Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Syst Rev ; 9(1): 215, 2020 09 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1456002

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A growing body of research highlights the pervasive harms of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) on health throughout the life-course. However, findings from prior reviews and recent longitudinal studies investigating the association between types of ACEs and persistent pain have yielded inconsistent findings in the strength and direction of associations. The purpose of this review is to appraise and summarize evidence on the relationship between ACEs and persistent pain and disability outcomes in adulthood. The specific aims are (1) to determine whether there is a relationship between exposure to ACE and persistent pain and disability in adults and (2) to determine whether unique and cumulative ACEs exposures (number and type) increase the risk of developing persistent pain and disability in adulthood. METHOD: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies will be conducted. Our eligibility criteria are defined following a PECOS approach: population, adults with persistent (≥ 3 months) musculoskeletal and somatoform painful disorders exposed to single or cumulative direct ACEs alone (i.e., physical, sexual, emotional abuse or neglect) or in combination to indirect types of ACE (e.g., parental death, exposure to domestic violence) in the first 18 years of life; comparators, unexposed individuals; outcomes, measurements for persistent pain (≥ 3 months) and disability using discrete and/or continuous measures; and settings, general population, primary care. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE (Ovid) and nine other pertinent databases was conducted from inception to 29 August 2019 using a combination of key words and MeSh terms (the search will be updated prior to conducting the analyses). Pairs of reviewers will independently screen records and full text articles, and a third reviewer will be consulted in cases of disagreement. Data will be extracted using Endnote and Covidence and a meta-analysis will be conducted using Review Manager (RevMan) Version 5.3. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists will be used to assess the quality of the included studies. If heterogeneity is high, the findings will be presented in narrative form. DISCUSSION: The present review will help consolidate knowledge on persistent pain and disability by evaluating whether frequency and type of adverse childhood experiences produces the most harm. Findings may help inform practitioners and policy-makers who endeavor to prevent and/or mitigate the consequences of ACEs and promote healthy development and well-being of children, youth, and families. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020150230.


Subject(s)
Adverse Childhood Experiences , Disabled Persons , Pain , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Retrospective Studies , Systematic Reviews as Topic
2.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(2): e25484, 2021 02 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1088875

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly limited patients' access to care for spine-related symptoms and disorders. However, physical distancing between clinicians and patients with spine-related symptoms is not solely limited to restrictions imposed by pandemic-related lockdowns. In most low- and middle-income countries, as well as many underserved marginalized communities in high-income countries, there is little to no access to clinicians trained in evidence-based care for people experiencing spinal pain. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe the development and present the components of evidence-based patient and clinician guides for the management of spinal disorders where in-person care is not available. METHODS: Ultimately, two sets of guides were developed (one for patients and one for clinicians) by extracting information from the published Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) papers. An international, interprofessional team of 29 participants from 10 countries on 4 continents participated. The team included practitioners in family medicine, neurology, physiatry, rheumatology, psychology, chiropractic, physical therapy, and yoga, as well as epidemiologists, research methodologists, and laypeople. The participants were invited to review, edit, and comment on the guides in an open iterative consensus process. RESULTS: The Patient Guide is a simple 2-step process. The first step describes the nature of the symptoms or concerns. The second step provides information that a patient can use when considering self-care, determining whether to contact a clinician, or considering seeking emergency care. The Clinician Guide is a 5-step process: (1) Obtain and document patient demographics, location of primary clinical symptoms, and psychosocial information. (2) Review the symptoms noted in the patient guide. (3) Determine the GSCI classification of the patient's spine-related complaints. (4) Ask additional questions to determine the GSCI subclassification of the symptom pattern. (5) Consider appropriate treatment interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The Patient and Clinician Guides are designed to be sufficiently clear to be useful to all patients and clinicians, irrespective of their location, education, professional qualifications, and experience. However, they are comprehensive enough to provide guidance on the management of all spine-related symptoms or disorders, including triage for serious and specific diseases. They are consistent with widely accepted evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. They also allow for adequate documentation and medical record keeping. These guides should be of value during periods of government-mandated physical or social distancing due to infectious diseases, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic. They should also be of value in underserved communities in high-, middle-, and low-income countries where there is a dearth of accessible trained spine care clinicians. These guides have the potential to reduce the overutilization of unnecessary and expensive interventions while empowering patients to self-manage uncomplicated spinal pain with the assistance of their clinician, either through direct in-person consultation or via telehealth communication.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Spinal Diseases/therapy , Telemedicine , Evidence-Based Medicine/organization & administration , Global Health , Humans , Practice Guidelines as Topic
3.
Chiropr Man Therap ; 28(1): 21, 2020 05 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-760596

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, the International Chiropractors Association (ICA) posted reports claiming that chiropractic care can impact the immune system. These claims clash with recommendations from the World Health Organization and World Federation of Chiropractic. We discuss the scientific validity of the claims made in these ICA reports. MAIN BODY: We reviewed the two reports posted by the ICA on their website on March 20 and March 28, 2020. We explored the method used to develop the claim that chiropractic adjustments impact the immune system and discuss the scientific merit of that claim. We provide a response to the ICA reports and explain why this claim lacks scientific credibility and is dangerous to the public. More than 150 researchers from 11 countries reviewed and endorsed our response. CONCLUSION: In their reports, the ICA provided no valid clinical scientific evidence that chiropractic care can impact the immune system. We call on regulatory authorities and professional leaders to take robust political and regulatory action against those claiming that chiropractic adjustments have a clinical impact on the immune system.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Immunization , Manipulation, Chiropractic , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , COVID-19 , Chiropractic , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Humans , Immunization/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Societies, Medical
4.
Chiropr Man Therap ; 28(1): 34, 2020 06 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-591582

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Social media has become an increasingly important tool in monitoring the onset and spread of infectious diseases globally as well monitoring the spread of information about those diseases. This includes the spread of misinformation, which has been documented within the context of the emerging COVID-19 crisis. Understanding the creation, spread and uptake of social media misinformation is of critical importance to public safety. In this descriptive study, we detail Twitter activity regarding spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) and claims it increases, or "boosts", immunity. Spinal manipulation is a common intervention used by many health professions, most commonly by chiropractors. There is no clinical evidence that SMT improves human immunity. METHODS: Social media searching software (Talkwalker Quick Search) was used to describe Twitter activity regarding SMT and improving or boosting immunity. Searches were performed for the 3 months and 12 months before March 31, 2020 using terms related to 1) SMT, 2) the professions that most often provide SMT and 3) immunity. From these searches, we determined the magnitude and time course of Twitter activity then coded this activity into content that promoted or refuted a SMT/immunity link. Content themes, high-influence users and user demographics were then stratified as either promoting or refuting this linkage. RESULTS: Twitter misinformation regarding a SMT/immunity link increased dramatically during the onset of the COVID crisis. Activity levels (number of tweets) and engagement scores (likes + retweets) were roughly equal between content promoting or refuting a SMT/immunity link, however, the potential reach (audience) of tweets refuting a SMT/immunity link was 3 times higher than those promoting a link. Users with the greatest influence on Twitter, as either promoters or refuters, were individuals, not institutions or organizations. The majority of tweets promoting a SMT/immunity link were generated in the USA while the majority of refuting tweets originated from Canada. CONCLUSION: Twitter activity about SMT and immunity increased during the COVID-19 crisis. Results from this work have the potential to help policy makers and others understand the impact of SMT misinformation and devise strategies to mitigate its impact.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/immunology , Communication , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Immunity/physiology , Manipulation, Spinal , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Social Media/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19 , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Media/standards , Time Factors
5.
Chiropr Man Therap ; 28(1): 24, 2020 05 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-232473

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Internet analytics are increasingly being integrated into public health regulation. One specific application is to monitor compliance of website and social media activity with respect to jurisdictional regulations. These data may then identify breaches of compliance and inform disciplinary actions. Our study aimed to evaluate the novel use of internet analytics by a Canadian chiropractic regulator to determine their registrants compliance with three regulations related to specific health conditions, pregnancy conditions and most recently, claims of improved immunity during the COVID-19 crisis. METHODS: A customized internet search tool (Market Review Tool, MRT) was used by the College of Chiropractors of British Columbia (CCBC), Canada to audit registrants websites and social media activity. The audits extracted words whose use within specific contexts is not permitted under CCBC guidelines. The MRT was first used in October of 2018 to identify words related to specific health conditions. The MRT was again used in December 2019 for words related to pregnancy and most recently in March 2020 for words related to COVID-19. In these three MRT applications, potential cases of word misuse were evaluated by the regulator who then notified the practitioner to comply with existing regulations by a specific date. The MRT was then used on that date to determine compliance. Those found to be non-compliant were referred to the regulator's inquiry committee. We mapped this process and reported the outcomes with permission of the regulator. RESULTS: In September 2018, 250 inappropriate mentions of specific health conditions were detected from approximately 1250 registrants with 2 failing to comply. The second scan for pregnancy related terms of approximately1350 practitioners revealed 83 inappropriate mentions. Following notification, all 83 cases were compliant within the specified timeframe. Regarding COVID-19 related words, 97 inappropriate mentions of the word "immune" were detected from 1350 registrants with 7 cases of non-compliance. CONCLUSION: Internet analytics are an effective way for regulators to monitor internet activity to protect the public from misleading statements. The processes described were effective at bringing about rapid practitioner compliance. Given the increasing volume of internet activity by healthcare professionals, internet analytics are an important addition for health care regulators to protect the public they serve.


Subject(s)
Chiropractic/legislation & jurisprudence , Communication , Internet , Public Health/legislation & jurisprudence , COVID-19 , Canada/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Disease , Female , Humans , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/immunology , Pregnancy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...