ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Comparative assessment of bilateral (KangaTech) and unilateral (HHD) testing modalities through concurrent validity and test-retest reliability. Methodological considerations explored include minimum repetitions and comparison of average and maximum values. DESIGN: Experimental, observational. SETTING: Biomechanics laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-three participants. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Concurrent validity using peak force. Test-retest reliability used Abduction and Adduction using 2 trials, randomised between devices. Maximum peak force and average of both trials were used. RESULTS: HHD and KT360 are concurrently valid (r = 0.996); with no significant difference (z = -0.681). Excellent HHD reliability (ICC:0.92-0.96) and KT360 (ICC:0.89-0.97). Significant difference between max peak force and average peak force but within the calculated MDC(%). No significant differences between max peak force between trials. Spearman-Brown prophecy predicted excellent reliability for one trial (ICC:0.81-0.95). Bilateral facilitation was demonstrated using the KT360 with 94.6-101.2% increase in force compared to HHD. CONCLUSIONS: With no significant difference between first and second max effort, and excellent prophesised reliability, one rep max effort should be acceptable to use. Body positioning within the KT360 seems to elicit bilateral facilitation rather than deficit, therefore unilateral and bilateral force values are not interchangeable.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: There is growing evidence to support Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) in the management of chronic pain. However, there is a need for further research evaluating ACT combined with physical exercise, and few studies have assessed the long-term impact of this type of intervention. This case series reports on the acceptability and impact of an ACT-based multidisciplinary pain management programme on a range of health outcomes in both the short and long-term. METHODS: Seventy-three participants completed an 8-week group-based, pain management programme. The programme combined weekly sessions of ACT with education and exercise classes. Self-report outcome measures were completed at baseline, post-intervention and at one-year follow-up. The measures assessed pain intensity and interference, psychological distress, self-efficacy, pain acceptance, values-based action, pain catastrophizing, fear avoidance and healthcare utilization. Pedometers were worn to objectively measure physical activity. Data were analyzed using linear mixed modelling. Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Mater Misericordiae University Hospital (MMUH) Institutional Review Board (Reference 1/378/1541). RESULTS: Eighty-six percent of respondents reported being satisfied with the intervention. Improvements were observed in most of the self-report outcomes post-intervention and many changes were maintained at one-year. There was also a significant increase in average daily step-count. CONCLUSION: A pain management programme combining ACT with exercise appears to be an acceptable treatment option for people with chronic pain. While improvements were observed in both the short and long-term, further fully powered RCTs with long-term follow-up are required to test the effectiveness of this type of intervention.
