery of an exercise intervention for rheumatoid arthritis: Strengthening and stretching for rheumatoid arthritis of the hand (SARAH) trial

This paper describes the development and implementation of a hand exercise intervention for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as part of a large multi-centred randomised controlled trial in a U.K. National Health Service (NHS) setting. Participants are eligible if diagnosed with RA according to American College of Rheumatology criteria, have a history of disease activity, functional deficit or impairment in the hand and/or wrist, and have been on a stable medication regime for at least 3 months. The intervention development was informed by the current evidence base, published guidelines, clinician and expert opinion, and a pilot study. The exercise programme targets known, potentially modifiable physical impairments of the hand with 5 exercise sessions and a home exercise component over a 12 week period. The intervention will be provided to 240 participants along with usual care. A further 240 will receive usual care only as part of the control arm. Specific details of the treatments delivered are described. [ISRCTN no: 89936343].

Strengthening and stretching for rheumatoid arthritis of the hand (SARAH). A randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND The effectiveness of exercise for improving hand and wrist function in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is uncertain. OBJECTIVES The study aims were (1) to estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding an optimised exercise programme for hands and upper limbs to standard care for patients with RA; and (2) to qualitatively describe the experience of participants in the trial with a particular emphasis on acceptability of the intervention, exercise behaviours and reasons for adherence/non-adherence. DESIGN A pragmatic, multicentred, individually randomised controlled trial with an embedded qualitative study. Outcome assessors were blind to group assignment and independent of treatment delivery. SETTING Seventeen NHS trusts in England comprising 21 rheumatology and therapy departments. PARTICIPANTS Adults with RA who had pain and dysfunction of the hands and/or wrists and had been on stable medication for at least 3 months. Patients were excluded if they were under 18 years old, had undergone upper limb surgery/fracture in the last 6 months, were on a waiting list for upper limb surgery or were pregnant. INTERVENTIONS Usual care or usual care plus an individualised exercise programme. Usual care consisted of joint protection education, general exercise advice and functional splinting if required. The exercise programme consisted of six sessions of strengthening and stretching exercises with a hand therapist, daily home exercises and strategies to maximise adherence. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was the Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire (MHQ) overall hand function subscale score at 12 months. Secondary outcome measures included the full MHQ, pain, health-related quality of life (Short Form questionnaire-12 items), impairment (grip strength, dexterity and range of motion) and self-efficacy. European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, medication and health-care use were collected for the health economics evaluation. Follow-up was at 4 and 12 months post randomisation. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS We randomised 490 patients (244 to usual care, 246 to exercise programme). Compliance with the treatments was very good (93% of usual care participants and 75% of exercise programme participants completed treatment). Outcomes were obtained for 89% of participants at 12 months (222 for usual care, 216 for exercise programme). There was a statistically significant difference in favour of the exercise programme for the primary outcome at 4 and 12 months [mean difference 4.6 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2 to 7.0 points; and mean difference 4.4 points, 95% CI 1.6 to 7.1 points, respectively]. There were no significant differences in pain scores or adverse events. The estimated difference in mean quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) accrued over 12 months was 0.01 greater (95% CI -0.03 to 0.05) in the exercise programme group. Imputed analysis produced incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimates of £17,941 (0.59 probability of cost-effectiveness at willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per QALY). The qualitative study found the exercise programme to be acceptable and highlighted the importance of the therapist in enabling patients to establish a routine and incorporate the exercises into their lives. CONCLUSIONS The results of the Strengthening And stretching for Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Hand trial suggest that the addition of an exercise programme for RA hands/wrists to usual care is clinically effective and cost-effective when compared with usual care alone. No adverse effects were associated with the exercise programme. The economic analysis suggests that the intervention is likely to be cost-effective. STUDY REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 89936343.

Strengthening and stretching for rheumatoid arthritis of the hand (SARAH): design of a randomised controlled trial of a hand and upper limb exercise intervention - ISRCTN89936343

BackgroundRheumatoid Arthritis (RA) commonly affects the hands and wrists with inflammation, deformity, pain, weakness and restricted mobility leading to reduced function. The effectiveness of exercise for RA hands is uncertain, although evidence from small scale studies is promising. The Strengthening And Stretching for Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Hand (SARAH) trial is a pragmatic, multi-centre randomised controlled trial evaluating the clinical and cost effectiveness of adding an optimised exercise programme for hands and upper limbs to best practice usual care for patients with RA.Methods/design480 participants with problematic RA hands will be recruited through 17 NHS trusts. Treatments will be provided by physiotherapists and occupational therapists. Participants will be individually randomised to receive either best practice usual care (joint protection advice, general exercise advice, functional splinting and assistive devices) or best practice usual care supplemented with an individualised exercise programme of strengthening and stretching exercises. The study assessors will be blinded to treatment allocation and will follow participants up at four and 12 months. The primary outcome measure is the Hand function subscale of the Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire, and secondary outcomes include hand and wrist impairment measures, quality of life, and resource use. Economic and qualitative studies will also be carried out in parallel.DiscussionThis paper describes the design and development of a trial protocol of a complex intervention study based in therapy out-patient departments. The findings will provide evidence to support or refute the use of an optimised exercise programme for RA of the hand in addition to best practice usual care.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN89936343

Hand exercises for patients with rheumatoid arthritis: an extended follow-up of the SARAH randomised controlled trial.

Objectives The Stretching And strengthening for Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Hand (SARAH) randomised controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness of a hand exercise programme and demonstrated it was clinically effective and cost-effective at 12 months. The aim of this extended follow-up was to evaluate the effects of the SARAH programme beyond 12 months. Methods Using postal questionnaires, we collected the Michigan Hand Questionnaire hand function (primary outcome), activities of daily living and work subscales, pain troublesomeness, self-efficacy and health-related quality of life. All participants were asked how often they performed hand exercises for their rheumatoid arthritis. Mean difference in hand function scores were analysed by a linear model, adjusted for baseline score. Results Two-thirds (n=328/490, 67%) of the original cohort provided data for the extended follow-up. The mean follow-up time was 26 months (range 19–40 months). There was no difference in change in hand function scores between the two groups at extended follow-up (mean difference (95% CI) 1.52 (−1.71 to 4.76)). However, exercise group participants were still significantly improved compared with baseline (p=0.0014) unlike the best practice usual care group (p=0.1122). Self-reported performance of hand exercises had reduced substantially. Conclusions Participants undertaking the SARAH exercise programme had improved hand function compared with baseline >2 years after randomisation. This was not the case for the control group. However, scores were no longer statistically different between the groups indicating the effect of the programme had diminished over time. This reduction in hand function compared with earlier follow-up points coincided with a reduction in self-reported performance of hand exercises. Further intervention to promote long-term adherence may be warranted. Trial registration number ISRCTN89936343; Results.

Current practice in the rehabilitation of complex regional pain syndrome: a survey of practitioners

Abstract Introduction: International clinical guidelines for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome recommend a wide range and variation of rehabilitation therapies as the core treatment. It is likely that most therapists employ a range of approaches when managing people with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome but a recent Cochrane review identified little evidence relating to the effectiveness of multi-modal rehabilitation. There is need for up to date trials of rehabilitation for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, but in order to develop a clear model of best practice that can be rigorously evaluated we need to understand current practice. Method: An electronic survey was disseminated internationally to clinicians involved in the rehabilitation of individuals with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome. The survey aimed to establish which criteria are used for diagnosis and which modalities clinicians use to treat Complex Regional Pain Syndrome and which they consider ineffective or harmful. Results: 132 valid responses were received. A third of participants did not use any established criteria to diagnose Complex Regional Pain Syndrome. Current practice commonly included patient education, encouragement of self-management, and physical exercises. Cortically directed treatments such as graded motor imagery and psychological approaches were often incorporated into treatment whereas pain provocative therapies, splinting, contrast bathing, and cold and heat therapy were rarely used in the acute or chronic phase of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome. Conclusion: A broad range of modalities are currently used in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome rehabilitation. Practice appears to be characterized by educational and exercise based interventions delivered in a pain-contingent manner which largely echoes recommendations in international clinical guidelines. Implications for Rehabilitation: Patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome suffer from a painful and disabling condition for which we still do not know the best treatment options. From our survey sample most clinicians use treatments recommended in the international guidelines. A large proportion of clinicians from our survey sample are not using internationally recognized diagnostic criteria and we therefore recommend that clinicians become familiar with these criteria and use them for all suspected Complex Regional Pain Syndrome cases.

Effectiveness of scoliosis-specific exercises for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis compared with other non-surgical interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE To assess the effectiveness of scoliosis-specific exercises (SSE) on adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) compared with other non-surgical interventions. BACKGROUND AIS is a complex deformity of the spine that develops between the age of 10years and skeletal maturity. SSE are prescribed to patients to reduce or slow curve progression, although their effectiveness is unknown. METHODS Electronic databases were searched for relevant studies. Randomised controlled trials were eligible if they compared SSE with non-surgical interventions for individuals with AIS. Three authors independently extracted data, evaluated methodological quality and assessed the quality of evidence. Meta-analysis was performed where possible; otherwise, descriptive syntheses are reported. RESULTS Nine randomised controlled trials were included. Four had a high risk of bias, three had an unclear risk and two had a low risk. Very-low-quality evidence indicated that SSE improved some measures of spinal deformity, function, pain and overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Very-low-quality evidence suggested that SSE had no effect on self-image and mental health. Very-low-quality evidence showed that bracing was more effective than SSE on measures of spinal deformity. However, SSE showed greater improvements in function, HRQoL, self-image, mental health and patient satisfaction with treatment. No differences were found for pain or trunk rotation. CONCLUSIONS SSE may be effective for improving measures of spinal deformity for people with AIS, but the evidence is of very low quality. Future studies should evaluate relevant clinical measures and cost-effectiveness using rigorous methods and reporting standards.

Cost-utility of maintained physical activity and physiotherapy in the management of distal arm pain: an economic evaluation of data from a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Arm pain is common, costly to health services and society. Physiotherapy referral is standard management, and while awaiting treatment, advice is often given to rest, but the evidence base is weak. OBJECTIVE To assess the cost-effectiveness of advice to remain active (AA) versus advice to rest (AR); and immediate physiotherapy (IP) versus usual care (waiting list) physiotherapy (UCP). METHODS Twenty-six-week within-trial economic evaluation (538 participants aged ≥18 years randomized to usual care, i.e. AA (n = 178), AR (n = 182) or IP (n = 178). Regression analysis estimated differences in mean costs and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated. Primary analysis comprised the 193 patients with complete resource use (UK NHS perspective) and EQ-5D data. Sensitivity analysis investigated uncertainty. RESULTS Baseline-adjusted cost differences were £88 [95% confidence interval (CI): -14, 201) AA versus AR; -£14 (95% CI: -87, 66) IP versus UCP. Baseline-adjusted QALY differences were 0.0095 (95% CI: -0.0140, 0.0344) AA versus AR; 0.0143 (95% CI: -0.0077, 0.0354) IP versus UCP. There was a 71 and 89% probability that AA (versus AR) and IP (versus UCP) were the most cost-effective option using a threshold of £20,000 per additional QALY.  The results were robust in the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSION The difference in mean costs and mean QALYs between the competing strategies was small and not statistically significant. However, decision-makers may judge that IP was not shown to be any more effective than delayed treatment, and was no more costly than delayed physiotherapy. AA is preferable to one that encourages AR, as it is more effective and more likely to be cost-effective than AR.

A Web-Based Training Resource for Therapists to Deliver an Evidence-Based Exercise Program for Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Hand (iSARAH): Design, Development, and Usability Testing

Background The Strengthening and Stretching for Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Hand (SARAH) is a tailored, progressive exercise program for people having difficulties with wrist and hand function due to rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The program was evaluated in a large-scale clinical trial and was found to improve hand function, was safe to deliver, and was cost-effective. These findings led to the SARAH program being recommended in the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines for the management of adults with RA. To facilitate the uptake of this evidence-based program by clinicians, we proposed a Web-based training program for SARAH (iSARAH) to educate and train physiotherapists and occupational therapists on delivering the SARAH program in their practice. The overall iSARAH implementation project was guided by the 5 phases of the analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation (ADDIE) system design model. Objective The objective of our study was to conduct the first 3 phases of the model in the development of the iSARAH project. Methods Following publication of the trial, the SARAH program materials were made available to therapists to download from the trial website for use in clinical practice. A total of 35 therapists who downloaded these materials completed an online survey to provide feedback on practice trends in prescribing hand exercises for people with RA, perceived barriers and facilitators to using the SARAH program in clinical practice, and their preferences for the content and Web features of iSARAH. The development and design of iSARAH were further guided by a team of multidisciplinary health professionals (n=17) who took part in a half-day development meeting. We developed the preliminary version of iSARAH and tested it among therapists (n=10) to identify and rectify usability issues and to produce the final version. Results The major recommendations made by therapists and the multidisciplinary team were having a simple Web design and layout, clear exercise pictures and videos, and compatibility of iSARAH on various browsers and devices. We rectified all usability issues in the preliminary version to develop the final version of iSARAH, which included 4 short modules and additional sections on self-assessment, frequently asked questions, and a resource library. Conclusions The use of the ADDIE design model and engagement of end users in the development and evaluation phases have rendered iSARAH a convenient, easy-to-use, and effective Web-based learning resource for therapists on how to deliver the SARAH program. There is also huge potential for adapting iSARAH across different cultures and languages, thus opening more opportunities for wider uptake and application of the SARAH program into practice.