Randomized trial of two physiotherapy interventions for primary care neck and back pain patients: 'McKenzie' vs brief physiotherapy pain management

Contextual Factors-Enriched Standard Care on mechanical neck pain (ContextualizAR trial): Protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Understanding the influence of contextual factors (CFs) on interventions for mechanical neck pain (MNP) is essential for evidence-based practice in physical therapy. However, the specific effects and synergies of combining different CFs remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The primary purpose of this study will be to determine if a CFs-Enriched Standard Care (SC) approach is an effective treatment for MNP in terms of reducing pain and improving function.

METHODS

This will be an assessor-blinded, 2-group (1:1) randomised clinical trial (RCT) aiming to enrol 94 participants with neck pain persisting for more than 4 weeks. Both groups will undergo 4 weeks of SC twice weekly, following established clinical practice guidelines. In the intervention group, CFs will be enhanced, encompassing the physical, psychological, and social elements inherent in the clinical encounter, based on existing evidence. The primary outcomes will encompass changes in pain and disability after 4 weeks of treatment, with a follow-up reassessment at week 12 post-treatment. Secondary outcomes will include changes in Active Range of Motion, Global Rating of Change, and Satisfaction with treatment. The change between groups after treatment and at the 12-week follow-up will be reported for all outcomes, considering the difference from scores recorded at baseline.

RESULTS

We hypothesise that a 4-week CFs-Enriched SC approach will be superior to SC alone in terms of patient-reported disability and pain, with measurements conducted using the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This RCT rigorously assesses the effect of purposeful manipulation of CFs during MNP treatment. By elucidating the role of these factors, our findings have the potential to significantly refine clinical practice in managing MNP, thereby enhancing patient care, and advancing the fields of physical therapy and rehabilitation.

Effectiveness of psychological interventions delivered by physiotherapists in the management of neck pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Physiotherapists are increasingly using psychological treatments for musculoskeletal conditions. We assessed the effects of physiotherapist-delivered psychological interventions on pain, disability, and quality of life in neck pain. We evaluated quality of intervention reporting. We searched databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising individuals with acute or chronic whiplash-associated disorder (WAD) or nontraumatic neck pain (NTNP), comparing physiotherapist-delivered psychological interventions to standard care or no treatment. Data were extracted regarding study characteristics and outcomes. Standardised mean difference (SMD) was calculated by random-effects meta-analysis. We evaluated certainty of evidence using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) and intervention reporting using TIDieR. Fourteen RCTs (18 articles-4 detail additional outcome/follow-up data) were included comprising 2028 patients, examining acute WAD (n = 4), subacute/mixed NTNP (n = 3), chronic WAD (n = 2), and chronic NTNP (n = 5). Treatment effects on pain favoured psychological interventions in chronic NTNP at short-term (SMD -0.40 [95% CI -0.73, -0.07]), medium-term (SMD -0.29 [95% CI -0.57, 0.00]), and long-term (SMD -0.32 [95% CI -0.60, -0.05]) follow-up. For disability, effects favoured psychological interventions in acute WAD at short-term follow-up (SMD -0.39 [95% CI -0.72, -0.07]) and chronic NTNP at short-term (SMD -0.53 [95% CI -0.91, -0.15]), medium-term (SMD -0.49 [95% CI -0.77, -0.21]), and long-term (SMD -0.60 [95% CI -0.94, -0.26]) follow-up. GRADE ratings were typically moderate, and intervention reporting often lacked provision of trial materials and procedural descriptions. Psychological interventions delivered by physiotherapists were more effective than standard physiotherapy for chronic NTNP (small-to-medium effects) and, in the short term, acute WAD.

The McKenzie Method Is an Effective Rehabilitation Paradigm for Treating Adults With Moderate-to-Severe Neck Pain: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

Neck pain is a common musculoskeletal condition frequently managed with numerous conservative interventions. The McKenzie method of mechanical diagnosis and therapy (MMDT) is a form of physical therapy evaluation and treatment that aims to improve pain and disability in patients with musculoskeletal pain, including neck pain. To date, no systematic review with meta-analysis has examined the use of the McKenzie MMDT for neck pain. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of the McKenzie MMDT in adult patients with neck pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed using PubMed, ScienceDirect, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Full search terms were "McKenzie method" OR "McKenzie approach" OR "McKenzie treatment" AND "neck pain." Inclusion criteria were the use of the McKenzie MMDT, level I randomized control trials (RCTs), adults, and outcomes of pain (0-10 scale) and disability (neck disability index). A total of 11 RCTs met the final selection criteria from 1,955 articles on initial search with 289 patients receiving the McKenzie MMDT out of 677 total patients. For meta-analysis, there was a clinically insignificant but statistically significant improvement in pain (1.14/10 points) in patients receiving the McKenzie MMDT versus control interventions (p<0.02). There was no significant improvement in the neck disability index score between the McKenzie MMDT versus control interventions (p=0.19). For severity of pain, there was a clinically and statistically significant improvement in moderate or severe pain (2.06/10 points; p<0.01), but not in mild-to-moderate pain (p=0.84) when comparing the McKenzie MMDT to control interventions. Overall, the McKenzie MMDT provides very small but statistically significant improvements in neck pain of all severity compared to control interventions. However, the McKenzie MMDT does provide clinically and statistically significant pain improvement in moderate-to-severe neck pain. Use of the McKenzie MMDT did not provide any significant improvement in disability compared to control interventions. This study is the first systematic review with meta-analysis on the effectiveness of the McKenzie MMDT for adult patients with neck pain.

Mechanical diagnosis and therapy in musculoskeletal pain of individuals with spinal cord injury

CONTEXT/OBJECTIVE

Musculoskeletal pain (MSKP) has high prevalence in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) is a method focused on identifying the pain source in the musculoskeletal system and presents good results in pain relief in people without neurological impairment. However, no studies have investigated the use of MDT in SCI population. The objective was to evaluate the applicability and outcomes of MDT treatment in pain relief and independence improvement in daily activities of individuals with SCI presenting MSKP.

DESIGN

Single-arm trial.

SETTING

Rehabilitation Hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-four individuals with SCI who presented MSKP.

INTERVENTION

MDT-certified physical therapist conducted assessments and treatments of pain according to the MDT approach.

OUTCOMES MEASURES

Numeric rating scale (NRS) was used to measure pain and Pain Disability Index (PDI) and Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) to evaluate daily activities.

RESULTS

Significant median decreases were found for NRS (from 7 to 2) and PDI (from 27 to 8) after MDT, whereas PSFS score presented a significant mean increase (from 3.2-7.7). The average decrease in pain after MDT treatment was 70.9% (5.36 on the NRS).

CONCLUSION

MDT can reduce pain and enhance independence in daily activities in individuals with SCI and MSKP.

The McKenzie method for (sub)acute non-specific low back pain

BACKGROUND

There is widespread agreement amongst clinicians that people with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) comprise a heterogeneous group and that their management should be individually tailored. One treatment known by its tailored design is the McKenzie method (e.g. an individualized program of exercises based on clinical clues observed during assessment).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of the McKenzie method in people with (sub)acute non-specific low back pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two trials registers up to 15 August 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of the McKenzie method in adults with (sub)acute (less than 12 weeks) NSLBP.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included five RCTs with a total of 563 participants recruited from primary or tertiary care. Three trials were conducted in the USA, one in Australia, and one in Scotland. Three trials received financial support from non-commercial funders and two did not provide information on funding sources. All trials were at high risk of performance and detection bias. None of the included trials measured adverse events. McKenzie method versus minimal intervention (educational booklet; McKenzie method as a supplement to other intervention - main comparison) There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may result in a slight reduction in pain in the short term (MD -7.3, 95% CI -12.0 to -2.56; 2 trials, 377 participants) but not in the intermediate term (MD -5.0, 95% CI -14.3 to 4.3; 1 trial, 180 participants). There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD -2.5, 95% CI -7.5 to 2.0; 2 trials, 328 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD -0.9, 95% CI -7.3 to 5.6; 1 trial, 180 participants). McKenzie method versus manual therapy There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce pain in the short term (MD -8.7, 95% CI -27.4 to 10.0; 3 trials, 298 participants) and may result in a slight increase in pain in the intermediate term (MD 7.0, 95% CI 0.7 to 13.3; 1 trial, 235 participants). There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD -5.0, 95% CI -15.0 to 5.0; 3 trials, 298 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD 4.3, 95% CI -0.7 to 9.3; 1 trial, 235 participants). McKenzie method versus other interventions (massage and advice) There is very low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD 4.0, 95% CI -15.4 to 23.4; 1 trial, 30 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD 10.0, 95% CI -8.9 to 28.9; 1 trial, 30 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low- to very low-certainty evidence, the treatment effects for pain and disability found in our review were not clinically important. Thus, we can conclude that the McKenzie method is not an effective treatment for (sub)acute NSLBP.

Matching the Outcomes to Treatment Targets of Exercise for Low Back Pain: Does it Make a Difference? Results of Secondary Analyses From Individual Patient Data of Randomised Controlled Trials and Pooling of Results Across Trials in Comparative Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To explore whether using a single matched or composite outcome might affect the results of previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing exercise for non-specific low back pain (NSLBP). The first objective was to explore whether a single matched outcome generated greater standardized mean differences (SMDs) when compared with the original unmatched primary outcome SMD. The second objective was to explore whether a composite measure, composed of matched outcomes, generated a greater SMD when compared with the original primary outcome SMD.

DESIGN

We conducted exploratory secondary analyses of data.

SETTING

Seven RCTs were included, of which 2 were based in the USA (University research clinic, Veterans Affairs medical center) and the UK (primary care clinics, nonmedical centers). One each were based in Norway (clinics), Brazil (primary care), and Japan (outpatient clinics).

PARTICIPANTS

The first analysis comprised 1) 5 RCTs (n=1033) that used an unmatched primary outcome but included (some) matched outcomes as secondary outcomes, and the second analysis comprised 2) 4 RCTs (n=864) that included multiple matched outcomes by developing composite outcomes (N=1897).

INTERVENTION

Exercise compared with no exercise.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The composite consisted of standardized averaged matched outcomes. All analyses replicated the RCTs' primary outcome analyses.

RESULTS

Of 5 RCTs, 3 had greater SMDs with matched outcomes (pooled effect SMD 0.30 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.04, 0.56], P=.02) compared with an unmatched primary outcome (pooled effect SMD 0.19 [95% CI -0.03, 0.40] P=.09). Of 4 composite outcome analyses, 3 RCTs had greater SMDs in the composite outcome (pooled effect SMD 0.28 [95% CI 0.05, 0.51] P=.02) compared with the primary outcome (pooled effect SMD 0.24 [95% CI -0.04, 0.53] P=.10).

CONCLUSIONS

These exploratory analyses suggest that using an outcome matched to exercise treatment targets in NSLBP RCTs may produce greater SMDs than an unmatched primary outcome. Composite outcomes could offer a meaningful way of investigating superiority of exercise than single domain outcomes.

The association between self-efficacy on function and pain outcomes among patients with chronic low back pain managed using the McKenzie approach: a prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Self-efficacy is a determinant of function and pain outcomes in patients with chronic low back pain receiving physiotherapy. The McKenzie approach is an effective intervention for patients with back pain that may affect self-efficacy. Study aims were to determine if, among patients with back pain being managed by McKenzie-credentialed physiotherapists: intake self-efficacy is correlated with intake function and pain; intake self-efficacy is associated with changes in function and pain during treatment; self-efficacy improves during treatment; and improvements in self-efficacy during treatment are associated with improvements in function and pain at discharge.

METHODS

Two-hundred-eighty-two subjects with chronic low back pain seen by McKenzie-credentialed clinicians provided data on self-efficacy, function and pain at intake and discharge.

RESULTS

Self-efficacy was correlated with function and pain at intake; however, intake self-efficacy was not associated with function or pain outcomes. Self-efficacy increased during treatment. This increase was associated with improvements in function and pain at discharge.

CONCLUSION

While intake self-efficacy was associated with function and pain when initiating physiotherapy, it did not result in improved treatment outcomes. Specific interventions may be necessary to improve self-efficacy. The increases in self-efficacy observed during treatment were associated with improvements in function and pain outcomes at discharge.

A Mixed Comparison of Interventions for Kinesiophobia in Individuals With Musculoskeletal Pain: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Objective

This systematic review aims to make a mixed comparison of interventions for kinesiophobia and individuals with musculoskeletal pain.

Methods

A comprehensive search strategy was conducted in the database of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science with the inclusion criteria: (1) randomized controlled design; (2) patients with musculoskeletal pain as participants; (3) treatments protocols of kinesiophobia as interventions or comparisons; (4) the score of Tampa Scale Kinesiophobia (TSK) as outcome measures. A network meta-analysis was used to synthesize the data after checking the model consistency. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Assessment Tool.

Results

Thirty-one studies were included in this review after a comprehensive search strategy with a low risk of bias and good consistency. According to the results of the network meta-analysis, a multi-modal treatment protocol had the highest probability to become the best choice in dealing with kinesiophobia caused by musculoskeletal pain, whereas psychological treatment protocols also showed a potentially positive effect on musculoskeletal pain-induced kinesiophobia.

Conclusion

Multi-modal protocols could be recommended as the preferred option when dealing with kinesiophobia caused by musculoskeletal pain. However, it is still worth mentioning that there are also potentially positive therapeutic effects of psychological interventions. Since the concept of kinesiophobia is based on the fear-avoidance model, the psychological mechanism should be paid enough attention to during treatment.

Registration Number

CRD42021286450.

Training of Physical Therapists to Deliver Individualized Biopsychosocial Interventions to Treat Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

Current guidelines recommend management of musculoskeletal pain conditions from a biopsychosocial approach; however, biopsychosocial interventions delivered by physical therapists vary considerably in effectiveness. It is unknown whether the differences are explained by the intervention itself, the training and/or competency of physical therapists delivering the intervention, or fidelity of the intervention. The aim was to investigate and map the training, competency assessments, and fidelity checking of individualized biopsychosocial interventions delivered by physical therapists to treat musculoskeletal pain conditions.

METHODS

A scoping review methodology was employed, using Arksey and O'Malley's framework. Seven electronic databases were searched between January and March 2019, with a bridge search completed in January 2020. Full-text peer-reviewed articles, with an individualized biopsychosocial intervention were considered, and 35 studies were included.

RESULTS

Reporting overall was sparse and highly variable. There was a broad spectrum of training. More sophisticated training involved workshops combining didactic and experiential learning over longer durations with supervision and feedback. Less sophisticated training was brief, involving lectures or seminars, with no supervision or feedback. Competency assessments and fidelity testing were underperformed.

CONCLUSIONS

Training in some interventions might not have facilitated the implementation of skills or techniques to enable the paradigm shift and behavior change required for physical therapists to effectively deliver a biopsychosocial intervention. Lack of competency assessments and fidelity checking could have impacted the methodological quality of biopsychosocial interventions.

IMPACT

This study highlighted problematic reporting, training, assessment of competency, and fidelity checking of physical therapist-delivered individualized biopsychosocial interventions. Findings here highlight why previous interventions could have shown small effect sizes and point to areas for improvement in future interventions. These findings can help inform future research and facilitate more widespread implementation of physical therapist-delivered biopsychosocial interventions for people with musculoskeletal pain and thereby improve their quality of life.

Efficacy of risk factor education on pain intensity and disability in office workers with nonspecific neck or low back pain: A pilot cluster randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal disorders are of multi-factorial origin, including individual, physical, and psychosocial factors. An effective education program for musculoskeletal disorders should include predisposing factors.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine the effect of risk factor education on pain intensity and disability levels compared to a home-based exercise program in office workers with nonspecific neck or low back pain.

METHODS

A pilot cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted in 46 workers with neck or low back pain. The education group received checklists of risk factors and handbooks providing information on how to manage them. The exercise group received a home-based exercise program to manage their neck or low back pain. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity and disability levels.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in pain intensity or disability level between groups at baseline and follow-ups. However, neck and low back pain intensity, but not disability level, at the 3-month and 6-month follow-ups was significantly lower than those at baseline in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Risk factor education was not more effective than the home-based exercise program in terms of pain intensity or disability reduction in workers with nonspecific neck or low back pain.

Treatment targets of exercise for persistent non-specific low back pain: a consensus study

OBJECTIVES

Despite several hundred previous randomised controlled trials (RCTs), the key treatment targets of exercise for persistent non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) remain unclear. This study aimed to generate consensus about the key treatment targets of exercise interventions for patients with NSLBP.

DESIGN

Consensus was generated using modified nominal group technique in two, sequential, workshops. The results of a previous systematic review informed the first, national, workshop idea generation and the results of this workshop informed the second, international, workshop. The authors generated a starting list of 30 treatment targets from the systematic review. A pre-specified consensus threshold of 75% was used in the voting stage.

PARTICIPANTS

Workshop participants included people with experience of using exercise to manage their persistent NSLBP, clinicians who prescribe exercise for persistent NSLBP, and researchers who design and evaluate exercise interventions in RCTs. All participants generated, voted and ranked the treatment targets in each workshop using an online platform.

RESULTS

A total of 39 participants contributed to the consensus (15 in the national workshop and 24 in the international workshop), comprising two people with NSLBP, six clinicians and 31 researchers/clinicians. A total of 40 exercise treatment targets were generated, and 25 were retained after voting and ranking. The prioritised targets of exercise for persistent NSLBP were: improving function, improving quality of life, reducing pain, meeting patient-specific goals and reducing fear of movement.

CONCLUSIONS

Future RCTs of exercise should specify the targets of their exercise intervention and consider assessing these treatment targets as well as including mediation analyses.

Effects of Exercise Training on Fear-Avoidance in Pain and Pain-Free Populations: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Fear of pain and movement is an important factor in the development of hypervigilance and avoidance behaviours.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the effectiveness of exercise training on improving fear-avoidance beliefs.

METHODS

A systematic review (data sources: MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, EMBASE, CENTRAL) and metaanalysis of randomised controlled/clinical trials of exercise training in adults versus relevant nonexercise comparators that quantified fear-avoidance was conducted.

RESULTS

After screening 4603 identified records, 17 (2014 participants) and 13 (1152 participants) studies were eligible for qualitative and quantitative synthesis, respectively. Pairwise meta-analysis showed exercise training was more effective than all non-exercise comparators (standardised mean difference (SMD) [95% CI] - 0.378 [- 0.623, - 0.133], P = 0.002, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation [GRADE]: very low) for reducing fear-avoidance. Exercise training was more effective than true control for reducing fear avoidance (- 0.407 [- 0.750, - 0.065], P = 0.020, GRADE: very low), however it was not more effective than other interventions (- 0.243 [- 0.614, 0.128], P = 0.199, GRADE: very low). In people with low back pain, exercise training was more effective than non-exercise comparator groups for reducing fear-avoidance (- 0.530 [- 0.755, - 0.304], P < 0.001, GRADE: very low). For individuals with neck pain, exercise training was not more effective than non-exercise comparator groups for reducing fear-avoidance (0.061 [- 0.360, 0.482], P = 0.777, GRADE: very low).

CONCLUSION

There is very low to low-quality evidence that exercise training is effective for reducing fear-avoidance, including in people with low back pain. Exercise training may be more effective than no intervention for reducing fear avoidance, but there is very low-quality evidence that non-exercise interventions are as effective as exercise for fear avoidance. Few studies with low risk of bias is a limitation.

TRAIL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42019139678.

Effects of pain neuroscience education and dry needling for the management of patients with chronic myofascial neck pain: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to observe the medium-term effects on pain, disability, and psychological factors of a combination of myofascial trigger point (MTrP) dry needling (DN) with pain neuroscience education (PNE) versus DN alone versus control care as usual (CUC) in patients with chronic neck pain.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients were randomly selected in a Spanish National Health Service Public Hospital and divided into three groups: 6 sessions of DN with 3 sessions of PNE (TrPDN + PNE group, n = 21), 6 sessions of DN alone (TrPDN group, n = 20), or 10 sessions of usual care (CUC group, n = 19). The primary outcome was neck pain intensity, while neck disability, medication intake, and psychological factors were secondary outcomes. These variables were measured at baseline, post-treatment, and at 1 month and 3 months after treatment.

RESULTS

TrPDN + PNE and DN alone were associated with greater reductions in pain intensity and disability compared to CUC (p < 0.01). TrPDN + PNE resulted in greater improvements in kinesiophobia, pain anxiety, and pain-related beliefs than DN alone and CUC (p < 0.01). No differences between groups were observed in medication intake, quality of life, catastrophizing, depression, or fear of pain (p > 0.05).

DISCUSSION

Provision of PNE and DN in the management of chronic neck pain in a Spanish National Health Service Public Hospital was associated with greater improvements in psychological factors than DN therapy only.

CONCLUSION

DN alone was more effective at reducing chronic non-specific neck pain and disability than CUC at 3-month follow-up. However, the inclusion of PNE combined with DN resulted in greater improvements in kinesiophobia, pain anxiety, and pain-related beliefs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03095365 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

The McKenzie Method and its association with psychosocial outcomes in low back pain: a systematic review

Study Design: Systematic Literature Review.Background: The McKenzie Method (MDT) is a comprehensive conservative approach commonly used for the management of low back pain (LBP); however, its association with psychosocial outcomes in this population is less clear.Objectives: Evaluate whether MDT has an association with psychosocial outcomes for individuals with LBP.Methods: The following electronic databases were searched: Medline, Pubmed, Cochrane, CINAHL, Embase and AMED. They were systematically searched from the date of inception to August 2019. Included studies had to have participants experiencing LBP who were over 18 years old, utilize MDT as an assessment or intervention, and report outcomes for at least one psychosocial variable. Three reviewers independently evaluated methodological quality of randomized control trials (RCT) using the PEDro scale and observational studies using the GRACE scale.Results: The initial search resulted in 181 articles to review. After screening abstracts, then full articles, a total of 16 studies were included, 5 of which were RCTs rated 5-8/10 on the PEDro scale. A qualitative review was performed and the studies' results were synthesized into five main findings: fear-avoidance beliefs, depression symptoms, pain self-efficacy, psychological distress, and return to work (RTW).Conclusions: There is evidence that MDT has an association with improving fear-avoidance beliefs, pain self-efficacy, depression, and psychological distress. These results should be interpreted with caution as further high-quality randomized control trials addressing this topic are necessary due to the varying methodological and statistical constructs of the included studies.

Cognitive behavioural interventions, and function and pain outcomes among patients with chronic neck pain managed with the McKenzie approach

OBJECTIVES

Graded activity and graded exposure in vivo are recommended cognitive behavioural approaches to improve function and pain outcomes for patients receiving physiotherapy for chronic nonspecific neck pain. The McKenzie method is a common treatment approach for patients with neck pain. The study objectives were to examine associations between interventions with graded activity and/or graded exposure, as determined by the treating physiotherapist, and function and pain outcomes for patients with chronic nonspecific neck pain managed by clinicians with credentials in the McKenzie approach.

METHOD

A cohort study was carried out, in which subjects (n = 366) with chronic nonspecific neck pain completed intake surveys (i.e., the Neck Functional Status Computerized Adaptive Test and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale), and questions related to their demographic, lifestyle and health status. Treatment with graded activity/graded exposure during the episode of care was recorded. Function and pain measures were repeated at discharge. Multivariable models examining associations between patients receiving versus not receiving graded activity/graded exposure, and pain and function outcomes were constructed, controlling for potential confounding effects.

RESULTS

Despite statistical significance, there were no clinically relevant differences between treatment versus no treatment with graded activity/graded exposure, and function or pain outcomes.

CONCLUSION

There is insufficient evidence to suggest that patients being managed with McKenzie methods will attain clinically relevant improvements in function or pain outcomes when augmenting treatment with graded activity and/or graded exposure when the choice to intervene with these cognitive behavioural approaches is determined by the treating physiotherapist.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Psychological Interventions Delivered by Physiotherapists on Pain, Disability and Psychological Outcomes in Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of physiotherapist delivered psychological interventions combined with physiotherapy on pain, disability, and psychological outcomes for patients with musculoskeletal pain conditions.

METHODS

The review was conducted in accordance with the (PRISMA) guidelines. Five databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials from inception to May 2016. Studies were required to compare a psychological intervention delivered by physiotherapists combined with physiotherapy to physiotherapy alone or usual care. Physiotherapists delivering the interventions must have undergone training by a psychologist or a health professional trained in the delivery of psychological interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 34 articles met the eligibility criteria, of those, 30 were suitable for meta-analysis. There was low to high quality evidence that physiotherapist delivered psychological intervention combined with physiotherapy decreased pain in the short (26 studies, mean difference=-0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.65 to -0.09) and long term (22 studies, mean difference=-0.38; 95% CI, -0.67 to -0.10) and decreased disability in the short term (29 studies, standardized mean difference =-0.14; 95% CI, -0.26 to -0.01). Effect sizes were small. Low to high quality evidence demonstrated small to medium effects for some psychological outcomes at short-term and long-term follow-ups.

DISCUSSION

The results indicate that psychological interventions delivered by physiotherapist show promise to improve health outcomes, particularly psychological outcomes, in musculoskeletal pain conditions.

Effect of Treatment Preference in Randomized Controlled Trials: Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

A significant limitation of the traditional randomized controlled trials is that strong preferences for (or against) one treatment may influence outcomes and/or willingness to receive treatment. Several trial designs incorporating patient preference have been introduced to examine the effect of treatment preference separately from the effects of individual interventions. In the current study, we summarized results from studies using doubly randomized preference trial (DRPT) or fully randomized preference trial (FRPT) designs and examined the effect of treatment preference on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

The current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies using DRPT or FRPT design were identified using electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar between January 1989 and November 2018. All studies included in this meta-analysis were examined to determine the extent to which giving patients their preferred treatment option influenced clinical outcomes. The following data were extracted from included studies: study characteristics, sample size, study duration, follow-up, patient characteristics, and clinical outcomes. We further appraised risk of bias for the included studies using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool.

RESULTS

The search identified 374 potentially relevant articles, of which 27 clinical trials utilized a DRPT or FRPT design and were included in the final analysis. Overall, patients who were allocated to their preferred treatment intervention were more likely to achieve better clinical outcomes [effect size (ES) = 0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10-0.26]. Subgroup analysis also found that mental health as well as pain and functional disorders moderated the preference effect (ES = 0.23, 95% CI 0.11-0.36, and ES = 0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.15, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Matching patients to preferred interventions has previously been shown to promote outcomes such as satisfaction and treatment adherence. Our analysis of current evidence showed that allowing patients to choose their preferred treatment resulted in better clinical outcomes in mental health and pain than giving them a treatment that is not preferred. These results underline the importance of incorporating patient preference when making treatment decisions.

Directional preference, cognitive behavioural interventions, and outcomes among patients with chronic low back pain

OBJECTIVES

Graded activity and graded exposure are recommended cognitive behavioural approaches to improve function and pain outcomes for patients receiving physiotherapy for chronic nonspecific low back pain. Directional preference identified following the McKenzie method is also associated with favourable patient outcomes. Study objectives were to examine associations between graded activity and/or graded exposure, and directional preference or no directional preference combined with or without graded activity/graded exposure subgroups, and function and pain outcomes among patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain managed by clinicians credentialed in the McKenzie approach.

METHOD

Cohort study: Subjects (n = 801) with chronic nonspecific low back pain completed intake surveys, that is, the Lumbar Computer Adaptive Test measuring function and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale measuring pain, and questions addressing their demographic, lifestyle, and health status. Directional preference was determined at intake. Treatment with graded activity/graded exposure during the episode of care was recorded. Function and pain measures were repeated at discharge. Two models were developed controlling for potential confounding effects. The first model examined associations between patients receiving versus not receiving graded activity/graded exposure. The second model examined interaction effects between four combinations of directional preference and graded activity/graded exposure. Outcome measures were changes in function and pain during rehabilitation.

RESULTS

Regarding the first objective, there were no clinically relevant differences between treatment versus no treatment with graded activity/graded exposure, and functional outcomes. Regarding the second objective, patients in the no-directional preference group were more likely to see benefits from the addition of graded activity/graded exposure to their treatment groups than those with a directional preference.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians using McKenzie methods might attain improved patient functional outcomes when augmenting treatment with graded activity and/or graded exposure among patients who do not demonstrate directional preference.

Self-efficacy and self-care-related outcomes following Alexander Technique lessons for people with chronic neck pain in the ATLAS randomised, controlled trial

Introduction

ATLAS was a pragmatic randomised (1:1:1 ratio), controlled trial recruiting patients with chronic neck pain (N = 517) and evaluating one-to-one Alexander Technique lessons, or acupuncture, each plus usual care, compared with usual care alone. The primary outcome (12-month Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire [NPQ]) demonstrated significant and clinically meaningful reductions in neck pain and associated disability for both interventions compared with usual care alone. Here we describe pre-specified, self-efficacy and other self-care-related outcomes for the Alexander group compared with usual care.

Methods

Participants reported on 11 self-efficacy/self-care-related outcome measures at 6 and 12 months. Linear or logistic regression models evaluated changes in parameters and impact on NPQ. Alexander teachers reported on lesson content.

Results

Lesson content reflected standard UK practice. The Alexander group (n = 172) reported significantly greater improvements, compared with usual care alone (n = 172), in most of the self-efficacy/self-care measures (9/11 measures at 6 months, and 8/11 at 12 months), including the ability to reduce pain in daily life. At 6 months, 81% (106/131) of Alexander participants reported significant improvement in the way they lived and cared for themselves (versus 23% for usual care), increasing to 87% (117/135) at 12 months (usual care: 25%). NPQ scores at both 6 and 12 months were related to improvement in self-efficacy and ability to reduce pain during daily life.

Conclusions

Alexander Technique lessons led to long-term improvements in the way participants lived their daily lives and managed their neck pain. Alexander lessons promote self-efficacy and self-care, with consequent reductions in chronic neck pain.

Factors in Patient Responsiveness to Directional Preference-Matched Treatment of Neck Pain With or Without Upper Extremity Radiation

PURPOSE

Patient-related predictive factors in responsiveness to directional preference therapy for neck pain with or without upper extremity radiation (NP/R) have not been reported. A directional preference is any neck movement that, when performed repeatedly to end range, results in centralization and/or alleviation of NP/R. It was hypothesized that patient compliance with a prescribed, directional preference-matched home exercise program would improve positive responsiveness to NP/R treatment.

METHODS

Patient-related factors thought to affect responsiveness to care were collected retrospectively from charts and de-identified for patients with NP/R who underwent chiropractic treatment at a multispecialty spine clinic from January 2014 through June 2015. Responsiveness was measured by calculating the percentage change in Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire (NBQ) scores over treatment time. Multiple linear regression was used to identify factors associated with positive responsiveness.

RESULTS

Mean percentage change in patient NBQ score from initial intake to discharge was 50% (standard deviation: 32%). Of 104 patients meeting study inclusion criteria, 86 (83%) reported experiencing improvement after the first treatment session. Bivariate analysis of patient characteristics by compliance with directional preference-matched exercise indicated that compliant patients (n=95, 91%) demonstrated significantly greater responsiveness to care than did noncompliant patients, at 55% versus 25% change in NBQ score, respectively (P=0.0041). Four factors were statistically significant predictors of patient responsiveness to directional preference therapy for NP/R: patient compliance with directional preference-matched exercise (P=0.0023), patient age (P=0.0029), condition chronicity (P<0.0001), and whether the patient reported improvement of symptoms following initial treatment session (P=0.0003).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that patient compliance with directional preference exercise is associated with patient responsiveness to conservative treatment of NP/R, as are age, chronicity and report of immediate symptom improvement.

Measurement of outcomes for patients with centralising versus non-centralising neck pain

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to determine whether individuals with neck pain who demonstrate centralisation of symptoms have more favourable outcome than individuals who do not demonstrate centralisation.

METHODS

Eleven subjects with neck pain were evaluated and treated by two physical therapists certified in Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT). Eleven physical therapy patients underwent a routine initial evaluation and were treated 2-3 times per week using MDT principles and other physical therapy interventions. The Neck Disability Index (NDI) tool was administered at the initial examination, approximately 2 weeks following the initial examination, each subsequent re-evaluation, and at discharge from the study to measure changes in functional outcomes for each subject. Patients continued with treatments until they were discharged or removed from the study. Four subjects were referred back to their physician by treating physical therapist secondary to non-centralisation (NC) and worsening of symptoms.

RESULTS

Of the 11 subjects, six demonstrated centralisation (CEN) and five demonstrated NC. At initial evaluation, the average NDI score for the CEN group was 51.0 (SD ± 19.4) and 56.4 (SD ± 17.6) for the NC group. For the CEN group, the average change in NDI score between initial evaluation and discharge was 41.2 (SD ± 13.2 and 12.2 (SD ± 13.0) for the NC group. The correlation coefficient of CEN and change in NDI score was 0.772 and was statistically significant (P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

In this limited sample, people with neck pain demonstrated more favourable outcomes when the CEN phenomenon was observed. Future research on CEN should be investigated with a larger sample size and with a greater number of clinicians trained in the MDT approach.

Immediate improvement in the cranio-cervical flexion test associated with MDT-based interventions: a case report

The patient in this case study presented with constant idiopathic neck pain and left lower scapular pain (greater than 3 months) and was treated based on the principles of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT). Retraction exercises produced centralization of the lower scapular pain to the upper part of the scapula at the initial visit. At the first visit, the performance level on the Cranio-Cervical Flexion Test (CCFT) was ≤20 mmHg before the treatment. At the conclusion of the treatment during which centralization occurred, the CCFT level improved to 24 mmHg. At the second visit, all symptoms were abolished and cervical range of motion (ROM) was fully restored by performing repeated extension in lying from a retracted position with clinician's traction. The CCFT levels before and immediately after the treatment were 24 and 26 mmHg, respectively. At the third visit (1 week after the initial visit), he noted that all daily activities could be performed without pain. The CCFT level was maintained at 26mmHg. The patient in this study showed immediate improvement in the CCFT through the treatments based on MDT. This suggests a possible link between MDT interventions and motor control of the cervical spine and a need to further investigate this relationship.

Effects of Cervical Extension on Deformation of Intervertebral Disk and Migration of Nucleus Pulposus

BACKGROUND

We theorized that active cervical extension should influence the position of the nucleus pulposus (NP) within the intervertebral disk (IVD) in the sagittal plane. Although several studies on the lumbar IVD have been conducted, there are no quantitative data for in vivo positional changes of the NP in the cervical IVD.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the influence and mechanism of cervical extension on the deformation and migration of IVD and NP in the sagittal plane and understand underlying mechanisms of the extension maneuver.

DESIGN

Asymptomatic subjects underwent magnetic resonance imaging while supine with their cervical spines in neutral and extended positions.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

Ten young, healthy male participants (age range 19-30 years; mean 22.4 ± 1.64 years).

METHODS

T2-weighted sagittal images from C3-C4 to C6-C7 of subjects in both neutral and extension positions were analyzed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Deformation of IVD and positional change of NP were quantified and compared between neutral and extension positions. Intersegmental angles between vertebrae, horizontal positions of anterior and posterior IVD and NP margins, IVD outer and inner heights, and sagittal morphology of NP were quantified and compared between the neutral and extension positions. Correlations between the measured parameters and segmental extension angle were also investigated.

RESULTS

Anterior and posterior IVD margins moved posteriorly with respect to the vertebral body in extension. Both NP margins remained unchanged relative to the vertebral body but moved anteriorly with respect to the IVD. IVD outer and inner heights in the anterior region increased in extension, and morphological changes of the NP were less noticeable when compared with its relative migration within the IVD. Most of the intradiskal changes were linearly correlated with the segmental extension angle.

CONCLUSIONS

Cervical extension induces anterior migration of the NP away from the posterior disk margin and may have a clinical effect on diskogenic neck pain resulting from internal disk disruption.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Not applicable.

Alexander Technique Lessons or Acupuncture Sessions for Persons With Chronic Neck Pain: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Management of chronic neck pain may benefit from additional active self-care-oriented approaches.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate clinical effectiveness of Alexander Technique lessons or acupuncture versus usual care for persons with chronic, nonspecific neck pain.

DESIGN

Three-group randomized, controlled trial. (Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN15186354).

SETTING

U.K. primary care.

PARTICIPANTS

Persons with neck pain lasting at least 3 months, a score of at least 28% on the Northwick Park Questionnaire (NPQ) for neck pain and associated disability, and no serious underlying pathology.

INTERVENTION

12 acupuncture sessions or 20 one-to-one Alexander lessons (both 600 minutes total) plus usual care versus usual care alone.

MEASUREMENTS

NPQ score (primary outcome) at 0, 3, 6, and 12 months (primary end point) and Chronic Pain Self-Efficacy Scale score, quality of life, and adverse events (secondary outcomes).

RESULTS

517 patients were recruited, and the median duration of neck pain was 6 years. Mean attendance was 10 acupuncture sessions and 14 Alexander lessons. Between-group reductions in NPQ score at 12 months versus usual care were 3.92 percentage points for acupuncture (95% CI, 0.97 to 6.87 percentage points) (P = 0.009) and 3.79 percentage points for Alexander lessons (CI, 0.91 to 6.66 percentage points) (P = 0.010). The 12-month reductions in NPQ score from baseline were 32% for acupuncture and 31% for Alexander lessons. Participant self-efficacy improved for both interventions versus usual care at 6 months (P < 0.001) and was significantly associated (P < 0.001) with 12-month NPQ score reductions (acupuncture, 3.34 percentage points [CI, 2.31 to 4.38 percentage points]; Alexander lessons, 3.33 percentage points [CI, 2.22 to 4.44 percentage points]). No reported serious adverse events were considered probably or definitely related to either intervention.

LIMITATION

Practitioners belonged to the 2 main U.K.-based professional associations, which may limit generalizability of the findings.

CONCLUSION

Acupuncture sessions and Alexander Technique lessons both led to significant reductions in neck pain and associated disability compared with usual care at 12 months. Enhanced self-efficacy may partially explain why longer-term benefits were sustained.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Arthritis Research UK.

Cognitive-behavioural treatment for subacute and chronic neck pain

EDITORIAL NOTE

EXPRESSION OF CONCERN - Professor Marco Monticone has acted as the first author of this Cochrane review. Readers should be informed that multiple randomized controlled trials authored by Professor Monticone have been scrutinized because of potential research integrity issues, including irregularities in the data (doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002659). One of the trials suspected of research integrity issues is included in this Cochrane review (doi:10.1007/s00586-012-2287-y). The Cochrane editorial team has concerns about the trustworthiness of the trial data and is applying Cochrane's policy on managing potentially problematic studies (https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/editorial-policies#problematic-studies). No major differences to the conclusions of this review were found after performing a sensitivity analysis on the main outcomes, whether the potentially problematic trial was included or excluded. Cochrane will take further action as needed on this review once additional investigations into the potentially problematic trial are concluded. In the meantime, a new version of this review topic is underway with a new author team. The new review will supersede this review.

BACKGROUND

Although research on non-surgical treatments for neck pain (NP) is progressing, there remains uncertainty about the efficacy of cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) for this population. Addressing cognitive and behavioural factors might reduce the clinical burden and the costs of NP in society.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of CBT among individuals with subacute and chronic NP. Specifically, the following comparisons were investigated: (1) cognitive-behavioural therapy versus placebo, no treatment, or waiting list controls; (2) cognitive-behavioural therapy versus other types of interventions; (3) cognitive-behavioural therapy in addition to another intervention (e.g. physiotherapy) versus the other intervention alone.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and PubMed, as well as ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to November 2014. Reference lists and citations of identified trials and relevant systematic reviews were screened.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that assessed the use of CBT in adults with subacute and chronic NP.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias in each study and extracted the data. If sufficient homogeneity existed among studies in the pre-defined comparisons, a meta-analysis was performed. We determined the quality of the evidence for each comparison with the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 randomised trials (836 participants) in this review. Four trials (40%) had low risk of bias, the remaining 60% of trials had a high risk of bias.The quality of the evidence for the effects of CBT on patients with chronic NP was from very low to moderate. There was low quality evidence that CBT was better than no treatment for improving pain (standard mean difference (SMD) -0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to -0.16), disability (SMD -0.61, 95% CI -1.21 to -0.01), and quality of life (SMD -0.93, 95% CI -1.54 to -0.31) at short-term follow-up, while there was from very low to low quality evidence of no effect on various psychological indicators at short-term follow-up. Both at short- and intermediate-term follow-up, CBT did not affect pain (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.21, low quality, at short-term follow-up; MD -0.89, 95% CI -2.73 to 0.94, low quality, at intermediate-term follow-up) or disability (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.20, moderate quality, at short-term follow-up; SMD -0.24, 95% CI-0.54 to 0.07, moderate quality, at intermediate-term follow-up) compared to other types of interventions. There was moderate quality evidence that CBT was better than other interventions for improving kinesiophobia at intermediate-term follow-up (SMD -0.39, 95% CI -0.69 to -0.08, I(2) = 0%). Finally, there was very low quality evidence that CBT in addition to another intervention did not differ from the other intervention alone in terms of effect on pain (SMD -0.36, 95% CI -0.73 to 0.02) and disability (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.36) at short-term follow-up.For patients with subacute NP, there was low quality evidence that CBT was better than other interventions at reducing pain at short-term follow-up (SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.00), while no difference was found in terms of effect on disability (SMD -0.12, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.12) and kinesiophobia.None of the included studies reported on adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

With regard to chronic neck pain, CBT was found to be statistically significantly more effective for short-term pain reduction only when compared to no treatment, but these effects could not be considered clinically meaningful. When comparing both CBT to other types of interventions and CBT in addition to another intervention to the other intervention alone, no differences were found. For patients with subacute NP, CBT was significantly better than other types of interventions at reducing pain at short-term follow-up, while no difference was found for disability and kinesiophobia. Further research is recommended to investigate the long-term benefits and risks of CBT including for the different subgroups of subjects with NP.

Mechanical diagnosis and therapy has similar effects on pain and disability as 'wait and see' and other approaches in people with neck pain: a systematic review

QUESTIONS

In people with neck pain, does Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) reduce pain and disability more than 'wait and see'? Does MDT reduce pain and disability more than other interventions? Are any differences in effect clinically important?

DESIGN

Systematic review of randomised trials with meta-analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

People with neck pain.

INTERVENTION

MDT.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain intensity and disability due to neck pain in the short (< 3 months), intermediate (< 1 year) and long term (≥ 1 year).

RESULTS

Five trials were included. Most comparisons demonstrated mean differences in effect that favoured MDT over wait-and-see controls or other interventions, although most were statistically non-significant. For pain, all comparisons had a 95% confidence interval (CI) with lower limits that were less than 20 on a scale of 0 to 100, which suggests that the difference may not be clinically important. For disability, even the upper limits of the 95% CI were below this threshold, confirming that the differences are not clinically important. In all of the trials, some or all of the treating therapists did not have the highest level of MDT training.

CONCLUSION

The additional benefit of MDT compared with the wait-and-see approach or other therapeutic approaches may not be clinically important in terms of pain intensity and is not clinically important in terms of disability. However, these estimates of the effect of MDT may reflect suboptimal training of the treating therapists. Further research could improve the precision of the estimates and assess whether the extent of training in MDT influences its effect.

An ICON Overview on Physical Modalities for Neck Pain and Associated Disorders

INTRODUCTION

Neck pain is common, can be disabling and is costly to society. Physical modalities are often included in neck rehabilitation programs. Interventions may include thermal, electrotherapy, ultrasound, mechanical traction, laser and acupuncture. Definitive knowledge regarding optimal modalities and dosage for neck pain management is limited.

PURPOSE

To systematically review existing literature to establish the evidence-base for recommendations on physical modalities for acute to chronic neck pain.

METHODS

A comprehensive computerized and manual search strategy from January 2000 to July 2012, systematic review methodological quality assessment using AMSTAR, qualitative assessment using a GRADE approach and recommendation presentation was included. Systematic or meta-analyses of studies evaluating physical modalities were eligible. Independent assessment by at least two review team members was conducted. Data extraction was performed by one reviewer and checked by a second. Disagreements were resolved by consensus.

RESULTS

Of 103 reviews eligible, 20 were included and 83 were excluded. Short term pain relief - Moderate evidence of benefit: acupuncture, intermittent traction and laser were shown to be better than placebo for chronic neck pain. Moderate evidence of no benefit: pulsed ultrasound, infrared light or continuous traction was no better than placebo for acute whiplash associated disorder, chronic myofascial neck pain or subacute to chronic neck pain. There was no added benefit when hot packs were combined with mobilization, manipulation or electrical muscle stimulation for chronic neck pain, function or patient satisfaction at six month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The current state of the evidence favours acupuncture, laser and intermittent traction for chronic neck pain. Some electrotherapies show little benefit for chronic neck pain. Consistent dosage, improved design and long term follow-up continue to be the recommendations for future research.

Alexander Technique Lessons, Acupuncture Sessions or usual care for patients with chronic neck pain (ATLAS): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic neck pain is a common condition in the adult population. More research is needed to evaluate interventions aiming to facilitate beneficial long-term change. We propose to evaluate the effect of Alexander Technique lessons and acupuncture in a rigorously conducted pragmatic trial with an embedded qualitative study.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will recruit 500 patients who have been diagnosed with neck pain in primary care, who have continued to experience neck pain for at least three months with 28% minimum cut-off score on the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). We will exclude patients with serious underlying pathology, prior cervical spine surgery, history of psychosis, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, osteoporosis, haemophilia, cancer, HIV or hepatitis, or with alcohol or drug dependency currently or in the last 12 months, or actively pursuing compensation or with pending litigation.The York Trials Unit will randomly allocate participants using a secure computer-based system. We will use block randomisation with allocation to each intervention arm being unambiguously concealed from anyone who might subvert the randomisation process.Participants will be randomised in equal proportions to Alexander Technique lessons, acupuncture or usual care alone. Twenty 30-minute Alexander Technique lessons will be provided by teachers registered with the Society of Teachers of the Alexander Technique and twelve 50-minute sessions of acupuncture will be provided by acupuncturists registered with the British Acupuncture Council. All participants will continue to receive usual GP care.The primary outcome will be the NPQ at 12 months, with the secondary time point at 6 months, and an area-under-curve analysis will include 3, 6 and 12 month time-points. Adverse events will be documented. Potential intervention effect modifiers and mediators to be explored include: self-efficacy, stress management, and the incorporation of practitioner advice about self-care and lifestyle. Qualitative material will be used to address issues of safety, acceptability and factors that impact on longer term outcomes.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide robust evidence on whether there are significant clinical benefits to patients, economic benefits demonstrating value for money, and sufficient levels of acceptability and safety.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15186354.

Clinician's ability to identify neck and low back interventions: an inter-rater chance-corrected agreement pilot study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate inter-rater agreement of physical therapists trained in MDT approach and participating in practice-based evidence (PBE) research to identify 72 physical therapy interventions in video demonstrations on a single model and clinical vignettes. PBE is a well designed observational study and demonstrating clinician observational consistency is an important step in conducting PBE research design.

METHODS

Two physical therapists volunteered to participate in pilot reliability testing and seven other physical therapists trained in McKenzie Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) methods volunteered for the inter-rater chance-corrected agreement study. All therapists identified interventions presented within 52 videos and 5 written clinical vignettes describing 20 more intervention techniques. Therapists independently identified all interventions. We assessed inter-rater chance-corrected agreement of therapists' ability to identify intervention techniques using Kappa coefficients with associated 95% confidence intervals and indices for bias and prevalence.

RESULTS

Of the 147 kappa coefficients estimated, 7% were ⩽0·6, 10% were >0·6 and ⩽0·8, and 83% were >0·8. Agreement was lowest for identifying cognitive behavioral techniques (median kappa = 0·79). The minimum and maximum prevalence and bias indices were 0·33 and 0·85 and 0 and 0·33, respectively suggesting kappa coefficient estimates were strong. Generalized kappa coefficients ranged from 0·73 to 1·00.

DISCUSSION

Results provide evidence that substantial to almost perfect inter-rater agreement could be expected when trained therapists identify physical therapy interventions used for patients with spinal impairments from staged videos and vignettes. This may be helpful to reassure clinicians of the quality of the reporting of intervention(s) performed when conducting multivariable analyses in future pragmatic PBE studies. Additional studies are needed to test whether these results can be validated using larger groups of therapists, trained and not trained in MDT methods, as well as examining different methods to examine inter-rater agreement for identifying diverse interventions commonly used for managing patients during routine practice.

Patient education for neck pain

BACKGROUND

Neck disorders are common, disabling, and costly. The effectiveness of patient education strategies is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the short- to long-term effects of therapeutic patient education (TPE) strategies on pain, function, disability, quality of life, global perceived effect, patient satisfaction, knowledge transfer, or behaviour change in adults with neck pain associated with whiplash or non-specific and specific mechanical neck pain with or without radiculopathy or cervicogenic headache.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched computerised bibliographic databases (inception to 11 July 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of TPE for acute to chronic neck pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Paired independent review authors conducted selection, data abstraction, and 'Risk of bias' assessment. We calculated risk ratio (RR) and standardised mean differences (SMD). Heterogeneity was assessed; no studies were pooled.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 15 selected trials, three were rated low risk of bias. Three TPE themes emerged.Advice focusing on activation: There is moderate quality evidence (one trial, 348 participants) that an educational video of advice focusing on activation was more beneficial for acute whiplash-related pain when compared with no treatment at intermediate-term [RR 0.79 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.06)] but not long-term follow-up [0.89 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.21)]. There is low quality evidence (one trial, 102 participants) that a whiplash pamphlet on advice focusing on activation is less beneficial for pain reduction, or no different in improving function and global perceived improvement from generic information given out in emergency care (control) for acute whiplash at short- or intermediate-term follow-up. Low to very low quality evidence (nine trials using diverse educational approaches) showed either no evidence of benefit or difference for varied outcomes. Advice focusing on pain & stress coping skills and workplace ergonomics: Very low quality evidence (three trials, 243 participants) favoured other treatment or showed no difference spanning numerous follow-up periods and disorder subtypes.  Low quality evidence (one trial, 192 participants) favoured specific exercise training for chronic neck pain at short-term follow-up.Self-care strategies: Very low quality evidence (one trial, 58 participants) indicated that self-care strategies did not relieve pain for acute to chronic neck pain at short-term follow-up.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

With the exception of one trial, this review has not shown effectiveness for educational interventions, including advice to activate, advice on stress-coping skills, workplace ergonomics and self-care strategies. Future research should be founded on sound adult learning theory and learning skill acquisition.

The efficacy of targeted interventions for modifiable psychosocial risk factors of persistent nonspecific low back pain - a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is considerable interest in whether best practice management of nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) should include the targeting of treatment to subgroups of people with identifiable clinical characteristics. However, there are no published systematic reviews of the efficacy of targeted psychosocial interventions.

AIM

This review aimed to determine if the efficacy of interventions for psychosocial risk factors of persistent NSLBP is improved when targeted to people with particular psychosocial characteristics.

METHOD

Bibliographic databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials of targeted psychosocial interventions that used trial designs capable of providing robust information on the efficacy of targeted treatment (treatment effect modification) for the outcomes of pain, activity limitation and psychosocial factors (fear avoidance, catastrophisation, anxiety and depression).

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Four studies met the inclusion criteria and collectively investigated nine hypotheses about targeted treatment on 28 subgroup/treatment outcomes. There were only two statistically significant results. Graded activity plus Treatment Based Classification targeted to people with high movement-related fear was more effective than Treatment Based Classification at reducing movement-related fear at 4 weeks. Active rehabilitation (physical exercise classes with cognitive-behavioural principles) was more effective than usual GP care at reducing activity limitation at 12 months, when targeted to people with higher movement-related pain. Few studies have investigated targeted psychosocial interventions in NSLBP, using trial designs suitable for measuring treatment effect modification, and they do not provide consistent evidence supporting such targeting. There is a need for appropriately designed and adequately powered trials to investigate targeted psychosocial interventions.

Self-management of persistent neck pain: two-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of a multicomponent group intervention in primary health care

STUDY DESIGN

A 2-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE

To compare long-term effects of (a) a multicomponent pain and stress self-management group intervention (PASS) and (b) individually administered physical therapy (IAPT) on patients with persistent tension-type neck pain in a primary health care (PHC) setting.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

In a previously reported short-term follow-up, PASS had better effects on pain control, pain-related self-efficacy, disability, and catastrophizing than IAPT. Long-term effects of self-management interventions for persistent neck pain, for example, maintenance of improvement and adherence to coping skills are sparsely investigated.

METHODS

Persons with persistent tension-type neck pain seeking physical therapy treatment at nine PHC centers in Sweden were randomly assigned to either PASS or IAPT. Before intervention, at 10 and 20 weeks and at 1 and 2 years after the intervention, the participants completed a self-assessment questionnaire comprising: the Self-Efficacy Scale, the Neck Disability Index, the Coping Strategies Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and questions regarding neck pain and analgesics. Analyses were performed using linear mixed models for repeated measures.

RESULTS

The study included 156 participants (PASS n = 77, IAPT n = 79). Between baseline, 10-week, 20-week, 1-year, and 2-year follow-up, significant time-by-group interaction effects were found in favor of PASS regarding the primary outcomes ability to control pain (P < 0.001) and self-efficacy for performing activities in spite of pain (P = 0.002), and the secondary outcome catastrophic thinking (P < 0.001) but not in neck pain-related disability.

CONCLUSION

The initial treatment effects of a self-management group intervention were largely maintained over a 2-year follow-up period and with a tendency to have superior long-term effects as compared to individually-administered physical therapy, in the treatment of persistent tension-type neck pain with regard to coping with pain, in terms of pain control, self-efficacy, and catastrophizing.

Predictor Variables for a Positive Long-Term Functional Outcome in Patients with Acute and Chronic Neck and Back Pain Treated with a McKenzie Approach: A Secondary Analysis

A cognitive behavioral approach was previously compared to a biomechanical approach (the McKenzie method) for the treatment of patients with back and neck pain in a randomized trial. Few differences between the treatment interventions were found. The aim of this secondary analysis was to determine if any clinical characteristics distinguished those patients who responded best to the McKenzie approach. Treatment success was defined as 50% reduction in original functional disability scores (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire or Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire); failure to achieve this was defined as treatment failure. A liberal definition of success was 50% improvement retained at either 6 or 12 months, whereas a strict definition of success was 50% improvement at both 6 and 12 months. Ten variables were screened by univariate regression analysis to see if they predicted success. Any significant variables (P < 0.1) underwent multiple regression analysis. Only 21 and 16 patients out of 102 were deemed treatment successes according to the liberal and strict definitions, respectively. With the liberal definition, only centralization (P = 0.065), spine region (back rather than neck pain) (P = 0.089), and duration of pain (P = 0.001) emerged as predictors from the univariate regression analysis. With the strict definition, only the latter two variables emerged: spine region (P = 0.026) and duration of pain (P <0.01). All these variables were retained in the multiple regression analysis. In this study, duration of pain was the strongest predictor of success, although back pain and centralization had some predictive ability.

Embedding psychosocial perspectives within clinical management of low back pain: integration of psychosocially informed management principles into physical therapist practice--challenges and opportunities

As the biopsychosocial model of health has become increasingly understood, it has become clear that there are complex, interdependent relationships between the physical and biomedical features of low back pain and the psychological and social factors that present concomitantly. Epidemiological studies have not only highlighted that psychological and social factors are associated with back pain and disability but also have shed light on the way in which these factors serve as prognostic indicators, or obstacles to recovery, predicting which patients will have a poor prognosis. Integrating the assessment of these obstacles to recovery into physical therapist practice and using this information to guide clinical decision making have the potential to improve the quality of care offered by physical therapists by improving the targeting of treatments to individuals and enhancing the therapist-patient relationship and adherence to management advice and treatment programs. In turn, such approaches may improve both patients' clinical outcomes and the efficiency and effectiveness of service provision, helping direct interventions to those who need them. This article summarizes the key challenges to embedding psychosocial perspectives within physical therapist practice for patients with low back pain and the opportunities that could be realized by doing so, and it highlights new developments in research, clinical practice, and education that are shaping future directions in this field.

Low back pain: what determines functional outcome at six months? An observational study

Background

The rise in disability due to back pain has been exponential with escalating medical and societal costs. The relative contribution of individual prognostic indicators to the pattern of recovery remains unclear. The objective of this study was to determine the prognostic value of demographic, psychosocial, employment and clinical factors on outcome in patients with low back pain

Methods

A prospective cohort study with six-month follow-up was undertaken at a multidisciplinary back pain clinic in central London employing physiotherapists, osteopaths, clinical psychologists and physicians, receiving referrals from 123 general practitioners. Over a twelve-month period, 593 consecutive patients referred from general practice with simple low back pain were recruited. A baseline questionnaire was developed to elicit information on potential prognostic variables. The primary outcome measures were change in 24-item Roland Morris disability questionnaire score at six months as a measure of low back related functional disability and the physical functioning scale of the SF-36, adjusted for baseline scores.

Results

Roland Morris scores improved by 3.8 index points (95% confidence interval 3.23 to 4.32) at six months and SF-36 physical functioning score by 10.7 points (95% confidence interval 8.36 to 12.95). Ten factors were linked to outcome yet in a multiple regression model only two remained predictive. Those with episodic rather than continuous pain were more likely to have recovered at six months (odds ratio 2.64 confidence interval 1.25 to 5.60), while those that classified themselves as non-white were less likely to have recovered (0.41 confidence interval 0.18 to 0.96).

Conclusions

Analysis controlling for confounding variables, demonstrated that participants showed greater improvement if their episodes of pain during the previous year were short-lived while those with Middle Eastern, North African and Chinese ethnicity demonstrated minimal improvement. The study did not support previous findings that a wide range of factors could predict outcome.

Assessing the impact of attrition in randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

A survey of randomized controlled trials found that almost a quarter of trials had more than 10% of responses missing for the primary outcome. There are a number of ways in which data could be missing: the subject is unable to provide it, or they withdraw, or become lost to follow-up. Such attrition means that balance in baseline characteristics for those randomized may not be maintained in the subsample who has outcome data. For individual trials, if the attrition is systematic and linked to outcome, then this will result in biased estimates of the overall effect. It then follows that if such trials are combined in a meta-analysis, it will result in a biased estimate of the overall effect and be misleading. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of attrition on baseline imbalance within individual trials and across multiple trials.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

In this article, we used individual patient data from a convenience sample of 10 trials evaluating interventions for the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders. Meta-analyses using the mean difference at baseline between the trial arms were carried out using individual patient data from these trials. The analyses were first carried out using all randomized participants and secondly only including participants with outcome data on the quality-of-life score. Meta-regression was carried out to evaluate whether the level of baseline imbalance was associated with the level of attrition.

RESULTS

The overall attrition rates for the quality-of-life score ranged between 4% and 28% of the total randomized patients. All trials showed some level of differential attrition between the treatment arms, ranging from 1% to 14%. Attrition within the control group ranged from 3% to 25% and within the intervention group, it ranged from 0% to 31%. For individual trials, there was no indication that attrition altered the results in favor of either the treatment or the control. Forest plots highlighted that the attrition had some impact on the baseline imbalance for the primary outcome score as more heterogeneity was introduced (I-squared value of 0.4% for the initial data set vs. I-squared value of 16.9% for the analyzed data set). However, the standardized mean difference increased only slightly (from 0.01 to 0.03 with 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.05, 0.10). Meta-regression showed little or no evidence of a significant dose-response relationship between the level of attrition and the baseline imbalance (coefficient 0.73, 95% CI: -0.81, 2.28).

CONCLUSION

Although, in theory, attrition can introduce selection bias in randomized trials, we did not find sufficient evidence to support this claim in our convenience sample of trials. However, the number of trials included was relatively small, which may have led to small but important differences in outcomes being missed. In addition, only 2 of 10 trials included had attrition levels greater than 15% suggesting a low level of potential bias. Meta-analyses and systematic reviews should always consider the impact of attrition on baseline imbalances and where possible any baseline imbalances in the analyzed data set and their impact on the outcomes reported.

Adverse events associated with the use of cervical manipulation and mobilization for the treatment of neck pain in adults: a systematic review

Adverse events (AE) are a concern for practitioners utilizing cervical manipulation or mobilization. While efficacious, these techniques are associated with rare but serious adverse events. Five bibliographic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro, AMED, EMBASE) and the gray literature were searched from 1998 to 2009 for any AE associated with cervical manipulation or mobilization for neck pain. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective or cross-sectional observational studies were included. Two independent reviewers conducted study selection, method quality assessment and data abstraction. Pooled relative risks (RR) were calculated. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane system, a modified Critical Appraisal Skills Program form and the McHarm scale to assess the reporting of harms. Seventeen of 76 identified citations resulted in no major AE. Two pooled estimates for minor AE found transient neurological symptoms [RR 1.96 (95% CI: 1.09-3.54) p < 0.05]; and increased neck pain [RR 1.23 (95% CI: 0.85-1.77) p > .05]. Forty-four studies (58%) were excluded for not reporting AE. No definitive conclusions can be made due to a small number of studies, weak association, moderate study quality, and notable ascertainment bias. Improved reporting of AE in manual therapy trials as recommended by the CONSORT statement extension on harms reporting is warranted.