Role of virtual reality in examining the effect of fear of falling (FOF) on postural stability in individuals without and with Parkinson's disease in Egypt: a mixed-methods feasibility study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Falls are common in older people and individuals with neurological conditions. Parkinson's disease (PD) is known for postural instability causing mobility disabilities, falls and reduced quality of life. The fear of falling (FOF), a natural response to unstable balance, can worsen postural control problems. Evaluating FOF relies largely on affected persons' subjective accounts due to limited objective assessment methods available. The aim of this mixed-methods feasibility study is to develop an assessment method for FOF while in motion and walking within virtual environments. This study will assess a range of FOF-related responses, including cognitive factors, neuromuscular response and postural stability. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This feasibility study will consist of four phases: the first two phases will include people without PD, while the other two will include people diagnosed with PD. Participants will be assessed for direct and indirect responses to real life, as well as virtual environment walking scenarios that may induce FOF. Data from questionnaires, different neurophysiological assessments, movement and gait parameters, alongside evaluations of usability and acceptability, will be collected. Semistructured interviews involving both participants and research assistants shall take place to elicit their experiences throughout different phases of the assessments undertaken. Demographic data, the scores of assessment scales, as well as feasibility, usability and acceptability of the measurement methods, will be illustrated via descriptive statistics. Movement and gait outcomes, together with neurophysiological data, will be extracted and calculated. Exploring relationships between different factors in the study will be achieved using a regression model. Thematic analysis will be the approach used to manage qualitative data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This feasibility study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Physical Therapy, Kafr El Sheikh University, Egypt (number: P.T/NEUR/3/2023/46). The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT05931692).

Effectiveness of high intensity laser therapy on pain, grip strength and median nerve conductivity in pregnant women with carpal tunnel syndrome: A randomized controlled trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Single-blind randomized controlled trial. INTRODUCTION: High-intensity laser therapy (HILT) was recently introduced to the physiotherapy field as a treatment option for patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). However, evidence about its effectiveness on pregnant women with CTS is sparse. PURPOSE OF STUDY: To test the effectiveness of HILT combined with a conventional physical therapy program to reduce pain intensity, sensory and motor nerve distal latency, and increase grip strength in pregnant women with CTS compared with the physical therapy alone. METHODS: Fifty-four pregnant women with mild to moderate CTS were randomized and further allocated into two groups. The HILT group (n = 27) received both HILT and conventional physical therapy, and the control group (n = 27) received only physical therapy, including nerve and tendon gliding exercises and the use of an orthotic device. Participants received the interventions at the University Hospital (omitted for review) three times per week for 5 weeks. An 11-points numerical pain rating scale, electromyography, and a handheld dynamometer were used for data collection before and after the treatment. RESULTS: Participants from both groups presented significant improvement in the median nerve motor nerve distal latency (MNDL), sensory nerve distal latency, numerical pain rating scale, and handgrip strength after the intervention. The between-group difference showed more improvements in participants of the HILT group on reducing pain intensity, mean difference (MD) = -3.11 (-4.1 to 2.1), and sensory nerve distal latency, MD = -0.3 (-0.5 to -0.1) compared with the control group. DISCUSSION: HILT produced greater improvement in outcomes of pregnant women with mild to moderate CTS whichsuggests that adding HILT to traditional CTS physical therapy protocol is beneficial and safe. CONCLUSIONS: High-intensity laser therapy combined with a standard physical therapy program for CTS in pregnant women is better than the physical therapy program alone to improve pain intensity and median nerve sensory distal latency.

Clinical Efficacy of High-Intensity Laser Therapy on Lateral Epicondylitis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Recently, high-intensity laser therapy has been used in the therapeutic protocols for pain management. We aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of high-intensity laser therapy versus other different modalities for improving lateral epicondylitis symptoms. METHODOLOGY: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on prospective randomized controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Science Direct until June 2021 using relevant key words. We analyzed the data using Review Manager software (RevMan 5.4). RESULTS: Six randomized controlled trials with 344 patients were included. There is low-quality evidence that high-intensity laser therapy generates a small reduction on pain intensity compared with a control group either during activity (mean difference = -0.98, 95% confidence interval = -1.6 to -0.35, P = 0.002) or during rest (mean difference = -0.98, 95% confidence interval = -1.68 to -0.09, P = 0.03). In addition, there is low-quality evidence that high-intensity laser therapy provides small improvements in quality of life (physical component) compared with control (mean difference = 9.76, 95% confidence interval = 2.69 to 16.83, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: High-intensity laser therapy is an effective therapeutic modality to reduce pain and improve quality of life (36-item short form health survey physical component) in patients experiencing persistent symptoms of lateral epicondylitis. However, grip strength, hand function, and quality of life (36-item short form health survey) did not show significant differences between high-intensity laser therapy and other therapies.

Systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of ultrasound-guided versus landmark corticosteroid injection in the treatment of shoulder pain: an update.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroid (CS) can be injected in a blind fashion (landmark-guided) or with ultrasound (US) guidance, and this may contribute to varying clinical results. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of US-guided versus landmark CS injections in the treatment of adult patients with shoulder pain. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing US-guided versus landmark CS injection regarding visual analogue scale (VAS), functional scores, disability scores, abduction degree, and side effects. The data were pooled as mean difference (MD), standardized mean difference (SMD), or risk ratios (RRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using R software (meta package 4.9-0) for windows. Subgroup analysis and leave-one-out analysis were conducted. RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs, with a total of 1010 patients, were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled estimate favored the US-guided over landmark CS injection in terms of the mean change of VAS between 6 weeks and baseline (SMD = - 0.48, 95% CI [- 0.79, - 0.17]), the shoulder functional scores (SMD = 0.35, 95% CI [0.05, 0.65]) and shoulder abduction degree (MD = 8.78, 95% CI [3.11, 14.46]). Whilst no significant difference was found between the compared group regarding the overall shoulder disability scores (SMD = - 0.51, 95% CI (- 1.25, 0.22]) and side effects (RR = 0.45, 95% CI [0.15, 1.34]). None of the eligible study analyzed the cost-effectiveness of the US-guided method compared with the landmark method for CS injection. CONCLUSION: Our analysis showed that US-guided CS injection was effective in the treatment of various shoulder diseases. Further research on the cost-effectiveness of US-guided CS methods is needed.