Capacity-building and continuing professional development in healthcare and rehabilitation in low- and middle-income countries-a scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: A recent world health report suggests that there is a growing rehabilitation human resource crisis. This review focuses on the capacity-building needed to meet present and future rehabilitation challenges in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Capacity-building is the process by which individuals and organizations obtain, improve, and retain the skills, knowledge, tools, equipment, and other resources needed to do their jobs competently. The objectives of this review are (1) to determine how capacity-building has been defined, implemented, and evaluated in LMICs and (2) to provide an overview of the effectiveness of capacity-building initiatives. METHODS: In the first of seven stages, we will refine and delimit the research. Then, we will identify relevant studies by searching five biomedical databases, two rehabilitation databases, three regional databases, and three databases of gray literature. Two independent reviewers will then select the studies using a priori selection criteria. We will exclude incomplete records, records published prior to 2000 for databases and 2010 for gray literature, and records written in languages other than English or Spanish. We will also exclude records focusing on entry-to-practice programs in academic settings. For Objective 1, using qualitative analysis software, we will extract and analyze text from included records that define or explains capacity building. For Objective 2, using an online file-sharing platform, one reviewer will extract data describing the effectiveness of capacity-building interventions and a second reviewer will verify the accuracy, with disagreements resolved by consensus. The results will be collated using tables and charts. After synthesizing the results, we will discuss the practicality and applicability of the findings with partners from Honduras and Colombia. We will use several formats and venues including presentations and publications in English and Spanish to present our results. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this will be the first attempt to systematically identify knowledge of capacity-building and rehabilitation in LMICs. This scoping review results will offer unique insights concerning the breadth and depth of literature in the area. It is anticipated that results from this scoping review will guide efforts in future capacity-building efforts in rehabilitation in LMICs. REVIEW REGISTRATION: Busch AJ, Deprez D, Bidonde J, Ramírez PA, Araque EP. Capacity building and continuing professional development in healthcare and rehabilitation in low- and middle-income countries-a scoping review. 2021. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/7VGXU .

RESUMEN: INTRODUCCIóN: La literatura mundial sugiere que existe una creciente crisis de recursos humanos en el área de rehabilitación. Esta Revisión Sistemática Exploratoria se centra en el desarrollo de capacidades en el área de rehabilitación en países de ingresos bajos y medianos (PIBM). El desarrollo de capacidades es el proceso mediante el cual las personas y las organizaciones obtienen, mejoran y retienen las habilidades, el conocimiento, las herramientas, el equipo y otros recursos necesarios para realizar su trabajo de manera competente. OBJETIVOS: Determinar cómo se ha definido, implementado y evaluado el desarrollo de capacidades en rehabilitación en los PIBM; y proporcionar una síntesis sobre la eficacia de las iniciativas de desarrollo de capacidades en rehabilitación en los PIBM. MéTODOS: En la primera de siete etapas, refinaremos las preguntas de la investigación. Luego, identificaremos estudios relevantes mediante la búsqueda de cinco bases de datos y tres bases de datos de literatura gris. Dos revisores en forma independiente seleccionarán los estudios utilizando criterios definidos a priori. Excluiremos registros (artículos y otra literatura) incompletos, publicados antes de 2000 para bases de datos y 2010 para literatura gris, y escritos en idiomas que no sean inglés o español. También excluiremos registros que sobre programas de ingreso a la práctica profesional (académicos). Para el Objetivo 1, extraeremos y analizaremos el texto que define las estrategias/iniciativas de desarrollo de capacidades en rehabilitación utilizando un software de análisis cualitativo. Para el Objetivo 2, un revisor extraerá datos que describen la efectividad de las intervenciones y un segundo revisor verificará la precisión de los datos utilizando una plataforma electrónica. Los desacuerdos entre revisores se resolverán por consenso. Los resultados se presentarán usando tablas y gráficos. Consultaremos con colegas de PIBM sobre la aplicabilidad de los hallazgos. Para la diseminación de resultados, usaremos presentaciones y publicaciones en inglés y español. DISCUSIóN: Hasta donde sabemos, esta será la primera revisión exploratoria para identificar el desarrollo de capacidades en rehabilitación en los PIBM. Se prevé que los resultados de esta revisión guiarán los esfuerzos futuros de desarrollo de capacidades en la rehabilitación de los PIBM.

An algorithm provided as initial guidance for reporting registry records and published protocols in systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to synthesize the available guidance with existing practices by Cochrane reviewers to generate an algorithm as a starting point in assisting reviewers reporting of registry records and published protocols (TRRs/PPs) use in systematic reviews of interventions. STUDY DESIGN: We used existing guidance from major review bodies, assessed the current reporting of TRRs/PPs use in a sample of Cochrane reviews, and engaged in critical analysis. Independent reviewers identified and extracted textual excerpts reporting the use of trial registry records and published protocols and codes following a systematic review framework. Based on these elements, and our initial research, we created an algorithm/graphical aid to visualize initial direction. RESULTS: We included 166 Cochrane systematic reviews published between August 2015 and 2016 from 48 review groups. Review authors' terminology (e.g., ongoing, terminated) varied between and within reviews. Reporting practices were diverse and inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: This is a timely investigation in an era where evidence synthesis informs health and health care decisions. Our proposed algorithm provides initial direction to systematize the reporting of TRR/PP use. We hope that the algorithm generates further discussion to enhance the transparency of TRR/PP reporting and methodological research into the complexities of using protocols in systematic reviews of interventions.

Videoconferencing psychotherapy for veterans with PTSD: Results from a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.

INTRODUCTION: Veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) face significant barriers that make it less likely for them to pursue treatment. A randomized controlled non-inferiority trial was used to determine if providing psychotherapy for PTSD via videoconference (VC) is as effective as in-person (IP) psychotherapy. METHODS: All eligible veterans (n = 207) received cognitive processing therapy (CPT) to treat PTSD symptoms in one of the two treatment modalities. Participant symptoms were collected at baseline, post-treatment, and six months after treatment completion. The primary outcome measure, the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS), was used to assess PTSD diagnosis and symptom severity. Secondary outcomes included two self-report measures of symptom severity, the Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist - Specific (PCL-S) for PTSD and the Patient Health Questionnaire - 9 (PHQ-9) for depressive symptoms. A linear mixed-effects model was used to assess non-inferiority for participants who completed treatment (completers) and those who were randomized to treatment (intention-to-treat (ITT)). RESULTS: Both completer and ITT analyses showed that improvement in CAPS scores in the VC condition was non-inferior to that in the IP condition at six-month follow-up, but VC was inferior to IP for improvement in CAPS at post-treatment. Non-inferiority was supported by completer analyses for PCL-S and PHQ-9 in both post-treatment change and six-month follow-up change, and the ITT analysis supported the significant non-inferiority for PCL at post-treatment change. DISCUSSION: These findings generally suggest that CPT delivered via VC can be as effective as IP for reducing the severity of PTSD symptoms.

Flexibility exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Exercise training is commonly recommended for adults with fibromyalgia. We defined flexibility exercise training programs as those involving movements of a joint or a series of joints, through complete range of motion, thus targeting major muscle-tendon units. This review is one of a series of reviews updating the first review published in 2002. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of flexibility exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database), Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2017, unrestricted by language, and we reviewed the reference lists of retrieved trials to identify potentially relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized trials (RCTs) including adults diagnosed with fibromyalgia based on published criteria. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, trial withdrawals, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected articles for inclusion, extracted data, performed 'Risk of bias' assessments, and assessed the certainty of the body of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. All discrepancies were rechecked, and consensus was achieved by discussion. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 RCTs (743 people). Among these RCTs, flexibility exercise training was compared to an untreated control group, land-based aerobic training, resistance training, or other interventions (i.e. Tai Chi, Pilates, aquatic biodanza, friction massage, medications). Studies were at risk of selection, performance, and detection bias (due to lack of adequate randomization and allocation concealment, lack of participant or personnel blinding, and lack of blinding for self-reported outcomes). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcomes were self-reported and were expressed on a 0-to-100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs) indicate improvement). We prioritized the findings of flexibility exercise training compared to land-based aerobic training and present them fully here.Very low-certainty evidence showed that compared with land-based aerobic training, flexibility exercise training (five trials with 266 participants) provides no clinically important benefits with regard to HRQoL, pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function. Low-certainty evidence showed no difference between these groups for withdrawals at completion of the intervention (8 to 20 weeks).Mean HRQoL assessed on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) Total scale (0 to 100, higher scores indicating worse HRQoL) was 46 mm and 42 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (2 studies, 193 participants); absolute change was 4% worse (6% better to 14% worse), and relative change was 7.5% worse (10.5% better to 25.5% worse) in the flexibility group. Mean pain was 57 mm and 52 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (5 studies, 266 participants); absolute change was 5% worse (1% better to 11% worse), and relative change was 6.7% worse (2% better to 15.4% worse). Mean fatigue was 67 mm and 71 mm in the aerobic and flexibility groups, respectively (2 studies, 75 participants); absolute change was 4% better (13% better to 5% worse), and relative change was 6% better (19.4% better to 7.4% worse). Mean physical function was 23 points and 17 points in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (1 study, 60 participants); absolute change was 6% worse (4% better to 16% worse), and relative change was 14% worse (9.1% better to 37.1% worse). We found very low-certainty evidence of an effect for stiffness. Mean stiffness was 49 mm to 79 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (1 study, 15 participants); absolute change was 30% better (8% better to 51% better), and relative change was 39% better (10% better to 68% better). We found no evidence of an effect in all-cause withdrawal between the flexibility and aerobic groups (5 studies, 301 participants). Absolute change was 1% fewer withdrawals in the flexibility group (8% fewer to 21% more), and relative change in the flexibility group compared to the aerobic training intervention group was 3% fewer (39% fewer to 55% more). It is uncertain whether flexibility leads to long-term effects (36 weeks after a 12-week intervention), as the evidence was of low certainty and was derived from a single trial.Very low-certainty evidence indicates uncertainty in the risk of adverse events for flexibility exercise training. One adverse effect was described among the 132 participants allocated to flexibility training. One participant had tendinitis of the Achilles tendon (McCain 1988), but it is unclear if the tendinitis was a pre-existing condition. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: When compared with aerobic training, it is uncertain whether flexibility improves outcomes such as HRQoL, pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function, as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Flexibility exercise training may lead to little or no difference for all-cause withdrawals. It is also uncertain whether flexibility exercise training has long-term effects due to the very low certainty of the evidence. We downgraded the evidence owing to the small number of trials and participants across trials, as well as due to issues related to unclear and high risk of bias (selection, performance, and detection biases). While flexibility exercise training appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), evidence on adverse events was scarce, therefore its safety is uncertain.

Mixed exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review is one of a series of reviews about exercise training for fibromyalgia that will replace the review titled "Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome", which was first published in 2002. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of mixed exercise training protocols that include two or more types of exercise (aerobic, resistance, flexibility) for adults with fibromyalgia against control (treatment as usual, wait list control), non exercise (e.g. biofeedback), or other exercise (e.g. mixed versus flexibility) interventions.Specific comparisons involving mixed exercise versus other exercises (e.g. resistance, aquatic, aerobic, flexibility, and whole body vibration exercises) were not assessed. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Thesis and Dissertations Abstracts, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), the Physiotherapy Evidence Databese (PEDro), Current Controlled Trials (to 2013), WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2017, unrestricted by language, to identify all potentially relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia that compared mixed exercise interventions with other or no exercise interventions. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the quality of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 29 RCTs (2088 participants; 98% female; average age 51 years) that compared mixed exercise interventions (including at least two of the following: aerobic or cardiorespiratory, resistance or muscle strengthening exercise, and flexibility exercise) versus control (e.g. wait list), non-exercise (e.g. biofeedback), and other exercise interventions. Design flaws across studies led to selection, performance, detection, and selective reporting biases. We prioritised the findings of mixed exercise compared to control and present them fully here.Twenty-one trials (1253 participants) provided moderate-quality evidence for all major outcomes but stiffness (low quality). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcome measures were self-reported and expressed on a 0 to 100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs) indicate improvement; we used a clinically important difference between groups of 15% relative difference). Results for mixed exercise versus control show that mean HRQL was 56 and 49 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (13 studies; 610 participants) with absolute improvement of 7% (3% better to 11% better) and relative improvement of 12% (6% better to 18% better). Mean pain was 58.6 and 53 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (15 studies; 832 participants) with absolute improvement of 5% (1% better to 9% better) and relative improvement of 9% (3% better to 15% better). Mean fatigue was 72 and 59 points in the control and exercise groups, respectively (1 study; 493 participants) with absolute improvement of 13% (8% better to 18% better) and relative improvement of 18% (11% better to 24% better). Mean stiffness was 68 and 61 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (5 studies; 261 participants) with absolute improvement of 7% (1% better to 12% better) and relative improvement of 9% (1% better to 17% better). Mean physical function was 49 and 38 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (9 studies; 477 participants) with absolute improvement of 11% (7% better to 15% better) and relative improvement of 22% (14% better to 30% better). Pooled analysis resulted in a moderate-quality risk ratio for all-cause withdrawals with similar rates across groups (11 per 100 and 12 per 100 in the control and intervention groups, respectively) (19 studies; 1065 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.51) with an absolute change of 1% (3% fewer to 5% more) and a relative change of 11% (28% fewer to 47% more). Across all 21 studies, no injuries or other adverse events were reported; however some participants experienced increased fibromyalgia symptoms (pain, soreness, or tiredness) during or after exercise. However due to low event rates, we are uncertain of the precise risks with exercise. Mixed exercise may improve HRQL and physical function and may decrease pain and fatigue; all-cause withdrawal was similar across groups, and mixed exercises may slightly reduce stiffness. For fatigue, physical function, HRQL, and stiffness, we cannot rule in or out a clinically relevant change, as the confidence intervals include both clinically important and unimportant effects.We found very low-quality evidence on long-term effects. In eight trials, HRQL, fatigue, and physical function improvement persisted at 6 to 52 or more weeks post intervention but improvements in stiffness and pain did not persist. Withdrawals and adverse events were not measured.It is uncertain whether mixed versus other non-exercise or other exercise interventions improve HRQL and physical function or decrease symptoms because the quality of evidence was very low. The interventions were heterogeneous, and results were often based on small single studies. Adverse events with these interventions were not measured, and thus uncertainty surrounds the risk of adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to control, moderate-quality evidence indicates that mixed exercise probably improves HRQL, physical function, and fatigue, but this improvement may be small and clinically unimportant for some participants; physical function shows improvement in all participants. Withdrawal was similar across groups. Low-quality evidence suggests that mixed exercise may slightly improve stiffness. Very low-quality evidence indicates that we are 'uncertain' whether the long-term effects of mixed exercise are maintained for all outcomes; all-cause withdrawals and adverse events were not measured. Compared to other exercise or non-exercise interventions, we are uncertain about the effects of mixed exercise because we found only very low-quality evidence obtained from small, very heterogeneous trials. Although mixed exercise appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), evidence on adverse events is scarce, so we are uncertain about its safety. We downgraded the evidence from these trials due to imprecision (small trials), selection bias (e.g. allocation), blinding of participants and care providers or outcome assessors, and selective reporting.

Therapeutic validity of exercise interventions in the management of fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic validity of exercise interventions included in a previous umbrella systematic review of high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the management of fibromyalgia and to explore whether exercise interventions with high therapeutic validity and that meet the 2013 American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) guidelines are positively associated with greater pain relief. METHODS: Therapeutic validity was evaluated based on the CONsensus on Therapeutic Exercise and Training (CONTENT) Scale, in high methodological quality RCTs found in the nine systematic reviews of a previous umbrella review on exercise interventions in the management of fibromyalgia. Additionally, adherence to the 2013 ACSM exercise recommendations for fibromyalgia was analyzed. The effect size for pain relief after the exercise programs was also considered. RESULTS: The CONTENT mean total score was 4.42 out of 9, demonstrating generally low therapeutic validity of the 28 included RCTs. There was poor concordance between therapeutic validity and pain relief (Kappa values ranging between -0.6 to 0.57). Kappa statistic results showed poor concordance (k=0.01) between statistically significant (P<0.05) pain relief values and adherence to the 2013 ACSM exercise recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The therapeutic validity of exercise intervention programs in fibromyalgia is low. This is mainly due to incomplete descriptions of exercise interventions and adherence. Poor concordance is found between high therapeutic validity and adherence to the ACSM exercise recommendations with pain relief. Improved standardized reporting is recommended to identify optimal exercise prescription for fibromyalgia.

Faculty Development Revisited: A Systems-Based View of Stakeholder Development to Meet the Demands of Entrustable Professional Activity Implementation.

In 2015, the Association of American Medical Colleges implemented an interinstitutional pilot of 13 core entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for entering residency, activities that entering residents should be expected to perform with indirect supervision. The pilot included a concept group on faculty development; this group previously offered a shared mental model focused on the development of faculty who devote their efforts to clinical teaching and assessment for learning and entrustment decision making. In this article, the authors draw from the literature of competency-based education to propose what is needed in overall approaches to faculty development to prepare institutions for undergraduate EPA implementation.Taking a systems-based view that defines the necessary tasks of EPA implementation, the authors move beyond the variably used term "faculty" and enumerate a comprehensive list of institutional stakeholders who can meaningfully support and/or engage in the relationships and organizational processes required for EPA learning and assessment. They consider each group's responsibilities and development needs according to five domains delineated by Steinert: teaching improvement, leadership and management, research-building capacity, academic career building, and organizational change.The authors argue that the EPA framework addresses barriers posed with the use of a competency-based framework. By facilitating the communication required for organizational change, enabling valid assessment with comprehensive yet feasible levels of faculty development, and incorporating all relevant data on student professional behavior into summative assessment decisions, EPAs may offer a clearer path toward the goal of competency-based education.

Scoping Review of Dance for Adults With Fibromyalgia: What Do We Know About It?

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia is a chronic disorder characterized by widespread muscular tenderness, pain, fatigue, and cognitive difficulties. Nonpharmacological treatment options, such as physical activity, are important for people with fibromyalgia. There are strong recommendations to support engagement in physical activity for symptom management among adults with fibromyalgia. Dance is a mode of physical activity that may allow individuals with fibromyalgia to improve their physical function, health, and well-being. Dance has the potential to promote improved pain processing while simultaneously providing the health and social benefits of engaging in physical activity that contributes to symptom management and overall function rehabilitation. However, we are unaware of current evidence on dance as a nonpharmacological/physical activity intervention for adults with fibromyalgia. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to understand how dance is used therapeutically by individuals with fibromyalgia; to examine the extent, range and nature of research activity in the area; and to determine the value of undertaking a systematic review of interventions. METHODS: We used and adapted the Arksey and O'Malley scoping framework. The search strategy involved a comprehensive search of main health and electronic social databases, trial registries and grey literature without language limits. Pairs of reviewers independently screened and extracted data and evaluated the methodological quality of randomized control trials. RESULTS: Twenty-one unique records for 13 studies met inclusion criteria; the studies included mostly middle-aged women. Types of dance included were aerobic dance, belly dance, dance movement therapy, biodanza and Zumba. Intervention parameters were different among studies. Frequency varied between one to three times a week; all were done in small group settings. Studies evaluated a variety of outcomes in the symptoms, wellness, psychosocial, physical functioning, balance and fitness categories; no studies evaluated the safety or adverse events systematically which is a major weakness of the literature. CONCLUSIONS: There are few studies in the field of dance and fibromyalgia, suggesting research is in its infancy but slowly growing. They are of European and South American origin, focusing on female participants and a limited number of dance modes. Because the body of literature is small, of low quality and highly heterogeneous, we concluded that a systematic review of interventions on dance is not warranted at this time.

Review of Factors Influencing Women's Choice of Mastectomy Versus Breast Conserving Therapy in Early Stage Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.

We have performed a narrative synthesis. A literature search was conducted between January 2000 and June 2014 in 7 databases. The initial search identified 2717 articles; 319 underwent abstract screening, 67 underwent full-text screening, and 25 final articles were included. This review looked at early stage breast cancer in women only, excluding ductal carcinoma in situ and advanced breast cancer. A conceptual framework was created to organize the central constructs underlying women's choices: clinicopathologic factors, physician factors, and individual factors with subgroups of sociodemographic, geographic, and personal beliefs and preferences. This framework guided our review's synthesis and analysis. We found that larger tumor size and increasing stage was associated with increased rates of mastectomy. The results for age varied, but suggested that old and young extremes of diagnostic age were associated with an increased likelihood of mastectomy. Higher socioeconomic status was associated with higher breast conservation therapy (BCT) rates. Resident rural location and increasing distance from radiation treatment facilities were associated with lower rates of BCT. Individual belief factors influencing women's choice of mastectomy (mastectomy being reassuring, avoiding radiation, an expedient treatment) differed from factors influencing choice of BCT (body image and femininity, physician recommendation, survival equivalence, less surgery). Surgeon factors, including female gender, higher case numbers, and individual surgeon practice, were associated with increased BCT rates. The decision-making process for women with early stage breast cancer is complicated and affected by multiple factors. Organizing these factors into central constructs of clinicopathologic, individual, and physician factors may aid health-care professionals to better understand this process.

Use of videoconferencing for physical therapy in people with musculoskeletal conditions: A systematic review.

Background Physical therapists are key players in the management of musculoskeletal conditions, which are common in rural and remote communities. There are few physical therapists in rural regions compared to potential need, so care is either not provided or must be sought in urban centers, requiring travel and time away from work and family to access services. Telerehabilitation strategies, such as real-time videoconferencing, are emerging as possible solutions to address shortages in rural physical therapy services. Objectives This review will: (1) determine the validity and the reliability of secure videoconferencing for physical therapy management of musculoskeletal conditions; (2) determine the health, system, and process outcomes when using secure videoconferencing for physical therapy management of musculoskeletal conditions. Methods A protocol-driven systematic review of four databases was carried out by two independent reviewers. Study criteria included English language articles from January 2003 to December 2016, on physical therapy management using secure videoconferencing, pertaining to adults 18-80 years with chronic musculoskeletal disorders. Randomized controlled trials, pre-experimental studies, and case-control studies were included. Quality analysis was performed utilizing standardized tools specific for the study designs. Results and conclusions Validity and reliability studies were identified as having high risk of bias. Intervention studies were of moderate quality, and found positive impact on health outcomes and satisfaction. Two studies evaluated costs, with evidence of cost savings in one study. More robust research is required to evaluate long-term effects of telerehabilitation for physical therapy management of musculoskeletal disorders, including cost-benefit analyses.

Whole body vibration exercise training for fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Exercise training is commonly recommended for adults with fibromyalgia. We defined whole body vibration (WBV) exercise as use of a vertical or rotary oscillating platform as an exercise stimulus while the individual engages in sustained static positioning or dynamic movements. The individual stands on the platform, and oscillations result in vibrations transmitted to the subject through the legs. This review is one of a series of reviews that replaces the first review published in 2002. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate benefits and harms of WBV exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PEDro, Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, AMED, WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2016, unrestricted by language, to identify potentially relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with the diagnosis of fibromyalgia based on published criteria including a WBV intervention versus control or another intervention. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed risk of bias assessments, and assessed the quality of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. We used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences. MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies involving 150 middle-aged female participants from one country. Two studies had two treatment arms (71 participants) that compared WBV plus mixed exercise plus relaxation versus mixed exercise plus relaxation and placebo WBV versus control, and WBV plus mixed exercise versus mixed exercise and control; two studies had three treatment arms (79 participants) that compared WBV plus mixed exercise versus control and mixed relaxation placebo WBV. We judged the overall risk of bias as low for selection (random sequence generation), detection (objectively measured outcomes), attrition, and other biases; as unclear for selection bias (allocation concealment); and as high for performance, detection (self-report outcomes), and selective reporting biases.The WBV versus control comparison reported on three major outcomes assessed at 12 weeks post intervention based on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) (0 to 100 scale, lower score is better). Results for HRQL in the control group at end of treatment (59.13) showed a mean difference (MD) of -3.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] -10.81 to 3.35) for absolute HRQL, or improvement of 4% (11% better to 3% worse) and relative improvement of 6.7% (19.6% better to 6.1% worse). Results for withdrawals indicate that 14 per 100 and 10 per 100 in the intervention and control groups, respectively, withdrew from the intervention (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.27 to 7.67; absolute change 4%, 95% CI 16% fewer to 24% more; relative change 43% more, 95% CI 73% fewer to 667% more). The only adverse event reported was acute pain in the legs, for which one participant dropped out of the program. We judged the quality of evidence for all outcomes as very low. This study did not measure pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, or physical function. No outcomes in this comparison met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance.The WBV plus mixed exercise (aerobic, strength, flexibility, and relaxation) versus control study (N = 21) evaluated symptoms at six weeks post intervention using the FIQ. Results for HRQL at end of treatment (59.64) showed an MD of -16.02 (95% CI -31.57 to -0.47) for absolute HRQL, with improvement of 16% (0.5% to 32%) and relative change in HRQL of 24% (0.7% to 47%). Data showed a pain intensity MD of -28.22 (95% CI -43.26 to -13.18) for an absolute difference of 28% (13% to 43%) and a relative change of 39% improvement (18% to 60%); as well as a fatigue MD of -33 (95% CI -49 to -16) for an absolute difference of 33% (16% to 49%) and relative difference of 47% (95% CI 23% to 60%); and a stiffness MD of -26.27 (95% CI -42.96 to -9.58) for an absolute difference of 26% (10% to 43%) and a relative difference of 36.5% (23% to 60%). All-cause withdrawals occurred in 8 per 100 and 33 per 100 withdrawals in the intervention and control groups, respectively (two studies, N = 46; RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.12) for an absolute risk difference of 24% (3% to 51%). One participant exhibited a mild anxiety attack at the first session of WBV. No studies in this comparison reported on physical function. Several outcomes (based on the findings of one study) in this comparison met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance: HRQL, pain intensity, fatigue, and stiffness, which improved by 16%, 39%, 46%, and 36%, respectively. We found evidence of very low quality for all outcomes.The WBV plus mixed exercise versus other exercise provided very low quality evidence for all outcomes. Investigators evaluated outcomes on a 0 to 100 scale (lower score is better) for pain intensity (one study, N = 23; MD -16.36, 95% CI -29.49 to -3.23), HRQL (two studies, N = 49; MD -6.67, 95% CI -14.65 to 1.31), fatigue (one study, N = 23; MD -14.41, 95% CI -29.47 to 0.65), stiffness (one study, N = 23; MD -12.72, 95% CI -26.90 to 1.46), and all-cause withdrawal (three studies, N = 77; RR 0.72, 95% CI -0.17 to 3.11). Adverse events reported for the three studies included one anxiety attack at the first session of WBV and one dropout from the comparison group ("other exercise group") due to an injury that was not related to the program. No studies reported on physical function. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Whether WBV or WBV in addition to mixed exercise is superior to control or another intervention for women with fibromyalgia remains uncertain. The quality of evidence is very low owing to imprecision (few study participants and wide confidence intervals) and issues related to risk of bias. These trials did not measure major outcomes such as pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, and physical function. Overall, studies were few and were very small, which prevented meaningful estimates of harms and definitive conclusions about WBV safety.

Predischarge Injectable Versus Oral Naltrexone to Improve Postdischarge Treatment Engagement Among Hospitalized Veterans with Alcohol Use Disorder: A Randomized Pilot Proof-of-Concept Study.

BACKGROUND: Injectable naltrexone for alcohol use disorders (AUDs) has been efficacious in several studies. It has not been (i) compared head-to-head with oral naltrexone or (ii) examined in the hospital setting as an intervention that might facilitate treatment attendance after hospital discharge. METHODS: Fifty-four hospitalized veterans identified as having DSM-IV-TR alcohol dependence were randomized to receive (i) a 50 mg oral naltrexone plus a 30-day prescription or (ii) a 380 mg intramuscular naltrexone injection prior to discharge. Of 113 veteran inpatients deemed eligible based on screening criteria, 54 met final eligibility criteria and were enrolled and randomized. Baseline data included demographics, alcohol consumption, and comorbidity. Measures of treatment initiation and engagement and alcohol consumption were reassessed at 14- and 45-day follow-ups. RESULTS: Thirty-five participants (64.8%) completed the entire study protocol (received a study medication and completed 14- and 45-day follow-ups). Among those who received a study medication (n = 45), 77.8% completed all follow-up interviews. This pilot study was not designed to have sufficient statistical power for hypothesis testing, and thus, as expected, there were no significant differences between groups in medication adherence (self-report of >80% of daily doses taken in oral group; receipt of second injection in the injection group), treatment engagement (at least treatment 3 visits in the 30 days postdischarge, and 2 or more visits per month in each of the 3 months following discharge) or alcohol consumption at 14 or at 45 days (p > 0.05). The median number of drinks among the entire cohort in the 2 weeks prior to hospitalization (128 drinks) was significantly higher than at day 14 (0 drinks, p < 0.001) or day 45 (0 drinks, p < 0.001). Rates of medication adherence were 62% in the oral group and 61% in the injection group. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate feasibility for larger, more definitive study. Both groups had significant reductions in alcohol consumption over time and high-treatment engagement rates. Both oral and injectable formulations are feasible to initiate prior to discharge for hospital inpatients identified as having an AUD.

Aerobic exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review is one of a series of reviews about exercise training for people with fibromyalgia that will replace the "Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome" review first published in 2002. OBJECTIVES: • To evaluate the benefits and harms of aerobic exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia• To assess the following specific comparisons ० Aerobic versus control conditions (eg, treatment as usual, wait list control, physical activity as usual) ० Aerobic versus aerobic interventions (eg, running vs brisk walking) ० Aerobic versus non-exercise interventions (eg, medications, education) We did not assess specific comparisons involving aerobic exercise versus other exercise interventions (eg, resistance exercise, aquatic exercise, flexibility exercise, mixed exercise). Other systematic reviews have examined or will examine these comparisons (Bidonde 2014; Busch 2013). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry up to June 2016, unrestricted by language, and we reviewed the reference lists of retrieved trials to identify potentially relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia that compared aerobic training interventions (dynamic physical activity that increases breathing and heart rate to submaximal levels for a prolonged period) versus no exercise or another intervention. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed a risk of bias assessment, and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. We used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences between groups. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 RCTs (839 people). Studies were at risk of selection, performance, and detection bias (owing to lack of blinding for self-reported outcomes) and had low risk of attrition and reporting bias. We prioritized the findings when aerobic exercise was compared with no exercise control and present them fully here.Eight trials (with 456 participants) provided low-quality evidence for pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function; and moderate-quality evidence for withdrawals and HRQL at completion of the intervention (6 to 24 weeks). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcome measures were self-reported and were expressed on a 0 to 100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs)/standardized mean differences (SMDs) indicate improvement). Effects for aerobic exercise versus control were as follows: HRQL: mean 56.08; five studies; N = 372; MD -7.89, 95% CI -13.23 to -2.55; absolute improvement of 8% (3% to 13%) and relative improvement of 15% (5% to 24%); pain intensity: mean 65.31; six studies; N = 351; MD -11.06, 95% CI -18.34 to -3.77; absolute improvement of 11% (95% CI 4% to 18%) and relative improvement of 18% (7% to 30%); stiffness: mean 69; one study; N = 143; MD -7.96, 95% CI -14.95 to -0.97; absolute difference in improvement of 8% (1% to 15%) and relative change in improvement of 11.4% (21.4% to 1.4%); physical function: mean 38.32; three studies; N = 246; MD -10.16, 95% CI -15.39 to -4.94; absolute change in improvement of 10% (15% to 5%) and relative change in improvement of 21.9% (33% to 11%); and fatigue: mean 68; three studies; N = 286; MD -6.48, 95% CI -14.33 to 1.38; absolute change in improvement of 6% (12% improvement to 0.3% worse) and relative change in improvement of 8% (16% improvement to 0.4% worse). Pooled analysis resulted in a risk ratio (RR) of moderate quality for withdrawals (17 per 100 and 20 per 100 in control and intervention groups, respectively; eight studies; N = 456; RR 1.25, 95%CI 0.89 to 1.77; absolute change of 5% more withdrawals with exercise (3% fewer to 12% more).Three trials provided low-quality evidence on long-term effects (24 to 208 weeks post intervention) and reported that benefits for pain and function persisted but did not for HRQL or fatigue. Withdrawals were similar, and investigators did not assess stiffness and adverse events.We are uncertain about the effects of one aerobic intervention versus another, as the evidence was of low to very low quality and was derived from single trials only, precluding meta-analyses. Similarly, we are uncertain of the effects of aerobic exercise over active controls (ie, education, three studies; stress management training, one study; medication, one study) owing to evidence of low to very low quality provided by single trials. Most studies did not measure adverse events; thus we are uncertain about the risk of adverse events associated with aerobic exercise. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: When compared with control, moderate-quality evidence indicates that aerobic exercise probably improves HRQL and all-cause withdrawal, and low-quality evidence suggests that aerobic exercise may slightly decrease pain intensity, may slightly improve physical function, and may lead to little difference in fatigue and stiffness. Three of the reported outcomes reached clinical significance (HRQL, physical function, and pain). Long-term effects of aerobic exercise may include little or no difference in pain, physical function, and all-cause withdrawal, and we are uncertain about long-term effects on remaining outcomes. We downgraded the evidence owing to the small number of included trials and participants across trials, and because of issues related to unclear and high risks of bias (performance, selection, and detection biases). Aerobic exercise appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), although evidence on adverse events is scarce, so we are uncertain about its safety.

Gaps exist in the current guidance on the use of randomized controlled trial study protocols in systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVES: The use of trial registry records and randomized controlled trial (RCT) study protocols can assist systematic reviewers in evaluating and, possibly, minimizing publication and selective reporting biases. This study examined current guidance on the use of registry records and RCT study protocols from key systematic review organizations, institutes, and collaborations. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Handbooks, guidelines, and standard documents from key systematic review organizations and the EQUATOR network database were identified. Textual excerpts providing guidance on the use of trial registry records, RCT protocols, and ongoing/unpublished studies were extracted independently by two reviewers and coded into a systematic review framework. RESULTS: Eleven documents published in English between 2009 and 2016 were included. Guidance for using RCT protocols and trial registry records was provided for 7 of 16 framework categories, and guidance for using unpublished and ongoing studies was available for 8 of 16 categories. CONCLUSION: This study identified gaps and ambiguities in language in guidance on the use of RCT protocols and trial registry records. To encourage and assist reviewers to use trial registry records and RCT study protocols in systematic reviews, current guidance should be expanded and clarified.

Dance for Adults With Fibromyalgia-What Do We Know About It? Protocol for a Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia is a chronic disorder characterized by widespread muscular tenderness, pain, fatigue, and cognitive difficulties. Nonpharmacological treatment options, such as physical activity, are important for people with fibromyalgia. There are strong recommendations to support engagement in physical activity for symptom management among adults with fibromyalgia. Dance is a mode of physical activity that may allow individuals with fibromyalgia to improve their physical function, health, and well-being. Dance has the potential to promote improved pain processing while simultaneously providing the health and social benefits of engaging in physical activity that contributes to symptom management. However, we are unaware of current evidence on dance as a nonpharmacological/physical activity intervention for adults with fibromyalgia. OBJECTIVE: The aims of the study are to provide an overview of the extant evidence to understand how dance is used for individuals with fibromyalgia; to examine the extent, range, and nature of research activity in the area; and to determine the value of undertaking a full systematic review. METHODS: Scoping reviews are useful to comprehensively and systematically map the literature and identify key evidence, or research gaps. The search strategy will involve electronic databases including Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Literature in the Health Sciences in Latin America and the Caribbean (LILACS), Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), International Bibliography of Theatre and Dance, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Trip, Proquest Theses/Dissertations, Web of Science, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The study will be mapped in seven stages: (1) identifying the research questions, (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) selecting the studies, (4) charting the data, (5) collating, summarizing and reporting the results, (6) consulting, and (7) disseminating the knowledge. RESULTS: The search, title, and abstract are now completed; full text screening was carried out and authors are awaiting interlibrary loans and translations. Data extraction will start shortly after full text 'screening' is completed. Completion is expected in Fall 2017. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this will be the first attempt to systematically identify knowledge of dance as a potential intervention for adults with fibromyalgia. This scoping review offers a feasible means for describing the evidence specific to dance and fibromyalgia; results will provide unique insights concerning the breadth and depth of literature in the area. An analysis of this body of literature as a whole may reveal new research directions or unknown ways this intervention could strengthen current management approaches of the disease.

Interviewers' Experiences with Two Multiple Mini-Interview Scoring Methods Used for Admission to a Master of Physical Therapy Programme.

Purpose: To describe participants' attitudes, beliefs, and experiences with the use of two methods of scoring the Multiple Mini-Interview (MMI) for admission to a Master of Physical Therapy program: a rank-based scoring system (RBS; used from 2007 to 2013) and a criterion-based scoring system (CBS; tested in 2014). The MMI uses short independent assessments to obtain an aggregate score of candidates' professionalism and interpersonal skills, based on behavioural questions within scenarios that assess one attribute at a time. Method: This qualitative descriptive inquiry sought to capture the experiences of 18 MMI interviewers primarily through semi-structured interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and the data were analyzed using thematic analysis. The results were validated by theoretical and investigator triangulation and member checking. Results: One major theme, scoring systems, and two sub-themes, CBS and RBS, emerged across all data. Participants unanimously agreed that CBS is a more fair and objective way to score candidates' interviews. Conclusions: CBS was well accepted by participants, and the majority preferred it over RBS. Participants felt that CBS presented a more accurate depiction of candidates.

Objectif : Décrire les attitudes, les croyances et les expériences des participants face à l'utilisation de deux méthodes d'attribution d'une note à la mini-entrevue multiple (MEM) pour l'admission à un programme de maîtrise en physiothérapie: un système de classement selon la note reçue (RBS, utilisé de 2007 à 2013) et un système de classement selon des critères (CBS, testé en 2014). La MEM utilise de brèves évaluations indépendantes pour produire, au sujet du professionnalisme et des techniques de relations interpersonnelles des candidats, une note agrégée basée sur des questions relatives au comportement dans les scénarios qui évaluent une qualité à la fois. Méthode : Cette recherche descriptive qualitative visait à saisir les expériences de 18 intervieweurs MEM principalement grâce à des entrevues semi-structurées. Les entrevues ont été transcrites textuellement et l'on a analysé les données en appliquant une analyse thématique. Les résultats ont été validés par triangulation entre la théorie et les chercheurs et par une vérification auprès des membres. Résultats : Un thème de premier plan, soit les systèmes de notation, et deux sous-thèmes, soit les systèmes RBS et CBS, ont émergé de toutes les données. Les participants ont convenu à l'unanimité que le classement selon des critères constitue une façon plus équitable et objective d'attribuer une note aux entrevues des candidats. Conclusion : Les participants ont bien accepté le classement basé sur des critères qu'ils préféraient en majorité au classement selon la note reçue. Les participants étaient d'avis que le classement basé sur des critères représentait plus fidèlement les candidats.

Aquatic exercise training for fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review examined the effects of supervised group aquatic training programs (led by an instructor). We defined aquatic training as exercising in a pool while standing at waist, chest, or shoulder depth. This review is part of the update of the 'Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome' review first published in 2002, and previously updated in 2007. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the benefits and harms of aquatic exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 2 (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Health Technology Assessment Database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, Dissertation Abstracts, WHO international Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and AMED, as well as other sources (i.e., reference lists from key journals, identified articles, meta-analyses, and reviews of all types of treatment for fibromyalgia) from inception to October 2013. Using Cochrane methods, we screened citations, abstracts, and full-text articles. Subsequently, we identified aquatic exercise training studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Selection criteria were: a) full-text publication of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in adults diagnosed with fibromyalgia based on published criteria, and b) between-group data for an aquatic intervention and a control or other intervention. We excluded studies if exercise in water was less than 50% of the full intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data (24 outcomes), of which we designated seven as major outcomes: multidimensional function, self reported physical function, pain, stiffness, muscle strength, submaximal cardiorespiratory function, withdrawal rates and adverse effects. We resolved discordance through discussion. We evaluated interventions using mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Where two or more studies provided data for an outcome, we carried out meta-analysis. In addition, we set and used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences. MAIN RESULTS: We included 16 aquatic exercise training studies (N = 881; 866 women and 15 men). Nine studies compared aquatic exercise to control, five studies compared aquatic to land-based exercise, and two compared aquatic exercise to a different aquatic exercise program.We rated the risk of bias related to random sequence generation (selection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), selective reporting (reporting bias), blinding of outcome assessors (detection bias), and other bias as low. We rated blinding of participants and personnel (selection and performance bias) and allocation concealment (selection bias) as low risk and unclear. The assessment of the evidence showed limitations related to imprecision, high statistical heterogeneity, and wide confidence intervals. Aquatic versus controlWe found statistically significant improvements (P value < 0.05) in all of the major outcomes. Based on a 100-point scale, multidimensional function improved by six units (MD -5.97, 95% CI -9.06 to -2.88; number needed to treat (NNT) 5, 95% CI 3 to 9), self reported physical function by four units (MD -4.35, 95% CI -7.77 to -0.94; NNT 6, 95% CI 3 to 22), pain by seven units (MD -6.59, 95% CI -10.71 to -2.48; NNT 5, 95% CI 3 to 8), and stiffness by 18 units (MD -18.34, 95% CI -35.75 to -0.93; NNT 3, 95% CI 2 to 24) more in the aquatic than the control groups. The SMD for muscle strength as measured by knee extension and hand grip was 0.63 standard deviations higher compared to the control group (SMD 0.63, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; NNT 4, 95% CI 3 to 12) and cardiovascular submaximal function improved by 37 meters on six-minute walk test (95% CI 4.14 to 69.92). Only two major outcomes, stiffness and muscle strength, met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance (improved by 27% and 37% respectively). Withdrawals were similar in the aquatic and control groups and adverse effects were poorly reported, with no serious adverse effects reported. Aquatic versus land-basedThere were no statistically significant differences between interventions for multidimensional function, self reported physical function, pain or stiffness: 0.91 units (95% CI -4.01 to 5.83), -5.85 units (95% CI -12.33 to 0.63), -0.75 units (95% CI -10.72 to 9.23), and two units (95% CI -8.88 to 1.28) respectively (all based on a 100-point scale), or in submaximal cardiorespiratory function (three seconds on a 100-meter walk test, 95% CI -1.77 to 7.77). We found a statistically significant difference between interventions for strength, favoring land-based training (2.40 kilo pascals grip strength, 95% CI 4.52 to 0.28). None of the outcomes in the aquatic versus land comparison reached clinically relevant differences of 15%. Withdrawals were similar in the aquatic and land groups and adverse effects were poorly reported, with no serious adverse effects in either group. Aquatic versus aquatic (Ai Chi versus stretching in the water, exercise in pool water versus exercise in sea water)Among the major outcomes the only statistically significant difference between interventions was for stiffness, favoring Ai Chi (1.00 on a 100-point scale, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.69). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low to moderate quality evidence relative to control suggests that aquatic training is beneficial for improving wellness, symptoms, and fitness in adults with fibromyalgia. Very low to low quality evidence suggests that there are benefits of aquatic and land-based exercise, except in muscle strength (very low quality evidence favoring land). No serious adverse effects were reported.

Exercise for adults with fibromyalgia: an umbrella systematic review with synthesis of best evidence.

The objective of this umbrella systematic review was to identify, evaluate, and synthesize systematic reviews of physical activity interventions for adults with fibromyalgia (FM) focussing on four outcomes: pain, multidimensional function (wellness or quality of life), physical function (self-reported physical function or measured physical fitness) and adverse effects. A further objective was to link these outcomes with details of the interventions so as to guide and shape future practice and research. Electronic databases including Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, the Cochrane Library, and DARE, were searched for the January 1(st) 2007 to March 31(st) 2013 period. Nine systematic reviews (60 RCTs with 3816 participants) were included. Meta-analysis was not conducted due to the heterogeneity of the sample. We found positive results of diverse exercise interventions on pain, multidimensional function, and self-reported physical function, and no supporting evidence for new (to FM) interventions (i.e., qigong, tai chi). There were no serious adverse effects reported. The variability of the interventions in the reviews prevented us from answering important clinical questions to guide practical decisions about optimal modes or dosages (i.e., frequency, intensity, duration). Finally, the number of review articles is proliferating, leading researchers and reviewers to consider the rigor and quality of the information being reviewed. As well, consumers of these reviews (i.e., clinicians, individuals with FM) should not rely on them without careful consideration.

Resistance exercise training for fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia is characterized by chronic widespread pain that leads to reduced physical function. Exercise training is commonly recommended as a treatment for management of symptoms. We examined the literature on resistance training for individuals with fibromyalgia. Resistance training is exercise performed against a progressive resistance with the intention of improving muscle strength, muscle endurance, muscle power, or a combination of these. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of resistance exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia. We compared resistance training versus control and versus other types of exercise training. SEARCH METHODS: We searched nine electronic databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, Dissertation Abstracts, Current Controlled Trials, World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, AMED) and other sources for published full-text articles. The date of the last search was 5 March 2013. Two review authors independently screened 1856 citations, 766 abstracts and 156 full-text articles. We included five studies that met our inclusion criteria. SELECTION CRITERIA: Selection criteria included: a) randomized clinical trial, b) diagnosis of fibromyalgia based on published criteria, c) adult sample, d) full-text publication, and e) inclusion of between-group data comparing resistance training versus a control or other physical activity intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted intervention and outcome data. We resolved disagreements between the two review authors and questions regarding interpretation of study methods by discussion within the pairs or when necessary the issue was taken to the full team of 11 members. We extracted 21 outcomes of which seven were designated as major outcomes: multidimensional function, self reported physical function, pain, tenderness, muscle strength, attrition rates, and adverse effects. We evaluated benefits and harms of the interventions using standardized mean differences (SMD) or mean differences (MD) or risk ratios or Peto odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where two or more studies provided data for an outcome, we carried out a meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: The literature search yielded 1865 citations with five studies meeting the selection criteria. One of the studies that had three arms contributed data for two comparisons. In the included studies, there were 219 women participants with fibromyalgia, 95 of whom were assigned to resistance training programs. Three randomized trials compared 16 to 21 weeks of moderate- to high-intensity resistance training versus a control group. Two studies compared eight weeks of progressive resistance training (intensity as tolerated) using free weights or body weight resistance exercise versus aerobic training (ie, progressive treadmill walking, indoor and outdoor walking), and one study compared 12 weeks of low-intensity resistance training using hand weights (1 to 3 lbs (0.45 to 1.36 kg)) and elastic tubing versus flexibility exercise (static stretches to major muscle groups).Statistically significant differences (MD; 95% CI) favoring the resistance training interventions over control group(s) were found in multidimensional function (Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total decreased 16.75 units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -23.31 to -10.19), self reported physical function (-6.29 units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -10.45 to -2.13), pain (-3.3 cm on a 10-cm scale; 95% CI -6.35 to -0.26), tenderness (-1.84 out of 18 tender points; 95% CI -2.6 to -1.08), and muscle strength (27.32 kg force on bilateral concentric leg extension; 95% CI 18.28 to 36.36).Differences between the resistance training group(s) and the aerobic training groups were not statistically significant for multidimensional function (5.48 on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -0.92 to 11.88), self reported physical function (-1.48 units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -6.69 to 3.74) or tenderness (SMD -0.13; 95% CI -0.55 to 0.30). There was a statistically significant reduction in pain (0.99 cm on a 10-cm scale; 95% CI 0.31 to 1.67) favoring the aerobic groups.Statistically significant differences were found between a resistance training group and a flexibility group favoring the resistance training group for multidimensional function (-6.49 FIQ units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -12.57 to -0.41) and pain (-0.88 cm on a 10-cm scale; 95% CI -1.57 to -0.19), but not for tenderness (-0.46 out of 18 tender points; 95% CI -1.56 to 0.64) or strength (4.77 foot pounds torque on concentric knee extension; 95% CI -2.40 to 11.94). This evidence was classified low quality due to the low number of studies and risk of bias assessment. There were no statistically significant differences in attrition rates between the interventions. In general, adverse effects were poorly recorded, but no serious adverse effects were reported. Assessment of risk of bias was hampered by poor written descriptions (eg, allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessors). The lack of a priori protocols and lack of care provider blinding were also identified as methodologic concerns. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence (rated as low quality) suggested that moderate- and moderate- to high-intensity resistance training improves multidimensional function, pain, tenderness, and muscle strength in women with fibromyalgia. The evidence (rated as low quality) also suggested that eight weeks of aerobic exercise was superior to moderate-intensity resistance training for improving pain in women with fibromyalgia. There was low-quality evidence that 12 weeks of low-intensity resistance training was superior to flexibility exercise training in women with fibromyalgia for improvements in pain and multidimensional function. There was low-quality evidence that women with fibromyalgia can safely perform moderate- to high-resistance training.

Cognitive behavioural therapies for fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia (FM) is a clinically well-defined chronic condition of unknown aetiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction and fatigue. Patients often report high disability levels and negative mood. Psychotherapies focus on reducing key symptoms, improving daily functioning, mood and sense of personal control over pain. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of cognitive behavioural therapies (CBTs) for treating FM at end of treatment and at long-term (at least six months) follow-up. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1966 to 28 August 2013), PsycINFO (1966 to 28 August 2013) and SCOPUS (1980 to 28 August 2013). We searched http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (web site of the US National Institutes of Health) and the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/) for ongoing trials (last search 28 August,2013), and the reference lists of reviewed articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials of CBTs with children, adolescents and adults diagnosed with FM. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The data of all included studies were extracted and the risks of bias of the studies were assessed independently by two review authors. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-three studies with 24 study arms with CBTs were included. A total of 2031 patients were included; 1073 patients in CBT groups and 958 patients in control groups. Only two studies were without any risk of bias. The GRADE quality of evidence of the studies was low. CBTs were superior to controls in reducing pain at end of treatment by 0.5 points on a scale of 0 to 10 (standardised mean difference (SMD) - 0.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.49 to -0.17) and by 0.6 points at long-term follow-up (median 6 months) (SMD -0.40; 95% CI -0.62 to -0.17); in reducing negative mood at end of treatment by 0.7 points on a scale of 0 to 10 (SMD - 0.33; 95% CI -0.49 to -0.17) and by 1.3 points at long-term follow-up (median 6 months) (SMD -0.43; 95% CI -0.75 to -0.11); and in reducing disability at end of treatment by 0.7 points on a scale of 0 to 10 (SMD - 0.30; 95% CI -0.51 to -0.08) and at long-term follow-up (median 6 months) by 1.2 points (SMD -0.52; 95% CI -0.86 to -0.18). There was no statistically significant difference in dropout rates for any reasons between CBTs and controls (risk ratio (RR) 0.94; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.35). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: CBTs provided a small incremental benefit over control interventions in reducing pain, negative mood and disability at the end of treatment and at long-term follow-up. The dropout rates due to any reason did not differ between CBTs and controls.