Do patients with fibromyalgia have body image and tactile acuity distortion?

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were twofold: (1) to compare the body image and tactile acuity of patients with fibromyalgia and asymptomatic participants, and (2) to investigate the effects of an 8-week exercise-based intervention (aerobic or Pilates exercises) on the body image, tactile acuity, and pain intensity in patients with fibromyalgia. METHODS: A cross-sectional study and a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial were carried out, which assessed the following outcomes in 24 patients with fibromyalgia and 24 asymptomatic participants: subjective body image (Drawing Test), tactile acuity (Two-Point Discrimination Test), limb circumference (Cirtometry), and pain (Pain Numerical Rating Scale). After the assessment, the 24 patients with fibromyalgia were randomly allocated to one of the intervention groups: aerobic or Pilates. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the tactile acuity of the cervical, lumbar, hands, and feet regions between the participants with fibromyalgia and the asymptomatic participants (p > 0.05). However, patients with fibromyalgia showed changes in subjective body image when the drawings were compared to the cirtometry measurements. After the intervention, there was no significant difference between aerobic exercise and Pilates for pain and tactile acuity in the cervical, lumbar, hands, and feet regions of patients with fibromyalgia (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with fibromyalgia presented altered perception in subjective body image but not on tactile acuity, when compared to asymptomatic participants. In addition, there was no difference between aerobic exercise and Pilates for pain and tactile acuity in these patients.

Discriminative and Predictive Analysis of the Brazilian Version of the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire (ÖMPSQ) Short-Form in Patients With Low Back Pain.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to analyze the discriminative and predictive validity of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire Short-Form (ÖMPSQ-Short). Methods: In this prospective longitudinal cohort study, the ÖMPSQ-Short was administered to 150 patients with acute, subacute, and chronic nonspecific low back pain. A 6-month follow-up was also completed to assess the predictive ability of the questionnaire for risk of pain, disability, and absence from work. The Roland-Morris disability questionnaire, pain numerical rating scale, and additional questions related to work and absence from work were also used. Results: The ÖMPSQ-Short cutoff point was determined by analyzing the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, and specificity, which yielded a value of 44 points for the Brazilian population. Analysis of the 2 × 2 contingency tables showed that the ÖMPSQ-Short correctly classified high-risk patients with pain. Predictive capacity was assessed by univariate linear regression analysis. The ÖMPSQ-Short was able to predict pain, disability, and absence from work in patients with acute pain and disability in patients with subacute pain, and disability and absence from work in patients with chronic pain, but with a small predictive capacity. Conclusion: The ÖMPSQ-Short cutoff demonstrated the ability to classify patients with low and high risk of involvement of psychosocial factors. However, due to its small predictive capacity, we suggest that the ÖMPSQ-Short should not be used to predict pain, disability, and absence from work over 6 months. However, we recommend using it as a guide to discuss the patient's clinical condition.

Pilates for low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Non-specific low back pain is a major health problem worldwide. Interventions based on exercises have been the most commonly used treatments for patients with this condition. Over the past few years, the Pilates method has been one of the most popular exercise programmes used in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of the Pilates method for patients with non-specific acute, subacute or chronic low back pain. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted the searches in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and SPORTDiscus from the date of their inception to March 2014. We updated the search in June 2015 but these results have not yet been incorporated. We also searched the reference lists of eligible papers as well as six trial registry websites. We placed no limitations on language or date of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We only included randomized controlled trials that examined the effectiveness of Pilates intervention in adults with acute, subacute or chronic non-specific low back pain. The primary outcomes considered were pain, disability, global impression of recovery and quality of life. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent raters performed the assessment of risk of bias in the included studies using the 'Risk of bias' assessment tool recommended by The Cochrane Collaboration. We also assessed clinical relevance by scoring five questions related to this domain as 'yes', 'no' or 'unclear'. We evaluated the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach and for effect sizes we used three levels: small (mean difference (MD) < 10% of the scale), medium (MD 10% to 20% of the scale) or large (MD > 20% of the scale). We converted outcome measures to a common 0 to 100 scale when different scales were used. MAIN RESULTS: The search retrieved 126 trials; 10 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and we included them in the review (a total sample of 510 participants). Seven studies were considered to have low risk of bias, and three were considered as high risk of bias.A total of six trials compared Pilates to minimal intervention. There is low quality evidence that Pilates reduces pain compared with minimal intervention, with a medium effect size at short-term follow-up (less than three months after randomization) (MD -14.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) -18.91 to -9.19). For intermediate-term follow-up (at least three months but less than 12 months after randomization), two trials provided moderate quality evidence that Pilates reduces pain compared to minimal intervention, with a medium effect size (MD -10.54, 95% CI -18.46 to -2.62). Based on five trials, there is low quality evidence that Pilates improves disability compared with minimal intervention, with a small effect size at short-term follow-up (MD -7.95, 95% CI -13.23 to -2.67), and moderate quality evidence for an intermediate-term effect with a medium effect size (MD -11.17, 95% CI -18.41 to -3.92). Based on one trial and low quality evidence, a significant short-term effect with a small effect size was reported for function (MD 1.10, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.97) and global impression of recovery (MD 1.50, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.30), but not at intermediate-term follow-up for either outcome.Four trials compared Pilates to other exercises. For the outcome pain, we presented the results as a narrative synthesis due to the high level of heterogeneity. At short-term follow-up, based on low quality evidence, two trials demonstrated a significant effect in favour of Pilates and one trial did not find a significant difference. At intermediate-term follow-up, based on low quality evidence, one trial reported a significant effect in favour of Pilates, and one trial reported a non-significant difference for this comparison. For disability, there is moderate quality evidence that there is no significant difference between Pilates and other exercise either in the short term (MD -3.29, 95% CI -6.82 to 0.24) or in the intermediate term (MD -0.91, 95% CI -5.02 to 3.20) based on two studies for each comparison. Based on low quality evidence and one trial, there was no significant difference in function between Pilates and other exercises at short-term follow-up (MD 0.10, 95% CI -2.44 to 2.64), but there was a significant effect in favour of other exercises for intermediate-term function, with a small effect size (MD -3.60, 95% CI -7.00 to -0.20). Global impression of recovery was not assessed in this comparison and none of the trials included quality of life outcomes. Two trials assessed adverse events in this review, one did not find any adverse events, and another reported minor events. AUTHORS CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any high quality evidence for any of the treatment comparisons, outcomes or follow-up periods investigated. However, there is low to moderate quality evidence that Pilates is more effective than minimal intervention for pain and disability. When Pilates was compared with other exercises we found a small effect for function at intermediate-term follow-up. Thus, while there is some evidence for the effectiveness of Pilates for low back pain, there is no conclusive evidence that it is superior to other forms of exercises. The decision to use Pilates for low back pain may be based on the patient's or care provider's preferences, and costs.

Pilates for Low Back Pain: Complete Republication of a Cochrane Review.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of the Pilates method for patients with nonspecific acute, subacute, or chronic low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The Pilates method is one of the most common forms of intervention based on exercise used for treating patients with low back pain. However, its effectiveness is not well established. METHODS: We conducted searches on CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, and SPORTDiscus up to March 2014. We included randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of Pilates in patients with acute, subacute, or chronic nonspecific low back pain. The outcomes evaluated were pain, disability, function, and global impression of recovery. Two independent reviewers screened for potentially eligible studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted the data. We evaluated the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach and treatment effect sizes were described using mean differences and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Searches retrieved 126 trials, of which 10 were included in the review (n = 510 participants). Seven studies were considered to have low risk of bias, and three were considered at high risk of bias. When compared to minimal intervention, Pilates reduces pain at short and intermediate term with low- to moderate-quality evidence and medium effect sizes. For disability, there is also a significant difference in favor to Pilates with low- to moderate-quality evidence and small effect size for short term and medium effect size for intermediate term compared with minimal intervention. It is unclear whether Pilates is better than other exercises for short-term pain, but there is low-quality evidence that Pilates reduces pain at intermediate term. For disability, there is moderate-quality evidence that there is no significant difference between Pilates and other exercises in either the short term or the intermediate term. CONCLUSION: There is low- to moderate-quality evidence that Pilates is more effective than minimal intervention with most of the effect sizes being considered medium. However, there is no conclusive evidence that Pilates is superior to other forms of exercises. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Pilates for low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Non-specific low back pain is a major health problem worldwide. Interventions based on exercises have been the most commonly used treatments for patients with this condition. Over the past few years, the Pilates method has been one of the most popular exercise programmes used in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of the Pilates method for patients with non-specific acute, subacute or chronic low back pain. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted the searches in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro and SPORTDiscus from the date of their inception to March 2014. We updated the search in June 2015 but these results have not yet been incorporated. We also searched the reference lists of eligible papers as well as six trial registry websites. We placed no limitations on language or date of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We only included randomised controlled trials that examined the effectiveness of Pilates intervention in adults with acute, subacute or chronic non-specific low back pain. The primary outcomes considered were pain, disability, global impression of recovery and quality of life. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent raters performed the assessment of risk of bias in the included studies using the 'Risk of bias' assessment tool recommended by The Cochrane Collaboration. We also assessed clinical relevance by scoring five questions related to this domain as 'yes', 'no' or 'unclear'. We evaluated the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach and for effect sizes we used three levels: small (mean difference (MD) < 10% of the scale), medium (MD 10% to 20% of the scale) or large (MD > 20% of the scale). We converted outcome measures to a common 0 to 100 scale when different scales were used. MAIN RESULTS: The search retrieved 126 trials; 10 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and we included them in the review (a total sample of 510 participants). Seven studies were considered to have low risk of bias, and three were considered as high risk of bias.A total of six trials compared Pilates to minimal intervention. There is low quality evidence that Pilates reduces pain compared with minimal intervention, with a medium effect size at short-term follow-up (less than three months after randomisation) (MD -14.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) -18.91 to -9.19). For intermediate-term follow-up (at least three months but less than 12 months after randomisation), two trials provided moderate quality evidence that Pilates reduces pain compared to minimal intervention, with a medium effect size (MD -10.54, 95% CI -18.46 to -2.62). Based on five trials, there is low quality evidence that Pilates improves disability compared with minimal intervention, with a small effect size at short-term follow-up (MD -7.95, 95% CI -13.23 to -2.67), and moderate quality evidence for an intermediate-term effect with a medium effect size (MD -11.17, 95% CI -18.41 to -3.92). Based on one trial and low quality evidence, a significant short-term effect with a small effect size was reported for function (MD 1.10, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.97) and global impression of recovery (MD 1.50, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.30), but not at intermediate-term follow-up for either outcome.Four trials compared Pilates to other exercises. For the outcome pain, we presented the results as a narrative synthesis due to the high level of heterogeneity. At short-term follow-up, based on low quality evidence, two trials demonstrated a significant effect in favour of Pilates and one trial did not find a significant difference. At intermediate-term follow-up, based on low quality evidence, one trial reported a significant effect in favour of Pilates, and one trial reported a non-significant difference for this comparison. For disability, there is moderate quality evidence that there is no significant difference between Pilates and other exercise either in the short term (MD -3.29, 95% CI -6.82 to 0.24) or in the intermediate term (MD -0.91, 95% CI -5.02 to 3.20) based on two studies for each comparison. Based on low quality evidence and one trial, there was no significant difference in function between Pilates and other exercises at short-term follow-up (MD 0.10, 95% CI -2.44 to 2.64), but there was a significant effect in favour of other exercises for intermediate-term function, with a small effect size (MD -3.60, 95% CI -7.00 to -0.20). Global impression of recovery was not assessed in this comparison and none of the trials included quality of life outcomes. Two trials assessed adverse events in this review, one did not find any adverse events, and another reported minor events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We did not find any high quality evidence for any of the treatment comparisons, outcomes or follow-up periods investigated. However, there is low to moderate quality evidence that Pilates is more effective than minimal intervention for pain and disability. When Pilates was compared with other exercises we found a small effect for function at intermediate-term follow-up. Thus, while there is some evidence for the effectiveness of Pilates for low back pain, there is no conclusive evidence that it is superior to other forms of exercises. The decision to use Pilates for low back pain may be based on the patient's or care provider's preferences, and costs.

Tutorial for writing systematic reviews for the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy (BJPT) / Tutorial para elaboração de revisões sistemáticas para o Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy (BJPT)

Systematic reviews aim to summarize all evidence using very rigorous methods in order to address a specific research question with less bias as possible. Systematic reviews are widely used in the field of physical therapy, however not all reviews have good quality. This tutorial aims to guide authors of the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy on how systematic reviews should be conducted and reported in order to be accepted for publication. It is expected that this tutorial will help authors of systematic reviews as well as journal editors and reviewers on how to conduct, report, critically appraise and interpret this type of study design. .

Revisões sistemáticas têm como objetivo sumarizar toda a evidência disponível, através de métodos rigorosos, para responder a uma pergunta de pesquisa específica com o mínimo de viés possível. Revisões sistemáticas são amplamente utilizadas na fisioterapia, porém nem todas as revisões possuem boa qualidade. Esse tutorial tem como objetivo guiar os autores do Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy sobre como revisões sistemáticas deveriam ser conduzidas e descritas para que sejam aceitas para publicação. Espera-se que esse tutorial irá auxiliar autores de revisões sistemáticas, assim como editores e revisores de periódicos em como conduzir, descrever, fazer análise crítica e interpretar esse tipo de delineamento de pesquisa.

Assessment of the measurement properties of quality of life questionnaires in Brazilian women with breast cancer

BACKGROUND: There are several questionnaires available to assess quality of life in breast cancer, however the choice of the best questionnaire often does not take into account the adequacy of these questionnaires' measurement properties. OBJECTIVE: To test the measurement properties of two generic quality of life questionnaires and one quality of life questionnaire specific for women with breast cancer. METHOD: We assessed 106 women after surgery for breast cancer. The assessment included application of the SF-36, WHOQOL-bref, and FACT-B+4 questionnaires as well as the Global Perceived Effect and Pain Numerical Rating scales. The participants were interviewed on three occasions to investigate internal consistency, floor and ceiling effects, construct validity, reproducibility, and responsiveness. RESULTS: Most of the instruments' domains showed adequate internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha varying from 0.66 to 0.91). Reliability varied from poor to substantial (ICC2,1 between 0.39 and 0.87) and agreement varied from negative to very good. The SF-36 presented doubtful agreement and showed floor and ceiling effects in three domains. The domains of the generic questionnaires presented moderate to good correlation with the FACT-B+4 (Pearson varying from 0.31 to 0.69). The internal responsiveness varied from small to large (ES varying from -0.26 to 0.98) and external responsiveness was found in only some of the instruments' domains. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the measurement properties tested for the WHOQOL-bref and FACT-B+4 were adequate as was their ability to assess quality of life in women with breast cancer. The SF-36 showed inadequacy in agreement and floor and ceiling effects and should not be used in women with breast cancer. .

Assessment of the measurement properties of quality of life questionnaires in Brazilian women with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: There are several questionnaires available to assess quality of life in breast cancer, however the choice of the best questionnaire often does not take into account the adequacy of these questionnaires' measurement properties. OBJECTIVE: To test the measurement properties of two generic quality of life questionnaires and one quality of life questionnaire specific for women with breast cancer. METHOD: We assessed 106 women after surgery for breast cancer. The assessment included application of the SF-36, WHOQOL-bref, and FACT-B+4 questionnaires as well as the Global Perceived Effect and Pain Numerical Rating scales. The participants were interviewed on three occasions to investigate internal consistency, floor and ceiling effects, construct validity, reproducibility, and responsiveness. RESULTS: Most of the instruments' domains showed adequate internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha varying from 0.66 to 0.91). Reliability varied from poor to substantial (ICC2,1 between 0.39 and 0.87) and agreement varied from negative to very good. The SF-36 presented doubtful agreement and showed floor and ceiling effects in three domains. The domains of the generic questionnaires presented moderate to good correlation with the FACT-B+4 (Pearson varying from 0.31 to 0.69). The internal responsiveness varied from small to large (ES varying from -0.26 to 0.98) and external responsiveness was found in only some of the instruments' domains. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the measurement properties tested for the WHOQOL-bref and FACT-B+4 were adequate as was their ability to assess quality of life in women with breast cancer. The SF-36 showed inadequacy in agreement and floor and ceiling effects and should not be used in women with breast cancer.

Tutorial for writing systematic reviews for the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy (BJPT).

Systematic reviews aim to summarize all evidence using very rigorous methods in order to address a specific research question with less bias as possible. Systematic reviews are widely used in the field of physical therapy, however not all reviews have good quality. This tutorial aims to guide authors of the Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy on how systematic reviews should be conducted and reported in order to be accepted for publication. It is expected that this tutorial will help authors of systematic reviews as well as journal editors and reviewers on how to conduct, report, critically appraise and interpret this type of study design.

Efficacy of the Pilates method for pain and disability in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the available evidence on the efficacy of the Pilates method in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. METHOD: Searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, SciELO, LILACS, CINAHL and CENTRAL in March 2013. Randomized controlled trials that tested the effectiveness of the Pilates method (against a nontreatment group, minimal intervention or other types of interventions) in adults with chronic low back pain were included regardless the language of publication. The outcome data were extracted from the eligible studies and were combined using a meta-analysis approach. RESULTS: The searches identified a total of 1,545 articles. From these, eight trials were considered eligible, and seven trials were combined in the meta-analysis. The comparison groups were as follows: Pilates versus other types of exercises (n=2 trials), and Pilates versus no treatment group or minimal intervention (n=4 trials) for short term pain; Pilates versus minimal intervention for short-term disability (n=4).We determined that Pilates was not better than other types of exercises for reducing pain intensity. However, Pilates was better than a minimal intervention for reducing short-term pain and disability (pain: pooled mean difference=1.6 points; 95% CI 1.4 to 1.8; disability: pooled mean difference=5.2 points; 95% CI 4.3 to 6.1). CONCLUSIONS: Pilates was better than a minimal intervention for reducing pain and disability in patients with chronic low back pain. Pilates was not better than other types of exercise for short-term pain reduction.

Efficacy of the Pilates method for pain and disability in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis / Eficacia do metodo Pilates considerando dor e incapacidade em pacientes com dor lombar cronica nao especifica: uma revisao sistematica com metanalise

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the available evidence on the efficacy of the Pilates method in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. METHOD: Searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, SciELO, LILACS, CINAHL and CENTRAL in March 2013. Randomized controlled trials that tested the effectiveness of the Pilates method (against a nontreatment group, minimal intervention or other types of interventions) in adults with chronic low back pain were included regardless the language of publication. The outcome data were extracted from the eligible studies and were combined using a meta-analysis approach. RESULTS: The searches identified a total of 1,545 articles. From these, eight trials were considered eligible, and seven trials were combined in the meta-analysis. The comparison groups were as follows: Pilates versus other types of exercises (n=2 trials), and Pilates versus no treatment group or minimal intervention (n=4 trials) for short term pain; Pilates versus minimal intervention for short-term disability (n=4).We determined that Pilates was not better than other types of exercises for reducing pain intensity. However, Pilates was better than a minimal intervention for reducing short-term pain and disability (pain: pooled mean difference=1.6 points; 95% CI 1.4 to 1.8; disability: pooled mean difference=5.2 points; 95% CI 4.3 to 6.1). CONCLUSIONS: Pilates was better than a minimal intervention for reducing pain and disability in patients with chronic low back pain. Pilates was not better than other types of exercise for short-term pain reduction. .

OBJETIVOS: Revisar estudos controlados aleatorizados sobre a eficácia do método Pilates no tratamento da dor lombar crônica não específica. MÉTODO: Buscas foram realizadas nas bases de dados MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, SciELO, LILACS, CINAHL e CENTRAL em março de 2013. Foram selecionados apenas estudos controlados aleatorizados em adultos com dor lombar crônica não específica, cujo tratamento foi baseado no método Pilates comparado com nenhuma intervenção ou intervenção mínima, outros tipos de intervenção ou exercícios, sem restrição ao idioma de publicação. Os dados referentes à dor e incapacidade foram extraídos de textos, tabelase figuraspara combinação por metanálise. RESULTADOS: Dos 1545 artigos encontrados, oito foram considerados elegíveis e sete foram incluídos na metanálise. Dois estudos compararam o método Pilates com outros exercícios, e quatro estudos compararam com nenhuma intervenção ou intervenção mínima para dor a curto prazo; quatro estudos compararam o método Pilates com intervenção mínima para incapacidade a curto prazo. Na metanálise, houve diferença significante para dor e incapacidade na comparação com nenhuma intervenção ou intervenção mínima (diferença entre médias=1,6 pontos; IC 95% 1,4 a 1,8; diferença entre médias=5,2 pontos; IC 95% 4,3 a 6,1; respectivamente). O método Pilates não foi superior para o desfecho dor com relação a outros exercícios a curto prazo. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se que o método Pilates é mais eficaz que intervenção mínima para melhora da dor e incapacidade a curto prazo. O método Pilates não é mais eficaz que outros tipos de exercícios para melhora ...

Attitudes and beliefs of Brazilian physical therapists about chronic low back pain: a cross-sectional study / Atitudes e crenças de fisioterapeutas brasileiros em relação à dor lombar crônica: um estudo transversal

OBJECTIVES: To measure the attitudes and beliefs of Brazilian physical therapists about chronic low back pain and to identify the sociodemographic characteristics that are more likely to influence these attitudes and beliefs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study with 100 Brazilian physical therapists who routinely work with chronic low back pain patients. The attitudes and beliefs were measured by the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS.PT) and the Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS). Multivariate linear regression models were built to identify sociodemographic characteristics that could be associated with physical therapists' attitudes and beliefs. RESULTS: Mean scores on the biomedical and biopsychosocial factors of PABS.PT were 27.06 (SD 7.19) and 24.34 (SD 6.31), respectively, and the mean score on HC-PAIRS was 45.45 (SD 10.45). The score on PABS.PTbiomedical was associated with gender and years of professional experience. No variable was associated with the score on PABS.PTbiopsychosocial. The score on HC-PAIRS was significantly associated with the number of back pain patients seen by the physical therapist each month. These results indicate that male and less experienced physical therapists tend to follow a biomedical approach to the treatment of chronic low back pain patients, and that the lower the professional experience the stronger the belief in the relationship between pain and disability. CONCLUSIONS: Brazilian physical therapists are uncertain of the factors involved in the development and maintenance of chronic low back pain and about the relationship between pain and disability in these patients.

OBJETIVOS: Avaliar as atitudes e crenças de fisioterapeutas brasileiros sobre a dor lombar crônica e identificar características sociodemográficas que as influenciam. MÉTODOS: Este estudo transversal incluiu 100 fisioterapeutas brasileiros que atendem pacientes com dor lombar crônica em sua rotina clínica. As atitudes e crenças foram avaliadas pela Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS.PT) e Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS). Foram construídos modelos de regressão linear multivariada para verificar as possíveis características sociodemográficas que poderiam estar associadas com as atitudes e crenças dos fisioterapeutas. RESULTADOS: Os escores médios dos fatores biomédico e comportamental da PABS.PT foram 27,06 (DP 7,19) e 24,34 (DP 6,31), respectivamente, e o escore médio da HC-PAIRS foi 45,45 (DP 10,45). O escore do PABS.PT Fator biomédico foi associado com gênero e anos de experiência profissional. Já o escore do PABS.PT Fator comportamental não foi associado com nenhuma variável. O escore do HC-PAIRS foi significativamente associado com o número de pacientes com dor lombar atendido por mês. Esses resultados indicam que fisioterapeutas experientes tendem a seguir uma abordagem biomédica no tratamento de pacientes com dor lombar crônica. Além disso, quanto menor a experiência profissional, mais forte é a crença na relação entre dor e incapacidade. CONCLUSÕES: Os fisioterapeutas brasileiros mostram-se incertos acerca dos fatores que envolvem o desenvolvimento e a manutenção da dor lombar crônica e também sobre a relação entre dor e incapacidade nesses pacientes. Isso põe em questão as atitudes e práticas em relação ao manejo dos pacientes com dor lombar crônica no Brasil.

Attitudes and beliefs of Brazilian physical therapists about chronic low back pain: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To measure the attitudes and beliefs of Brazilian physical therapists about chronic low back pain and to identify the sociodemographic characteristics that are more likely to influence these attitudes and beliefs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study with 100 Brazilian physical therapists who routinely work with chronic low back pain patients. The attitudes and beliefs were measured by the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS.PT) and the Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS). Multivariate linear regression models were built to identify sociodemographic characteristics that could be associated with physical therapists' attitudes and beliefs. RESULTS: Mean scores on the biomedical and biopsychosocial factors of PABS.PT were 27.06 (SD 7.19) and 24.34 (SD 6.31), respectively, and the mean score on HC-PAIRS was 45.45 (SD 10.45). The score on PABS.PT(biomedical) was associated with gender and years of professional experience. No variable was associated with the score on PABS.PT(biopsychosocial). The score on HC-PAIRS was significantly associated with the number of back pain patients seen by the physical therapist each month. These results indicate that male and less experienced physical therapists tend to follow a biomedical approach to the treatment of chronic low back pain patients, and that the lower the professional experience the stronger the belief in the relationship between pain and disability. CONCLUSIONS: Brazilian physical therapists are uncertain of the factors involved in the development and maintenance of chronic low back pain and about the relationship between pain and disability in these patients.

Adjusting pulse amplitude during transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) application produces greater hypoalgesia.

UNLABELLED: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is a noninvasive technique used for pain modulation. During application of TENS there is a fading of current sensation. Textbooks of electrophysical agents recommend that pulse amplitude should be constantly adjusted. This seems to be accepted clinically despite the fact that there is no direct experimental evidence. The aim of the current study was to investigate the hypoalgesic effect of adjusting TENS pulse amplitude on pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in healthy humans. Fifty-six healthy TENS naïve participants were recruited and randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups (n = 14 per group): control, placebo TENS, fixed pulse amplitude TENS, and adjusted pulse amplitude TENS. Both active and placebo TENS were applied to the dominant forearm. PPTs were recorded from 2 points on the dominant forearm and hand before, during, and after 40 minutes of TENS. TENS increased the PPTs on the forearm (P = .003) and hand (P = .003) in the group that received the adjusted pulse amplitude when compared to all other groups. The mean final pulse amplitude for the adjusted pulse amplitude TENS group was 35.51 mA when compared to the fixed pulse amplitude TENS group, which averaged 31.37 mA (P = .0318). PERSPECTIVE: These results suggest that it is important to adjust the pulse amplitude during TENS application to get the maximal analgesic effect. We propose that the fading of current sensation allows the use of higher pulse amplitudes, which would activate a greater number of and deeper tissue afferents to produce greater analgesia.

The efficacy of the addition of the Pilates method over a minimal intervention in the treatment of chronic nonspecific low back pain: a study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: There is little high-quality evidence on the efficacy of the Pilates-based exercises for the treatment of chronic nonspecific low back pain. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to present a study protocol to investigate the efficacy of adding Pilates-based exercises to a minimum intervention in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial will recruit 86 patients of both sexes, aged between 18 and 60 years, with chronic non-specific low back pain. The participants will be randomly allocated into 2 treatment groups: the Booklet Group, which will receive a booklet with postural orientations, and the Pilates Group, which will receive the same booklet in addition to a Pilates-based exercises program. The general and specific functional capacities of the patient, kinesiophobia, pain intensity, and the global perceived effect will be evaluated by a blinded assessor before randomization and at 6 weeks and 6 months after randomization. In addition, the expectations of the participants and their confidence in the treatment will be evaluated before the randomization and after the first treatment session, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: It is hoped that the results of this study will provide high-quality evidence on the usefulness of Pilates-based exercises in the treatment of chronic non-specific low back pain.

Global postural reeducation and static stretching exercises in the treatment of myogenic temporomandibular disorders: a randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare 2 different interventions, global postural reeducation (GPR) and static stretching exercises (SS), in the treatment of women with temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). METHODS: A total of 28 subjects with TMDs were randomized into 2 treatment groups: GPR, where therapy involved muscle global chain stretching, or SS, with conventional static stretching; but only 24 completed the study. Eight treatment sessions lasting 40 minutes each (weekly) were performed. Assessments were conducted at baseline, immediately after treatment end, and 2 months later. Measurements included pain intensity at the temporomandibular joint, headache, cervicalgia, teeth clenching, ear symptoms, restricted sleep, and difficulties for mastication, using a visual analogue scale. In addition, electromyographic activity and pain thresholds were measured at the masseter, anterior temporalis, sternocleidomastoid, and upper trapezius muscles. Two-way analysis of variance with Tukey post hoc test was used for between-group comparisons. Significance level was .05. RESULTS: Comparing the pain assessments using the visual analogue scale, no significant differences were seen with the exception of severity of headaches at treatment end (GPR, 3.92 ± 2.98 cm; SS, 1.64 ± 1.66 cm; P < .024). In addition, no significant differences were seen for pain thresholds and for electromyographic activity (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: For the subjects in this study, both GPR and SS were similarly effective for the treatment of TMDs with muscular component. They equally reduced pain intensity, increased pain thresholds, and decreased electromyographic activity.

Evaluation of adaptive/nonadaptive filtering and wavelet transform techniques for noise reduction in EMG mobile acquisition equipment.

The myoelectric signal can be used to control many rehabilitation systems, for instance, prostheses and artificial neuromuscular electrical stimulation toward restoring movement to spinal cord injured subjects. These mobile systems are usually used in different environments and thus are being exposed to different noise levels with characteristics not completely known. In this article, three main techniques for noise reduction were evaluated: wavelet transform (WT), adaptive digital filters, and nonadaptive digital filters. The WT was used to reconstruct the signal with the components without noise information. Adaptive filters were designed using least mean square (LMS) and recursive least square (RLS) algorithms. Finite-impulse response (FIR) and infinite-impulse response (IIR) nonadaptive filters were used for comparison to both the adaptive filters and the signal reconstruction through the WT.