Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 36
Filter
1.
Exp Brain Res ; 242(7): 1609-1622, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38767666

ABSTRACT

Differences in organization of the primary motor cortex and altered trunk motor control (sensing, processing and motor output) have been reported in people with low back pain (LBP). Little is known to what extent these differences are related. We investigated differences in 1) organization of the primary motor cortex and 2) motor and sensory tests between people with and without LBP, and 3) investigated associations between the organization of the primary motor cortex and motor and sensory tests. We conducted a case-control study in people with (N=25) and without (N=25) LBP. The organization of the primary motor cortex (Center of Gravity (CoG) and Area of the cortical representation of trunk muscles) was assessed using neuronavigated transcranial magnetic stimulation, based on individual MRIs. Sensory tests (quantitative sensory testing, graphaesthesia, two-point discrimination threshold) and a motor test (spiral-tracking test) were assessed. Participants with LBP had a more lateral and lower location of the CoG and a higher temporal summation of pain. For all participants combined, better vibration test scores were associated with a more anterior, lateral, and lower CoG and a better two-point discrimination threshold was associated with a lower CoG. A small subset of variables showed significance. Although this aligns with the concept of altered organization of the primary motor cortex in LBP, there is no strong evidence of the association between altered organization of the primary motor cortex and motor and sensory test performance in LBP. Focusing on subgroup analyses regarding pain duration can be a topic for future research.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Motor Cortex , Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation , Humans , Motor Cortex/physiopathology , Motor Cortex/physiology , Male , Female , Low Back Pain/physiopathology , Adult , Middle Aged , Case-Control Studies , Young Adult , Evoked Potentials, Motor/physiology
2.
Musculoskelet Sci Pract ; 71: 102931, 2024 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38520875

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how people with shoulder problems and their physiotherapists perceive the recovery of shoulder problems. METHOD: We performed a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with patients and their physiotherapists. Nine pairs of patients and physiotherapists (n = 18) were recruited. The transcribed interviews were analyzed in a consecutive multistep iterative process using a conventional content analysis. RESULTS: Analysis of the interviews resulted in three major themes: 'What do I expect from my recovery?', 'Am I recovering?' and 'When do I consider myself recovered?' The patients and physiotherapists talked similarly about the importance of and interdependency between these themes. Central to these three themes are the analysis of the cause of shoulder problems and the experience of uncertainty. Our analyses suggest that there are conceptual differences in how patients and physiotherapists formulate their expectations about recovery, observe the recovering process, and conceptualize when someone may be considered recovered. Different interpretations by the patients of the information provided by the physical therapists appeared to fuel these differences. CONCLUSION: Our results show that the concept of recovery is defined by patients and physiotherapists in three distinct themes. Within these themes the patients and physiotherapists differ substantially in their conceptualization of the recovery. IMPACT STATEMENT: This insight in the concept of recovery can help patients and physiotherapists better understand each other, enhance the alignment of ideas about the care process, and support making decisions together. Physiotherapists should be aware that patients might interpret their words, explanations, and expectations substantially different.


Subject(s)
Physical Therapists , Qualitative Research , Humans , Female , Male , Adult , Middle Aged , Physical Therapists/psychology , Aged , Recovery of Function , Shoulder Pain/psychology , Physical Therapy Modalities/psychology , Attitude of Health Personnel
4.
Heliyon ; 10(2): e24362, 2024 Jan 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38298697

ABSTRACT

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indicate that power training has the ability to improve muscle power and physical performance in older adults. However, power training definitions are broad and previously-established criteria are vague, making the validity and replicability of power training interventions used in RCTs uncertain. Objective: The aim of this review was to assess whether the power training interventions identified in a previous systematic review (el Hadouchi 2022) are fully described, therapeutically valid, and meet our proposed criteria for power training. Design: Review. Methods: Power training interventions used in older adults, previously-identified in a systematic review, were assessed. The completeness of intervention descriptions was evaluated using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR), and therapeutic validity was evaluated using the CONTENT scale in combination with a set of criteria specific for power training. Results: None of the power training interventions were fully described or met the CONTENT scale's criteria for therapeutic validity. Five out of 14 interventions (35.7 %) met all specific power training criteria. Conclusions: Power training interventions used in RCTs comparing power training to strength training are poor to moderately described, may not be therapeutically valid, and may not reflect the construct of power training. This makes it difficult for clinicians or researchers to apply or replicate power training interventions reported in RCTs, and begs the question whether the true effects of power training have been estimated.

5.
Midwifery ; 129: 103892, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38043479

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy-related pelvic girdle pain (PPGP) is common and considered a multifactorial condition with biomechanical and psychosocial contributions. The patient's perceived cause is an important aspect of illness perceptions, and a strong predictor of self-management and healthcare utilization. It is unknown what causal beliefs primiparae hold regarding PPGP. OBJECTIVE: To explore and describe health and illness perceptions among primiparae towards PPGP and its cause. DESIGN: Exploratory, convergent parallel mixed-methods. SETTING: At the participants' homes. PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen primiparae with and without PPGP. FINDINGS: Primiparae with and without PPGP held comparable causal beliefs about PPGP. PPGP was described as the result of hormonal softening and loosening of the pelvis, and failure of the muscular system to compensate for that. Women who experienced similar physical symptoms attributed them differently, leading to different coping strategies. Interestingly, maternal healthcare providers reinforced the unidimensional- and predominantly biomechanical view when women sought healthcare. CONCLUSION: The causal mechanism of PPGP held by the women was not determined by their lived experience. It was primarily based on the concept of inevitable hormonal softening of the pelvis. This biomechanical belief is based on theories that are not in line with current knowledge of PPGP and contemporary pain science, yet they were reinforced by maternity healthcare providers. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Healthcare seeking behavior is influenced by illness beliefs. Maternity healthcare providers may play a key role in providing reassurance and addressing the multifactorial nature of PPGP when providing care and support to pregnant women.


Subject(s)
Pelvic Girdle Pain , Pregnancy Complications , Pregnancy , Female , Humans , Pelvic Girdle Pain/complications , Netherlands , Pregnant Women , Parity
6.
Hum Mov Sci ; 92: 103159, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37979472

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pain-related cognitions are associated with motor control changes in people with chronic low-back pain (CLBP). The mechanism underlying this association is unclear. We propose that perceived threat increases muscle-spindle-reflex-gains, which reduces the effect of mechanical perturbations, and simultaneously decreases movement precision. AIM: To evaluate effects of CLBP and pain-related cognitions on the impact of mechanical perturbations on trunk movement, and associations between these perturbation effects and movement precision. METHODS: 30 participants with CLBP and 30 healthy controls, performed two consecutive trials of a seated repetitive reaching task. During both trials participants were warned for mechanical perturbations, which were only administered during the second trial. The perturbation effect was characterized by the deviation of the trajectory of the T8 vertebra relative to the sacrum. Trunk movement precision was expressed as tracking error during a trunk movement target tracking task. We assessed pain-related cognitions with the task-specific 'Expected Back Strain'-scale (EBS). We used a two-way-Anova to assess the effect of Group (CLBP vs back-healthy) and dichotomized EBS (higher vs lower) on the perturbation effect, and a Pearson's correlation to assess associations between perturbation effects and movement precision. FINDINGS: Higher EBS was associated with smaller perturbation effects (p ≤ 0.011). A negative correlation was found between the perturbation effect and the tracking error, in the higher EBS-group (r = -0.5, p = 0.013). INTERPRETATION: These results demonstrate that pain-related cognitions influence trunk movement control and support the idea that more negative pain-related cognitions lead to an increased resistance against perturbations, at the expense of movement precision.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain , Humans , Movement , Pelvis , Spine , Cognition , Torso
7.
Musculoskelet Sci Pract ; 66: 102775, 2023 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37269589

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Clinically feasible and reliable methods to measure motor control in people with low back pain (LBP) are lacking. This reliability and measurement error study design (i.e. repeated measurements in stable patients) aimed to determine the intra- and interrater reliability, and measurement errors of several parameters for two clinical lumbar motor control tests. METHOD: Participants 18-65 years of age, with current or a history of LBP performed a spiral tracking task (n = 33; i.e., tracing a spiral on a computer monitor by making spinal movements) or a repositioning task (n = 34; i.e., returning the trunk to a predefined position). Accelerometers were used to measure trunk positions. To explore the potential of these tests, we evaluated a broad range of parameters. To assess intra- and interrater reliability, we calculated the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC(2,1) for absolute agreement), standard error of measurement and smallest detectable change for each parameter. FINDINGS: Overall, the interrater reliability of the spiral tracking test was good (ICC>0.75). The reliability of the second and third trial revealed higher ICC values compared to the reliability of the first two trials. The intra- and interrater reliability of the repositioning test was overall poor (ICC <0.5, with the exception of trunk inclination: ICC: 0.5 to 0.75). CONCLUSION: The reliability and set-up of the spiral tracking test supports its feasibility for clinical use. Considering the poor reliability of the repositioning test, it is doubtful whether further development of this measurement protocol is indicated. Only for the direction trunk inclination further standardisation might be warranted.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain , Humans , Low Back Pain/diagnosis , Lumbosacral Region , Movement , Reproducibility of Results , Spine , Male , Female , Adolescent , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged
8.
PLoS One ; 18(3): e0280607, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36972228

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Negative pain-related cognitions are associated with persistence of low-back pain (LBP), but the mechanism underlying this association is not well understood. We propose that negative pain-related cognitions determine how threatening a motor task will be perceived, which in turn will affect how lumbar movements are performed, possibly with negative long-term effects on pain. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of postural threat on lumbar movement patterns in people with and without LBP, and to investigate whether this effect is associated with task-specific pain-related cognitions. METHODS: 30 back-healthy participants and 30 participants with LBP performed consecutive two trials of a seated repetitive reaching movement (45 times). During the first trial participants were threatened with mechanical perturbations, during the second trial participants were informed that the trial would be unperturbed. Movement patterns were characterized by temporal variability (CyclSD), local dynamic stability (LDE) and spatial variability (meanSD) of the relative lumbar Euler angles. Pain-related cognition was assessed with the task-specific 'Expected Back Strain'-scale (EBS). A three-way mixed Manova was used to assess the effect of Threat, Group (LBP vs control) and EBS (above vs below median) on lumbar movement patterns. RESULTS: We found a main effect of threat on lumbar movement patterns. In the threat-condition, participants showed increased variability (MeanSDflexion-extension, p<0.000, η2 = 0.26; CyclSD, p = 0.003, η2 = 0.14) and decreased stability (LDE, p = 0.004, η2 = 0.14), indicating large effects of postural threat. CONCLUSION: Postural threat increased variability and decreased stability of lumbar movements, regardless of group or EBS. These results suggest that perceived postural threat may underlie changes in motor behavior in patients with LBP. Since LBP is likely to impose such a threat, this could be a driver of changes in motor behavior in patients with LBP, as also supported by the higher spatial variability in the group with LBP and higher EBS in the reference condition.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain , Humans , Biomechanical Phenomena , Low Back Pain/complications , Lumbosacral Region , Movement , Sitting Position , Case-Control Studies
9.
Contemp Clin Trials Commun ; 30: 101022, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36387987

ABSTRACT

Background: In people with low back pain (LBP), altered motor control has been related to reorganization of the primary motor cortex (M1). Sensory impairments in LBP have also been suggested to be associated with reorganization of M1. Little is known about reorganization of M1 over time in people with LBP, and whether it relates to changes in motor control and sensory impairments and recovery. This study aims to investigate 1) differences in organization of M1 of trunk muscles between people with and without LBP, and whether the organization of M1 relates to motor control and sensory impairments (cross-sectional component) and 2) reorganization of M1 over time and its relation with changes in motor control and sensory impairments and experienced recovery (longitudinal component). Methods: A case-control study with a cross-sectional and five-week longitudinal component is conducted in participants with LBP (N = 25) and participants without LBP (N = 25). Participants with LBP received usual care physiotherapy. Various tests were administered at baseline and follow-up. Following an anatomical MRI, organization of M1 (Center of Gravity and Area of the cortical representation of trunk muscles) was determined using transcranial magnetic stimulation. Quantitative sensory testing, a spiral-tracking motor control test, graphesthesia, two-point discrimination threshold and various self-reported questionnaires were also assessed. Multivariate multilevel analysis will be used for statistical analysis. Conclusion: We will address the gaps in knowledge about the association between reorganization of M1 and motor control and sensory tests during the clinical course of LBP. This study is registered at DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/5C8ZG.

10.
ERJ Open Res ; 8(3)2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35983539

ABSTRACT

Aim: To estimate the comparability and discriminability of outcome-based quality indicators by performing a practice test in Dutch physical therapy primary care, and to select a core set of outcome-based quality indicators that are well accepted by physical therapists based on their perceived added value as a quality improvement tool. Methods: First, a list of potential quality indicators was defined, followed by determination of the comparability (case-mix adjusted multilevel analysis) and discriminability (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)). Second, focus group meetings were conducted with stakeholders (physical therapists and senior researchers) to select a core set of quality indicators. Results: Overall, 229 physical therapists from 137 practices provided 2651 treatment episodes. Comparability: in 10 of the 11 case-mix adjusted models, the ICC increased compared with the intercept-only model. Discriminability: the ICC ranged between 0.01 and 0.34, with five of the 11 ICCs being >0.10. The majority of physical therapists in each focus group preferred the inclusion of seven quality indicators in the core set, including three process and four outcome indicators based upon the 6-min walk test (6MWT), the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), and the determination of quadriceps strength using a hand-held dynamometer. Conclusion: This is the first study to describe the comparability and discriminability of the outcome-based quality indicators selected for patients with COPD treated in primary care physical therapy practices. Future research should focus on increasing data collection in daily practice and on the development of tangible methods to use as the core set of a quality improvement tool.

11.
Eur Rev Aging Phys Act ; 19(1): 18, 2022 Aug 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35953775

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Research suggests that muscle power is a more critical determinant of physical functioning in older adults than muscle strength. The objective of this study was to systematically review the literature on the effect of power training compared to strength training in older adults on tests for muscle power, two groups of activity-based tests under controlled conditions: generic tests and tests with an emphasis on movement speed, and finally, physical activity level in daily life. METHODS: A systematic search for randomized controlled trials comparing effects of power training to strength training in older adults was performed in PubMed, Embase, Ebsco/CINAHL, Ebsco/SPORTDiscus, Wiley/Cochrane Library and Scopus. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Tool, and quality of evidence was evaluated using GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool. Standardized mean differenences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for outcomes separately using a random effects model. RESULTS: Fifteen trials and 583 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Results indicated a statistically significant benefit of power training on all reported outcomes (muscle power SMD: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.54 to 1.44, p < 0.001; generic activity-based tests SMD: 0.37, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.68; p = 0.02, activity-based tests emphasizing movement speed SMD: 0.43, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.62, p < 0.001). None of the included studies used physical activity level in daily life as outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Power training offers more potential for improving muscle power and performance on activity tests in older adults compared to strength training. Future research should assess exercise parameters for power training in older adults. In addition, the validity and reliability of the tests used must be evaluated to establish a standardized test protocol. This protocol should also include measurements of physical activity in daily life.

12.
J Patient Rep Outcomes ; 6(1): 79, 2022 Jul 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35852671

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: The quality of physiotherapy care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) can be improved by comparing outcomes of care in practice. AIM: To evaluate the experiences of physiotherapists implementing a standard set of measurement instruments to measure outcomes and improve the quality of care for patients with COPD. METHODS: This sequential explanatory mixed methods study was performed in two parts. In the quantitative part, a survey of 199 physiotherapists was conducted to evaluate their attitudes and knowledge, as well as the influence of contextual factors (i.e., practice policy and support from colleagues), in the implementation of the standard measurement set. In the qualitative part, 11 physiotherapists participated in individual interviews to elucidate their experiences using a thematical framework. RESULTS: The survey showed that, on average, 68.4% of the physiotherapists reported having a positive attitude about using the standard set, 85.0% felt they had sufficient knowledge of the measurement instruments, and 84.7% felt supported by practice policy and colleagues. In total, 80.3% of physiotherapists thought the standard set had added value in clinical practice, and 90.3% indicated that the measurement instruments can be valuable for evaluating treatment outcomes. The physiotherapists mentioned several barriers, such as lack of time and the unavailability of the entire standard set of measurement instruments in their practice. Moreover, the physiotherapists indicated that the measurement instruments have added value in providing transparency to policymakers through the anonymized publication of outcomes. CONCLUSION: Physiotherapists support the use of the standard set of measurement instruments to improve the quality of physiotherapy treatment for patients with COPD.

13.
Gait Posture ; 91: 216-222, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34740059

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Development of more effective interventions for nonspecific chronic low back pain (LBP), requires a robust theoretical framework regarding mechanisms underlying the persistence of LBP. Altered movement patterns, possibly driven by pain-related cognitions, are assumed to drive pain persistence, but cogent evidence is missing. AIM: To assess variability and stability of lumbar movement patterns, during repetitive seated reaching, in people with and without LBP, and to investigate whether these movement characteristics are associated with pain-related cognitions. METHODS: 60 participants were recruited, matched by age and sex (30 back-healthy and 30 with LBP). Mean age was 32.1 years (SD13.4). Mean Oswestry Disability Index-score in LBP-group was 15.7 (SD12.7). Pain-related cognitions were assessed by the 'Pain Catastrophizing Scale' (PCS), 'Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale' (PASS) and the task-specific 'Expected Back Strain' scale(EBS). Participants performed a seated repetitive reaching movement (45 times), at self-selected speed. Lumbar movement patterns were assessed by an optical motion capture system recording positions of cluster markers, located on the spinous processes of S1 and T8. Movement patterns were characterized by the spatial variability (meanSD) of the lumbar Euler angles: flexion-extension, lateral-bending, axial-rotation, temporal variability (CyclSD) and local dynamic stability (LDE). Differences in movement patterns, between people with and without LBP and with high and low levels of pain-related cognitions, were assessed with factorial MANOVA. RESULTS: We found no main effect of LBP on variability and stability, but there was a significant interaction effect of group and EBS. In the LBP-group, participants with high levels of EBS, showed increased MeanSDlateral-bending (p = 0.004, η2 = 0.14), indicating a large effect. MeanSDaxial-rotation approached significance (p = 0.06). SIGNIFICANCE: In people with LBP, spatial variability was predicted by the task-specific EBS, but not by the general measures of pain-related cognitions. These results suggest that a high level of EBS is a driver of increased spatial variability, in participants with LBP.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain , Adult , Biomechanical Phenomena , Cognition , Humans , Lumbar Vertebrae , Lumbosacral Region , Movement , Range of Motion, Articular , Rotation
14.
Musculoskelet Sci Pract ; 55: 102429, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34271415

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Since the contribution of the lumbar multifidus(LM) is not well understood in relation to non-specific low back pain(LBP), this may limit physiotherapists in choosing the most appropriate treatment strategy. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare clinical characteristics, in terms of LM function and morphology, between subacute and chronic LBP patients from a large clinical practice cohort compared to healthy controls. DESIGN: Multicenter case control study. METHOD: Subacute and chronic LBP patients and healthy controls between 18 and 65 years of age were included. Several clinical tests were performed: primary outcomes were the LM thickness from ultrasound measurements, trunk range of motion(ROM) from 3D kinematic tests, and median frequency and root mean square values of LM by electromyography measurements. The secondary outcomes Numeric Rating Scale for Pain(NRS) and the Oswestry Disability Index(ODI) were administered. Comparisons between groups were made with ANOVA, p-values<0.05, with Tukey's HSD post-hoc test were considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 161 participants were included, 50 healthy controls, 59 chronic LBP patients, and 52 subacute LBP patients. Trunk ROM and LM thickness were significantly larger in healthy controls compared to all LBP patients(p < 0.01). A lower LM thickness was found between subacute and chronic LBP patients although not significant(p = 0.11-0.97). All between-group comparisons showed no statistically significant differences in electromyography outcomes (p = 0.10-0.32). NRS showed no significant differences between LBP subgroups(p = 0.21). Chronic LBP patients showed a significant higher ODI score compared to subacute LBP patients(p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Trunk ROM and LM thickness show differences between LBP patients and healthy controls.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain , Paraspinal Muscles , Case-Control Studies , Humans , Lumbosacral Region , Paraspinal Muscles/diagnostic imaging , Primary Health Care
15.
Phys Ther ; 101(8)2021 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33929546

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to define and select a core set of outcome-based quality indicators, accepted by stakeholders on usability and perceived added value as a quality improvement tool, and to formulate recommendations for the next implementation step. METHODS: In phase 1, 15 potential quality indicators were defined for patient-reported outcome measures and associated domains, namely the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) for pain intensity, the Patient Specific Functioning Scale (PSFS) for physical activity, the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale for physical functioning, and the Global Perceived Effect-Dutch Version for perceived effect. Their comparability and discriminatory characteristics were described using cohort data. In phase 2, a core set of quality indicators was selected based on consensus among stakeholders in focus group meetings. RESULTS: In total, 65,815 completed treatment episodes for patients with nonspecific low back pain were provided by 1009 physical therapists from 219 physical therapist practices. The discriminability between physical therapists of all potential 15 quality indicators was adequate, with intraclass correlation coefficients between 0.08 and 0.30. Stakeholders selected a final core set of 6 quality indicators: 2 process indicators (the routine measurement of NPRS and the PSFS) and 4 outcome indicators (pretreatment and posttreatment change scores for the NPRS, PSFS, Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, and the minimal clinically important difference of the Global Perceived Effect-Dutch Version). CONCLUSION: This study described and selected a core set of outcome-based quality indicators for physical therapy in patients with nonspecific low back pain. The set was accepted by stakeholders for having added value for daily practice in physical therapy primary care and was found useful for quality improvement initiatives. Further studies need to focus on improvement of using the core set of outcome-based quality indicators as a quality monitoring and evaluation instrument. IMPACT: Patient-reported outcome-based quality indicators developed from routinely collected clinical data are promising for use in quality improvement in daily practice.


Subject(s)
Disability Evaluation , Low Back Pain/therapy , Pain Measurement , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Physical Therapy Modalities , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Adult , Aged , Cohort Studies , Denmark , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Primary Health Care
16.
J Biomech ; 121: 110435, 2021 05 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33894470

ABSTRACT

Literature highlights the need for research on changes in lumbar movement patterns, as potential mechanisms underlying the persistence of low-back pain. Variability and local dynamic stability are frequently used to characterize movement patterns. In view of a lack of information on reliability of these measures, we determined their within- and between-session reliability in repeated seated reaching. Thirty-six participants (21 healthy, 15 LBP) executed three trials of repeated seated reaching on two days. An optical motion capture system recorded positions of cluster markers, located on the spinous processes of S1 and T8. Movement patterns were characterized by the spatial variability (meanSD) of the lumbar Euler angles: flexion-extension, lateral bending, axial rotation, temporal variability (CyclSD) and local dynamic stability (LDE). Reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), coefficients of variation (CV) and Bland-Altman plots. Sufficient reliability was defined as an ICC ≥ 0.5 and a CV < 20%. To determine the effect of number of repetitions on reliability, analyses were performed for the first 10, 20, 30, and 40 repetitions of each time series. MeanSD, CyclSD, and the LDE had moderate within-session reliability; meanSD: ICC = 0.60-0.73 (CV = 14-17%); CyclSD: ICC = 0.68 (CV = 17%); LDE: ICC = 0.62 (CV = 5%). Between-session reliability was somewhat lower; meanSD: ICC = 0.44-0.73 (CV = 17-19%); CyclSD: ICC = 0.45-0.56 (CV = 19-22%); LDE: ICC = 0.25-0.54 (CV = 5-6%). MeanSD, CyclSD and the LDE are sufficiently reliable to assess lumbar movement patterns in single-session experiments, and at best sufficiently reliable in multi-session experiments. Within-session, a plateau in reliability appears to be reached at 40 repetitions for meanSD (flexion-extension), meanSD (axial-rotation) and CyclSD.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain , Humans , Lumbosacral Region , Reproducibility of Results
17.
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther ; 50(11): 632-641, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33131391

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine the construct validity, criterion validity, and responsiveness of measurement instruments evaluating scapular function. DESIGN: Systematic review of measurement properties. LITERATURE SEARCH: The MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus databases were systematically searched from inception until March 2019. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies published in Dutch, English, or German were included when they evaluated at least 1 of the measurement properties of interest. No restrictions were made regarding participants' health status. DATA SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently evaluated study quality using the COSMIN checklist and extracted and analyzed data. Quality of evidence was graded by measurement property for each distinctive type of measurement. RESULTS: Thirty-one measurement instruments in 14 studies were categorized into instruments to measure scapular posture and movement, and to assess scapular dyskinesis. Quality of evidence was at most moderate for 4 instruments with respect to criterion validity. Of these, criterion validity for instruments measuring scapular protraction/retraction posture and rotation angles up to 120° of thoracohumeral elevation was sufficient. Criterion validity for instruments measuring asymmetrical scapular posture, range of motion, and the lateral scapular slide test was insufficient. Quality of evidence for measurement properties of all other instruments was graded lower. CONCLUSION: There is currently insufficient evidence to recommend any instrument for the clinical examination of scapular function. Measurement instruments to assess scapular dyskinesis are prone to misinterpretation and should therefore not be used as such. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2020;50(11):632-641. doi:10.2519/jospt.2020.9265.


Subject(s)
Dyskinesias/diagnosis , Dyskinesias/physiopathology , Physical Examination/methods , Scapula/physiopathology , Humans , Movement , Posture , Reproducibility of Results , Scapula/physiology
18.
Gait Posture ; 76: 346-357, 2020 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31901525

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Observing and analyzing movement quality (MQ) in patients with non-specific low back pain (NS-LBP) is important in the clinical reasoning of primary care physiotherapists and exercise therapists. However, there is no standardized form of assessment. RESEARCH QUESTION: which MQ domains are measured with which instruments, and which activities are relevant, appropriate and methodologically sound for assessing MQ in patients with NS-LBP? METHODS: The study had three phases. In phase 1 we conducted a systematic review in PubMed, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus of literature published until October 2018. The selected studies measured MQ domains with instruments that enabled us to 1) compare MQ in self-paced dynamic activities of patients with NS-LBP and healthy controls, and/or 2) determine change over time of MQ in patients with NS-LBP. In phase 2 we established relevant dynamic activities to assess in patients with NS-LBP. In phase 3 we determined appropriateness and methodological qualities of the selected instruments. RESULTS: Thirty cross-sectional and three pre-post-test studies were eligible. The instruments consisted of complex (n = 19) and simple (n = 7) instrumented motion analysis systems and standardized observational tests (n = 7). We identified three domains representative for MQ: range of motion (ROM), inter-segmental coordination, and whole-body movements. In these domains, patients with NS-LBP significantly differed from healthy controls, respectively 7/12, 12/13 and 13/20 studies. Moreover, ROM and whole-body movements significantly improved over time in patients with NS-LBP (3/3 studies). Based on phase 3, we concluded that none of the instruments are appropriate to assess MQ in patients with NS-LBP in primary care. SIGNIFICANCE: Forward bending, lifting, and walking seem the most relevant activities to evaluate in patients with NS-LBP. However, we found no suitable instruments to measure ROM, inter-segmental coordination, or whole-body movements as determinants of MQ in these activities in daily practice. We therefore recommend such an instrument be developed.


Subject(s)
Low Back Pain/physiopathology , Movement , Range of Motion, Articular , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Lifting , Walking
19.
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis ; 14: 2649-2661, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31819398

ABSTRACT

Background: Standardization of measures in a common set opens the opportunity to learn from differences in treatment outcomes which can be used for improving the quality of care. Furthermore, a standard set can provide the basis for development of quality indicators and is therefore useful for quality improvement and public reporting purposes. The aim of this study was to develop a standard set of outcome domains and proposed measures for patients with COPD in Dutch primary care physical therapy practice, including a proposal to stratify patients in subgroups. Material and methods: A consensus-driven modified RAND-UCLA appropriateness method was conducted with relevant stakeholders (patients, physical therapists, researchers, policy makers and health insurers) in Dutch primary physical therapy care in eight steps: (1) literature search, (2) first online survey, (3) patient interviews, (4) expert meeting, resulting in a concept standard set and methods to identify subgroups' (5) consensus meeting, (6) expert meeting (7) second online survey and (8) final approval of an advisory board resulting of the approved standard set. Results: Five outcome domains were selected for COPD: physical capacity, muscle strength, physical activity, dyspnea and quality of life. A total of 21 measures were rated and discussed. Finally, eight measures were included, of which four mandatory measures: Characteristics of practices and physical therapists, Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) for quality of life, Global Perceived Effect (GPE) for experience, 6-mins Walk Test (6-MWT) for physical capacity; two conditional measures: Hand-Held Dynamometer (HHD) (with Microfet™) for Quadriceps strength, Medical Research Council Dyspnea (MRC) for monitoring dyspnea; and two exploratory measures: Accelerometry for physical activity, and the Assessment of Burden of COPD tool (ABC). To identify subgroups, a method described in the Dutch standard of care from the Lung Alliance was included. Conclusion: This study described the development of a standard set of outcome domains and proposed measures for patients with COPD in primary care physical therapy. Each measure was accepted for relevance and feasibility by the involved stakeholders. The set is currently used in daily practice and tested on validity and reliability in a pilot for the development of quality indicators.


Subject(s)
Actigraphy/standards , Dyspnea/therapy , Exercise Test/standards , Lung/physiopathology , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Physical Therapy Modalities/standards , Primary Health Care/standards , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/therapy , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Dyspnea/diagnosis , Dyspnea/physiopathology , Dyspnea/psychology , Health Status , Humans , Mental Health , Muscle Strength , Muscle Strength Dynamometer/standards , Netherlands , Physical Fitness , Predictive Value of Tests , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/physiopathology , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/psychology , Quality Improvement/standards , Quality Indicators, Health Care/standards , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome
20.
Pain ; 159(4): 673-683, 2018 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29300277

ABSTRACT

Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) is a biopsychosocial treatment approach for patients with chronic pain that comprises at least psychological and physiotherapeutic interventions. Core outcome sets (COSs) are currently developed in different medical fields to standardize and improve the selection of outcome domains, and measurement instruments in clinical trials, to make trial results meaningful, to pool trial results, and to allow indirect comparison between interventions. The objective of this study was to develop a COS of patient-relevant outcome domains for chronic pain in IMPT clinical trials. An international, multiprofessional panel (patient representatives [n = 5], physicians specialized in pain medicine [n = 5], physiotherapists [n = 5], clinical psychologists [n = 5], and methodological researchers [n = 5]) was recruited for a 3-stage consensus study, which consisted of a mixed-method approach comprising an exploratory systematic review, a preparing online survey to identify important outcome domains, a face-to-face consensus meeting to agree on COS domains, and a second online survey (Delphi) establishing agreement on definitions for the domains included. The panel agreed on the following 8 domains to be included into the COS for IMPT: pain intensity, pain frequency, physical activity, emotional wellbeing, satisfaction with social roles and activities, productivity (paid and unpaid, at home and at work, inclusive presentism and absenteeism), health-related quality of life, and patient's perception of treatment goal achievement. The complexity of chronic pain in a biopsychosocial context is reflected in the current recommendation and includes physical, mental, and social outcomes. In a subsequent step, measurement instruments will be identified via systematic reviews.


Subject(s)
Chronic Pain/psychology , Chronic Pain/therapy , Combined Modality Therapy/methods , Consensus , International Cooperation , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Treatment Outcome , Endpoint Determination , Female , Humans , Male , Quality of Life
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...