An overview of systematic reviews examining the quantitative sensory testing-derived hypoalgesic effects of manual therapy for musculoskeletal pain.

BACKGROUND: Changes in quantitative sensory testing (QST) after manual therapy can provide insight into pain relief mechanisms. Prior systematic reviews have evaluated manual-therapy-induced QST change. This overview of systematic reviews aims to consolidate this body of literature and critically review evidence on the hypoalgesic effects of manual therapy in clinical populations. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed, CINAHL, PsycInfo, and Embase. Peer-reviewed systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis were eligible if the reviews examined the effect of manual therapy compared to non-manual therapy interventions on QST outcomes in clinical populations. Methodological quality was assessed with the AMSTAR 2 tool. Meta-analysis results and qualitative (non-meta-analysis) interpretations were summarized by type of manual therapy. Overlap of studies was examined with the corrected covered area (CCA) index. RESULTS: Thirty systematic reviews, including 11 meta-analyses, met inclusion. There was a slight overlap in studies (CCA of 1.72% for all reviews and 1.69% for meta-analyses). Methodological quality was predominantly low to critically low. Eight (27%) reviews examined studies with a range of manual therapy types, 13 (43%) reviews focused on joint-biased manual therapy, 7 (23%) reviews focused on muscle-biased manual therapy, and 2 (7%) reviews focused on nerve-biased manual therapy. Twenty-nine (97%) reviews reported on pressure pain threshold (PPT). Meta-analytic results demonstrated conflicting evidence that manual therapy results in greater hypoalgesic effects compared to other interventions or controls. CONCLUSION: Our overview of QST effects, which has relevance to mechanisms underlying hypoalgesia, shows conflicting evidence from mostly low to critically low systematic reviews.

Participants' perspectives on improving retention in HIV care after hospitalization: A post-study qualitative investigation of the MAPPS study.

Few interventions have been shown to improve retention in HIV care. We recently completed a randomized, controlled trial of a peer mentoring intervention, which failed to increase retention in care or HIV suppression. We sought to gain insight into this negative result and elicit suggestions for future interventions. We conducted semi-structured one-on-one interviews with a sub-sample of participants and all available interventionists after completion of the primary study. Interviews were coded by two researchers and thematically analyzed. Participants in the intervention arm (N = 16) reported good rapport with and benefit from peer mentoring and found the mentors helpful in facilitating the transition from hospital to out-patient clinic. Control arm participants (N = 9) reported similar emotional and social support benefits from the health educators. In both arms, ongoing challenges including completing paperwork, securing transportation, and rescheduling missed appointments were cited, along with internalized stigma and lack of will to seek care, despite the mentors' best efforts. Suggested improvements to the intervention included: more frequent contact with interventionists; additional support for mental health problems; and targeting overall health rather than a more selective focus on HIV. Mentors and health educators agreed with the participant-reported barriers and added that some participants were too sick to meaningfully participate in the intervention, while others appeared unwilling to engage with the interventionists in a meaningful way. Mentoring was highly acceptable and felt to be impactful, however it was not sufficient to overcome structural barriers or stigma and low motivation in some participants. The attention control intervention may have had an unintended positive impact. Future interventions should focus on broad aspects of health and well-being.

Feasibility of identifying out of care HIV-positive patients in a hospital setting and enrolling them in a retention intervention.

BACKGROUND: The hospital setting provides an opportunity to re-engage people living with HIV (PLWH) in HIV care. We developed and implemented a protocol to identify PLWH in a hospital setting. The aim of the current study was to report on our strategy to recruit hospitalized HIV patients into an intervention study, and to report on lessons learned for future studies. METHODS: Our protocol was developed based on experience of our research staff in recruiting HIV patients as well as clinical input from providers and administrators on delivering care in hospitalized settings. We identified hospitalized PLWH between 2010 and 2013 who were potentially eligible for an intervention study. Patients were identified by review of electronic medical records and clinician referral, followed by in-person screening to confirm eligibility. We examined factors related to identifying and enrolling hospitalized patients, and documented lessons learned. RESULTS: Key strategies included systematic medical record review followed by in-person screening, collaboration with staff, and flexibility in recruitment logistics. We identified 1801 PLWH hospitalized during the 3-year study period. Eighty-four percent (n = 1514) met the met the inclusion criteria based on medical record review. Of these, 48% (n = 733) were ineligible. Among eligible patients, 59% (n = 460) were enrolled. Only 3% (n = 23) of eligible patients declined; 84% (n = 321) were not enrolled because they were discharged before enrollment. Lessons learned included (1) needing to identify patients and deliver the intervention before hospital discharge, (2) limiting the complexity of the intervention, and (3) having research staff available on weekends and after hours. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted recruitment of hospitalized populations is a feasible and productive approach for finding and engaging PLWH who are newly diagnosed or out of routine care.

Veterans' Perspectives on Interventions to Improve Retention in HIV Care.

Poor retention in HIV medical care is associated with increased mortality among patients with HIV/AIDS. Developing new interventions to improve retention in HIV primary care is needed. The Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) is the largest single provider of HIV care in the US. We sought to understand what veterans would want in an intervention to improve retention in VA HIV care. We conducted 18 one-on-one interviews and 15 outpatient focus groups with 46 patients living with HIV infection from the Michael E. DeBakey VAMC (MEDVAMC). Analysis identified three focus areas for improving retention in care: developing an HIV friendly clinic environment, providing mental health and substance use treatment concurrent with HIV care and encouraging peer support from other Veterans with HIV.