ABSTRACT
UNLABELLED: Conservative non-surgical management of a herniated lumbar intervertebral disc (HLD) in athletes is a complex task due to the dramatic forces imparted on the spine during sport participation. The demands placed upon the athlete during rehabilitation and return to sport are unique not only from a sport specific perspective, but also regarding return to the sport strength and conditioning programs utilized for sport preparation. Many prescriptions fail to address postural and motor control faults specific to athletic development, which may prevent full return to sport after suffering a HLD or predispose the athlete to future exacerbations of a HLD. Strength exercises involving squatting, deadlifting, and Olympic power lifts are large components of the typical athlete's conditioning program, therefore some progressions are provided to address potential underlying problems in the athlete's technique that may have contributed to their HLD in the first place. The purpose of this clinical commentary is to propose a framework for rehabilitation that is built around the phases of healing of the disc. Phase I: Non-Rotational/Non-Flexion Phase (Acute Inflammatory Phase), Phase II: Counter rotation/Flexion Phase (Repair Phase), Phase III: Rotational Phase/Power development (Remodeling Phase), and Phase IV: Full return to sport. This clinical commentary provides a theoretical basis for these phases based on available literature as well as reviewing many popular current practice trends in the management of an HLD. The authors recognize the limits of any general exercise rehabilitation recommendation with regard to return to sport, as well as any general strength and conditioning program. It is vital that an individual assessment and prescription is made for every athlete which reviews and addresses movement in all planes of motion under all necessary extrinsic and intrinsic demands to that athlete. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.
ABSTRACT
Clinical trial registration involves placing the protocol for a clinical trial on a free, publicly available, and electronically searchable register. Registration is considered to be prospective if the protocol is registered before the trial commences (ie, before the first participant is enrolled). Prospective registration has several potential advantages. It could help avoid trials being duplicated unnecessarily and it could allow people with health problems to identify trials in which they might participate. Perhaps more importantly, however, it tackles 2 big problems in clinical research: selective reporting and publication bias. Prospective clinical trial registration is of great potential value to the clinicians, consumers, and researchers who rely on clinical trial data, and that is why the International Society of Physiotherapy Journal Editors (ISPJE) is recommending that members enact a policy for prospective trial registration.
Subject(s)
Clinical Trials as Topic/ethics , Physical Therapy Specialty/standards , Publication BiasABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Although much has been written about the efficacy of manual therapy interventions for adults with headaches or spinal pain, little research has focused on the use of these interventions in pediatric patients. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence for spinal manual therapy (SMT) interventions in patients 4-17 years old with headaches and/or mechanical spinal pain. METHODS: A search for relevant studies published in the past 15 years was conducted on MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Randomized Control Trials, PEDro, PubMed, and Sports Discus. Only English language articles were reviewed. Studies had to include at least one outcome measure for pain, function, or quality of life. Studies evaluating post-operative interventions, or those in which the interventions were directed at influencing excessive spinal curvatures, were excluded. Case reports and studies that did not limit analysis of the results to the pediatric population were also excluded. RESULTS: Two randomized control trials and two studies offering lower levels of evidence were identified in the literature search. The latter studies were prospective cohort studies. The four studies were evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria. DISCUSSION: There are very little data in the literature to support or refute the use of SMT interventions in pediatric patients. Further research is required to establish a strong evidence-based foundation for use of these interventions in children.
ABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Case report. BACKGROUND: A number of pain referral patterns for sacroiliac dysfunction have been reported in the literature. However, very little has been written about pain localized to the knee joint for cases involving sacroiliac dysfunction. CASE DESCRIPTION: A 25-year-old female runner was self-referred to physical therapy for medial knee pain of 4(1/2) weeks' duration without a significant onset event. The pain completely curtailed her training for the Boston Marathon. Examination of the patient's knee and hip did not reveal any abnormal findings and there was no reproduction of pain with any test procedures except for medial knee joint tenderness to palpation. Additional, more proximal examination suggested significant asymmetry of sacral bony landmarks of the pelvic girdle without significant findings on the provocation tests of the sacroiliac joint. A single session of manual therapy procedures directed to the pubic symphysis and sacroiliac joint ipsilateral to the side of knee pain was provided. OUTCOMES: The patient was able to return to running without further incident of knee pain after a single therapy session. DISCUSSION: This case suggests the importance of regional interdependence in the examination of patients with an apparently common clinical problem. Furthermore, the case describes a previously unreported presentation of local knee pain possibly attributable to sacroiliac joint dysfunction.
