Factors identified as barriers or facilitators to EMR/EHR based interprofessional primary care: a scoping review.

As interprofessional collaboration (IPC) in primary care receives increasing attention, the role of electronic medical and health record (EMR/EHR) systems in supporting IPC is important to consider. A scoping review was conducted to synthesize the current literature on the barriers and facilitators of EMR/EHRs to interprofessional primary care. Four online databases (OVID Medline, EBSCO CINAHL, OVID EMBASE, and OVID PsycINFO) were searched without date restrictions. Twelve studies were included in the review. Of six facilitator and barrier themes identified, the key facilitator was teamwork support and a significant barrier was data management. Other important barriers included usability related mainly to interoperability, and practice support primarily in terms of patient care. Additional themes were organization attributes and user features. Although EMR/EHR systems facilitated teamwork support, there is potential for team features to be strengthened further. Persistent barriers may be partly addressed by advances in software design, particularly if interprofessional perspectives are included. Organizations and teams might also consider strategies for working with existing EMR/EHR systems, for instance by developing guidelines for interprofessional use. Further research concerning the use of electronic records in interprofessional contexts is needed to support IPC in primary care.

Patient partners' perspectives of meaningful engagement in synthesis reviews: A patient-oriented rapid review.

BACKGROUND: A growing literature describes promising practices for patient-oriented research (POR) generally; however, those for systematic reviews are largely derived through the lens of a researcher. This rapid review sought to understand meaningful engagement in synthesis reviews from the patient partner (PP) perspective. DESIGN: The review team comprised PPs, librarians, SCPOR staff and academic faculty. We searched OVID MEDLINE and EMBASE, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health, and core POR websites. Documents describing PP reflections on their involvement in synthesis reviews were included. Screening and data extraction were conducted by two independent reviewers. Thematic analysis was employed to identify themes in the data regarding PP perceptions of engagement in synthesis reviews. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 1386 citations. Eight journal articles and one blog post were included. Seven studies focused on conducting systematic reviews on a particular health or patient-related topic to which PP involvement was an important part and two studies focused specifically on the experience of including PP in synthesis reviews. PPs engaged in the review process through a variety of mechanisms, levels and stages of the review process. Three major themes emerged from the data: (1) foster partnerships through team development, (2) provide opportunities for outcomes valued by PP and (3) strengthen the research endeavour. CONCLUSION: Fostering partnerships through team development is foundational for meaningful engagement in synthesis reviews. It requires sensitively balancing of various needs (eg overburdening with contributions). Meaningful involvement in reviews has both personal and research benefits. PATIENT INVOLVEMENT: Patient partners were equal collaborators in all aspects of the review.

An algorithm provided as initial guidance for reporting registry records and published protocols in systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to synthesize the available guidance with existing practices by Cochrane reviewers to generate an algorithm as a starting point in assisting reviewers reporting of registry records and published protocols (TRRs/PPs) use in systematic reviews of interventions. STUDY DESIGN: We used existing guidance from major review bodies, assessed the current reporting of TRRs/PPs use in a sample of Cochrane reviews, and engaged in critical analysis. Independent reviewers identified and extracted textual excerpts reporting the use of trial registry records and published protocols and codes following a systematic review framework. Based on these elements, and our initial research, we created an algorithm/graphical aid to visualize initial direction. RESULTS: We included 166 Cochrane systematic reviews published between August 2015 and 2016 from 48 review groups. Review authors' terminology (e.g., ongoing, terminated) varied between and within reviews. Reporting practices were diverse and inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: This is a timely investigation in an era where evidence synthesis informs health and health care decisions. Our proposed algorithm provides initial direction to systematize the reporting of TRR/PP use. We hope that the algorithm generates further discussion to enhance the transparency of TRR/PP reporting and methodological research into the complexities of using protocols in systematic reviews of interventions.

Developing a program theory of patient engagement in patient-oriented research and the impacts on the health care system: protocol for a rapid realist review.

BACKGROUND: The patient-oriented research (POR) discourse has been criticized as being fragmented, lacking consistent terminology and having few evaluative studies. Our research team will use rapid realist review methodology to generate broad, process-based program theory regarding how partnering patients with researchers in POR generates an impact within a health care system. METHODS: This protocol for a rapid realist review will involve multiple steps, including research question development; preliminary program theory and search strategy development; study selection and appraisal; data extraction, analysis and synthesis; and program theory refinement. We will be guided by the Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) publication standards for realist synthesis. Unlike traditional reviews, a realist review aims to discover and understand causal processes that exist within a complex environment, asking questions regarding what works for whom, under what circumstances, how and why. Our multidisciplinary team consists of patient partners, health care professionals, a health sciences librarian and health services researchers. Patient partners are full research partners, supporting development of our guiding research question and identifying community partners and stakeholder groups to disseminate our findings. Patient partners will be asked to recommend literature sources, to review and vet our set of search terms, and to review, evaluate and reflect on our initial program theory in light of their personal, lived expertise. INTERPRETATION: We will share the results of our rapid realist review with community partners and stakeholder groups. We will also disseminate our program theory by means of publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at scientific conferences.

Use of real-time videoconferencing to deliver physical therapy services: A scoping review of published and emerging evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Telehealth may be a viable means to deliver physical therapy services across a range of practice settings and health conditions; however, there is limited uptake of telehealth in clinical practice. The purpose of this study is to examine and describe trends, gaps and opportunities in published and emerging evidence regarding the use of real-time videoconferencing to deliver physical therapy services. METHODS: Four databases and three trial registries were searched using terms for physical therapy and telehealth. Inclusion criteria were primary studies, systematic reviews and published trial registries that had the following features: physical therapy assessment and/or treatment, real-time videoconferencing and English language. Title/abstract, full text screening and data extraction were completed by pairs of independent reviewers. Descriptive statistics stratified by published research and trial registry records were used to summarize study characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 100 studies (80 published and 20 trial registries) were included. Australia, Canada and the US have the highest proportion of published and emerging research (63%). The majority of conditions studied were musculoskeletal (42%). Computers were the most common videoconferencing technology used (31%) and only 14% of studies reported using a secure platform. The majority of studies examined health outcomes (64%) and process outcomes (65%), while only 32% reported system outcomes. DISCUSSION: Research in the field of telehealth and physical therapy is growing and becoming increasingly diverse with the advancements in technology.

Flexibility exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Exercise training is commonly recommended for adults with fibromyalgia. We defined flexibility exercise training programs as those involving movements of a joint or a series of joints, through complete range of motion, thus targeting major muscle-tendon units. This review is one of a series of reviews updating the first review published in 2002. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of flexibility exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database), Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2017, unrestricted by language, and we reviewed the reference lists of retrieved trials to identify potentially relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized trials (RCTs) including adults diagnosed with fibromyalgia based on published criteria. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, trial withdrawals, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected articles for inclusion, extracted data, performed 'Risk of bias' assessments, and assessed the certainty of the body of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. All discrepancies were rechecked, and consensus was achieved by discussion. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 RCTs (743 people). Among these RCTs, flexibility exercise training was compared to an untreated control group, land-based aerobic training, resistance training, or other interventions (i.e. Tai Chi, Pilates, aquatic biodanza, friction massage, medications). Studies were at risk of selection, performance, and detection bias (due to lack of adequate randomization and allocation concealment, lack of participant or personnel blinding, and lack of blinding for self-reported outcomes). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcomes were self-reported and were expressed on a 0-to-100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs) indicate improvement). We prioritized the findings of flexibility exercise training compared to land-based aerobic training and present them fully here.Very low-certainty evidence showed that compared with land-based aerobic training, flexibility exercise training (five trials with 266 participants) provides no clinically important benefits with regard to HRQoL, pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function. Low-certainty evidence showed no difference between these groups for withdrawals at completion of the intervention (8 to 20 weeks).Mean HRQoL assessed on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) Total scale (0 to 100, higher scores indicating worse HRQoL) was 46 mm and 42 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (2 studies, 193 participants); absolute change was 4% worse (6% better to 14% worse), and relative change was 7.5% worse (10.5% better to 25.5% worse) in the flexibility group. Mean pain was 57 mm and 52 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (5 studies, 266 participants); absolute change was 5% worse (1% better to 11% worse), and relative change was 6.7% worse (2% better to 15.4% worse). Mean fatigue was 67 mm and 71 mm in the aerobic and flexibility groups, respectively (2 studies, 75 participants); absolute change was 4% better (13% better to 5% worse), and relative change was 6% better (19.4% better to 7.4% worse). Mean physical function was 23 points and 17 points in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (1 study, 60 participants); absolute change was 6% worse (4% better to 16% worse), and relative change was 14% worse (9.1% better to 37.1% worse). We found very low-certainty evidence of an effect for stiffness. Mean stiffness was 49 mm to 79 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (1 study, 15 participants); absolute change was 30% better (8% better to 51% better), and relative change was 39% better (10% better to 68% better). We found no evidence of an effect in all-cause withdrawal between the flexibility and aerobic groups (5 studies, 301 participants). Absolute change was 1% fewer withdrawals in the flexibility group (8% fewer to 21% more), and relative change in the flexibility group compared to the aerobic training intervention group was 3% fewer (39% fewer to 55% more). It is uncertain whether flexibility leads to long-term effects (36 weeks after a 12-week intervention), as the evidence was of low certainty and was derived from a single trial.Very low-certainty evidence indicates uncertainty in the risk of adverse events for flexibility exercise training. One adverse effect was described among the 132 participants allocated to flexibility training. One participant had tendinitis of the Achilles tendon (McCain 1988), but it is unclear if the tendinitis was a pre-existing condition. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: When compared with aerobic training, it is uncertain whether flexibility improves outcomes such as HRQoL, pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function, as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Flexibility exercise training may lead to little or no difference for all-cause withdrawals. It is also uncertain whether flexibility exercise training has long-term effects due to the very low certainty of the evidence. We downgraded the evidence owing to the small number of trials and participants across trials, as well as due to issues related to unclear and high risk of bias (selection, performance, and detection biases). While flexibility exercise training appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), evidence on adverse events was scarce, therefore its safety is uncertain.

Mixed exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review is one of a series of reviews about exercise training for fibromyalgia that will replace the review titled "Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome", which was first published in 2002. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of mixed exercise training protocols that include two or more types of exercise (aerobic, resistance, flexibility) for adults with fibromyalgia against control (treatment as usual, wait list control), non exercise (e.g. biofeedback), or other exercise (e.g. mixed versus flexibility) interventions.Specific comparisons involving mixed exercise versus other exercises (e.g. resistance, aquatic, aerobic, flexibility, and whole body vibration exercises) were not assessed. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Thesis and Dissertations Abstracts, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), the Physiotherapy Evidence Databese (PEDro), Current Controlled Trials (to 2013), WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2017, unrestricted by language, to identify all potentially relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia that compared mixed exercise interventions with other or no exercise interventions. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the quality of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 29 RCTs (2088 participants; 98% female; average age 51 years) that compared mixed exercise interventions (including at least two of the following: aerobic or cardiorespiratory, resistance or muscle strengthening exercise, and flexibility exercise) versus control (e.g. wait list), non-exercise (e.g. biofeedback), and other exercise interventions. Design flaws across studies led to selection, performance, detection, and selective reporting biases. We prioritised the findings of mixed exercise compared to control and present them fully here.Twenty-one trials (1253 participants) provided moderate-quality evidence for all major outcomes but stiffness (low quality). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcome measures were self-reported and expressed on a 0 to 100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs) indicate improvement; we used a clinically important difference between groups of 15% relative difference). Results for mixed exercise versus control show that mean HRQL was 56 and 49 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (13 studies; 610 participants) with absolute improvement of 7% (3% better to 11% better) and relative improvement of 12% (6% better to 18% better). Mean pain was 58.6 and 53 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (15 studies; 832 participants) with absolute improvement of 5% (1% better to 9% better) and relative improvement of 9% (3% better to 15% better). Mean fatigue was 72 and 59 points in the control and exercise groups, respectively (1 study; 493 participants) with absolute improvement of 13% (8% better to 18% better) and relative improvement of 18% (11% better to 24% better). Mean stiffness was 68 and 61 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (5 studies; 261 participants) with absolute improvement of 7% (1% better to 12% better) and relative improvement of 9% (1% better to 17% better). Mean physical function was 49 and 38 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (9 studies; 477 participants) with absolute improvement of 11% (7% better to 15% better) and relative improvement of 22% (14% better to 30% better). Pooled analysis resulted in a moderate-quality risk ratio for all-cause withdrawals with similar rates across groups (11 per 100 and 12 per 100 in the control and intervention groups, respectively) (19 studies; 1065 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.51) with an absolute change of 1% (3% fewer to 5% more) and a relative change of 11% (28% fewer to 47% more). Across all 21 studies, no injuries or other adverse events were reported; however some participants experienced increased fibromyalgia symptoms (pain, soreness, or tiredness) during or after exercise. However due to low event rates, we are uncertain of the precise risks with exercise. Mixed exercise may improve HRQL and physical function and may decrease pain and fatigue; all-cause withdrawal was similar across groups, and mixed exercises may slightly reduce stiffness. For fatigue, physical function, HRQL, and stiffness, we cannot rule in or out a clinically relevant change, as the confidence intervals include both clinically important and unimportant effects.We found very low-quality evidence on long-term effects. In eight trials, HRQL, fatigue, and physical function improvement persisted at 6 to 52 or more weeks post intervention but improvements in stiffness and pain did not persist. Withdrawals and adverse events were not measured.It is uncertain whether mixed versus other non-exercise or other exercise interventions improve HRQL and physical function or decrease symptoms because the quality of evidence was very low. The interventions were heterogeneous, and results were often based on small single studies. Adverse events with these interventions were not measured, and thus uncertainty surrounds the risk of adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to control, moderate-quality evidence indicates that mixed exercise probably improves HRQL, physical function, and fatigue, but this improvement may be small and clinically unimportant for some participants; physical function shows improvement in all participants. Withdrawal was similar across groups. Low-quality evidence suggests that mixed exercise may slightly improve stiffness. Very low-quality evidence indicates that we are 'uncertain' whether the long-term effects of mixed exercise are maintained for all outcomes; all-cause withdrawals and adverse events were not measured. Compared to other exercise or non-exercise interventions, we are uncertain about the effects of mixed exercise because we found only very low-quality evidence obtained from small, very heterogeneous trials. Although mixed exercise appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), evidence on adverse events is scarce, so we are uncertain about its safety. We downgraded the evidence from these trials due to imprecision (small trials), selection bias (e.g. allocation), blinding of participants and care providers or outcome assessors, and selective reporting.

The association between awkward working posture and low back disorders in farmers: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Low back disorders (LBD) are the most common musculoskeletal problem among farmers, with higher prevalence than other occupations. Although studies of the general population have shown an association between LBD and awkward working posture, farmers have unique work context and exposures that may modify this relationship. This review aimed to 1) identify published research studies investigating posture as a risk factor for LBD in farmers/agricultural workers, and 2) determine the strength of the relationship between postural exposure and LBD risk of bias assessment. METHOD: Comprehensive electronic searches of Medline, Web of Science, CINAHL, SCOPUS, PubMed, and EMBASE were carried out with combined conceptual groups of search terms for 'farming' and 'LBD.' After screening, data were extracted to summarize the study design, sample characteristics, exposure assessment methods, LBD risk factors, demographic information, data collection methods, farm commodities, job context, and sampling strategy. Data were synthesized to determine the weight of evidence for awkward working posture as a risk factor for LBD among farmers. RESULTS: Nine studies were included in this review. All studies used self-report; there were no field-based studies including direct measurement of awkward posture. There was diversity in exposure definition, exposure assessment, LBD definition, worker characteristics, and analytical approaches. There was evidence to support association between awkward working posture and LBD among farmers. CONCLUSION: Despite the diversity, the weight of evidence supported a relationship between awkward posture and LBD. Well-designed epidemiological studies with quantitative physical workload assessments, consistent and valid LBD definitions, and longitudinal designs are recommended to clarify the relationship between awkward posture and LBD.

Learning while doing: program evaluation of the Medical Library Association Systematic Review Project.

OBJECTIVES: The Medical Library Association (MLA) Systematic Review Project aims to conduct systematic reviews to identify the state of knowledge and research gaps for fifteen top-ranked questions in the profession. In 2013, fifteen volunteer-driven teams were recruited to conduct the systematic reviews. The authors investigated the experiences of participants in this large-scale, volunteer-driven approach to answering priority research questions and fostering professional growth among health sciences librarians. METHODS: A program evaluation was conducted by inviting MLA Systematic Review Project team members to complete an eleven-item online survey. Multiple-choice and short-answer questions elicited experiences about outputs, successes and challenges, lessons learned, and future directions. Participants were recruited by email, and responses were collected over a two-week period beginning at the end of January 2016. RESULTS: Eighty (8 team leaders, 72 team members) of 198 potential respondents completed the survey. Eighty-four percent of respondents indicated that the MLA Systematic Review Project should be repeated in the future and were interested in participating in another systematic review. Team outputs included journal articles, conference presentations or posters, and sharing via social media. Thematic analysis of the short-answer questions yielded five broad themes: learning and experience, interpersonal (networking), teamwork, outcomes, and barriers. DISCUSSION: A large-scale, volunteer-driven approach to performing systematic reviews shows promise as a model for answering key questions in the profession and demonstrates the value of experiential learning for acquiring synthesis review skills and knowledge. Our project evaluation provides recommendations to optimize this approach.

Scoping Review of Dance for Adults With Fibromyalgia: What Do We Know About It?

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia is a chronic disorder characterized by widespread muscular tenderness, pain, fatigue, and cognitive difficulties. Nonpharmacological treatment options, such as physical activity, are important for people with fibromyalgia. There are strong recommendations to support engagement in physical activity for symptom management among adults with fibromyalgia. Dance is a mode of physical activity that may allow individuals with fibromyalgia to improve their physical function, health, and well-being. Dance has the potential to promote improved pain processing while simultaneously providing the health and social benefits of engaging in physical activity that contributes to symptom management and overall function rehabilitation. However, we are unaware of current evidence on dance as a nonpharmacological/physical activity intervention for adults with fibromyalgia. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to understand how dance is used therapeutically by individuals with fibromyalgia; to examine the extent, range and nature of research activity in the area; and to determine the value of undertaking a systematic review of interventions. METHODS: We used and adapted the Arksey and O'Malley scoping framework. The search strategy involved a comprehensive search of main health and electronic social databases, trial registries and grey literature without language limits. Pairs of reviewers independently screened and extracted data and evaluated the methodological quality of randomized control trials. RESULTS: Twenty-one unique records for 13 studies met inclusion criteria; the studies included mostly middle-aged women. Types of dance included were aerobic dance, belly dance, dance movement therapy, biodanza and Zumba. Intervention parameters were different among studies. Frequency varied between one to three times a week; all were done in small group settings. Studies evaluated a variety of outcomes in the symptoms, wellness, psychosocial, physical functioning, balance and fitness categories; no studies evaluated the safety or adverse events systematically which is a major weakness of the literature. CONCLUSIONS: There are few studies in the field of dance and fibromyalgia, suggesting research is in its infancy but slowly growing. They are of European and South American origin, focusing on female participants and a limited number of dance modes. Because the body of literature is small, of low quality and highly heterogeneous, we concluded that a systematic review of interventions on dance is not warranted at this time.

Review of Factors Influencing Women's Choice of Mastectomy Versus Breast Conserving Therapy in Early Stage Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.

We have performed a narrative synthesis. A literature search was conducted between January 2000 and June 2014 in 7 databases. The initial search identified 2717 articles; 319 underwent abstract screening, 67 underwent full-text screening, and 25 final articles were included. This review looked at early stage breast cancer in women only, excluding ductal carcinoma in situ and advanced breast cancer. A conceptual framework was created to organize the central constructs underlying women's choices: clinicopathologic factors, physician factors, and individual factors with subgroups of sociodemographic, geographic, and personal beliefs and preferences. This framework guided our review's synthesis and analysis. We found that larger tumor size and increasing stage was associated with increased rates of mastectomy. The results for age varied, but suggested that old and young extremes of diagnostic age were associated with an increased likelihood of mastectomy. Higher socioeconomic status was associated with higher breast conservation therapy (BCT) rates. Resident rural location and increasing distance from radiation treatment facilities were associated with lower rates of BCT. Individual belief factors influencing women's choice of mastectomy (mastectomy being reassuring, avoiding radiation, an expedient treatment) differed from factors influencing choice of BCT (body image and femininity, physician recommendation, survival equivalence, less surgery). Surgeon factors, including female gender, higher case numbers, and individual surgeon practice, were associated with increased BCT rates. The decision-making process for women with early stage breast cancer is complicated and affected by multiple factors. Organizing these factors into central constructs of clinicopathologic, individual, and physician factors may aid health-care professionals to better understand this process.

Measurement properties of instruments assessing permanent functional impairment of the spine: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Permanent functional impairment (PFI) of the spine is a rating system used by compensation authorities, such as workers compensation boards, to establish an appropriate level of financial compensation for persistent loss of function. Determination of PFI of the spine is commonly based on the assessment of spinal movement combined with other measures of physical and functional impairments; however, the reliability and validity of the measurement instruments used for these evaluations have yet to be established. The aim of this study is to systematically review and synthesise the literature concerning measurement properties of the various and different instruments used for assessing PFI of the spine. METHODS: Three conceptual groups of terms (1) PFI, (2) spinal disorder and (3) measurement properties will be combined to search Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, PEDro, OTSeeker and Health and Safety Science Abstracts. We will examine peer-reviewed, full-text articles over the full available date range. Two reviewers will independently screen citations (title, abstract and full text) and perform data extraction. Included studies will be appraised as to their methodological quality using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments criteria. Findings will be summarised and presented descriptively, with meta-analysis pursued as appropriate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will summarise the current level of evidence of measurement properties of instruments used for assessing PFI of the spine. Findings of this review may be applicable to clinicians, policy-makers, workers' compensation boards, other insurers and health and safety organisations. The findings will likely provide a foundation and direction for future research priorities for assessing spinal PFI. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017060390.

Association Between Whole-Body Vibration and Low-Back Disorders in Farmers: A Scoping Review.

INTRODUCTION: Low-back disorders (LBDs) are the most common musculoskeletal problem among farmers, with higher prevalence rates than in other occupations. Farmers who operate tractors and other types of machinery can have substantial exposure to whole-body vibration (WBV). Although there appears to be an association between LBDs and WBV, the causal relationship is not clear. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review investigates the association between WBV and LBDs specifically among farmers. METHODS: Nine databases were searched using groups of terms for two concepts: 'farming' and 'low back disorder'. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed by two reviewers independently. Included studies met the following criteria: focused on adult farmers/agricultural workers; assessed exposure to operating farm machinery such tractor, combine, or all-terrain vehicle; assessed LBDs as an outcome; and reported an inferential test to assess the relationship between WBV and LBD. RESULTS: After 276 full texts screened, 11 articles were found to analyze WBV as a risk factor for LBDs. Three were case-control, five cross-sectional, and three retrospective cohorts. Four studies showed no association between WBV and LBDs, four a positive association, and three results were mixed depending on the exposure/outcome measure. CONCLUSION: A firm conclusion is difficult due to heterogeneity in, LBDs definition, type of farm commodity, study design, and statistical strategy. Direct comparisons and synthesis were not possible. Although retrospective cohort studies tended to show a relationship, future studies with a prospective cohort design could help clarify this association further.

Whole body vibration exercise training for fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Exercise training is commonly recommended for adults with fibromyalgia. We defined whole body vibration (WBV) exercise as use of a vertical or rotary oscillating platform as an exercise stimulus while the individual engages in sustained static positioning or dynamic movements. The individual stands on the platform, and oscillations result in vibrations transmitted to the subject through the legs. This review is one of a series of reviews that replaces the first review published in 2002. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate benefits and harms of WBV exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PEDro, Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, AMED, WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2016, unrestricted by language, to identify potentially relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with the diagnosis of fibromyalgia based on published criteria including a WBV intervention versus control or another intervention. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed risk of bias assessments, and assessed the quality of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. We used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences. MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies involving 150 middle-aged female participants from one country. Two studies had two treatment arms (71 participants) that compared WBV plus mixed exercise plus relaxation versus mixed exercise plus relaxation and placebo WBV versus control, and WBV plus mixed exercise versus mixed exercise and control; two studies had three treatment arms (79 participants) that compared WBV plus mixed exercise versus control and mixed relaxation placebo WBV. We judged the overall risk of bias as low for selection (random sequence generation), detection (objectively measured outcomes), attrition, and other biases; as unclear for selection bias (allocation concealment); and as high for performance, detection (self-report outcomes), and selective reporting biases.The WBV versus control comparison reported on three major outcomes assessed at 12 weeks post intervention based on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) (0 to 100 scale, lower score is better). Results for HRQL in the control group at end of treatment (59.13) showed a mean difference (MD) of -3.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] -10.81 to 3.35) for absolute HRQL, or improvement of 4% (11% better to 3% worse) and relative improvement of 6.7% (19.6% better to 6.1% worse). Results for withdrawals indicate that 14 per 100 and 10 per 100 in the intervention and control groups, respectively, withdrew from the intervention (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.27 to 7.67; absolute change 4%, 95% CI 16% fewer to 24% more; relative change 43% more, 95% CI 73% fewer to 667% more). The only adverse event reported was acute pain in the legs, for which one participant dropped out of the program. We judged the quality of evidence for all outcomes as very low. This study did not measure pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, or physical function. No outcomes in this comparison met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance.The WBV plus mixed exercise (aerobic, strength, flexibility, and relaxation) versus control study (N = 21) evaluated symptoms at six weeks post intervention using the FIQ. Results for HRQL at end of treatment (59.64) showed an MD of -16.02 (95% CI -31.57 to -0.47) for absolute HRQL, with improvement of 16% (0.5% to 32%) and relative change in HRQL of 24% (0.7% to 47%). Data showed a pain intensity MD of -28.22 (95% CI -43.26 to -13.18) for an absolute difference of 28% (13% to 43%) and a relative change of 39% improvement (18% to 60%); as well as a fatigue MD of -33 (95% CI -49 to -16) for an absolute difference of 33% (16% to 49%) and relative difference of 47% (95% CI 23% to 60%); and a stiffness MD of -26.27 (95% CI -42.96 to -9.58) for an absolute difference of 26% (10% to 43%) and a relative difference of 36.5% (23% to 60%). All-cause withdrawals occurred in 8 per 100 and 33 per 100 withdrawals in the intervention and control groups, respectively (two studies, N = 46; RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.12) for an absolute risk difference of 24% (3% to 51%). One participant exhibited a mild anxiety attack at the first session of WBV. No studies in this comparison reported on physical function. Several outcomes (based on the findings of one study) in this comparison met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance: HRQL, pain intensity, fatigue, and stiffness, which improved by 16%, 39%, 46%, and 36%, respectively. We found evidence of very low quality for all outcomes.The WBV plus mixed exercise versus other exercise provided very low quality evidence for all outcomes. Investigators evaluated outcomes on a 0 to 100 scale (lower score is better) for pain intensity (one study, N = 23; MD -16.36, 95% CI -29.49 to -3.23), HRQL (two studies, N = 49; MD -6.67, 95% CI -14.65 to 1.31), fatigue (one study, N = 23; MD -14.41, 95% CI -29.47 to 0.65), stiffness (one study, N = 23; MD -12.72, 95% CI -26.90 to 1.46), and all-cause withdrawal (three studies, N = 77; RR 0.72, 95% CI -0.17 to 3.11). Adverse events reported for the three studies included one anxiety attack at the first session of WBV and one dropout from the comparison group ("other exercise group") due to an injury that was not related to the program. No studies reported on physical function. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Whether WBV or WBV in addition to mixed exercise is superior to control or another intervention for women with fibromyalgia remains uncertain. The quality of evidence is very low owing to imprecision (few study participants and wide confidence intervals) and issues related to risk of bias. These trials did not measure major outcomes such as pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, and physical function. Overall, studies were few and were very small, which prevented meaningful estimates of harms and definitive conclusions about WBV safety.

Aerobic exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review is one of a series of reviews about exercise training for people with fibromyalgia that will replace the "Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome" review first published in 2002. OBJECTIVES: • To evaluate the benefits and harms of aerobic exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia• To assess the following specific comparisons ० Aerobic versus control conditions (eg, treatment as usual, wait list control, physical activity as usual) ० Aerobic versus aerobic interventions (eg, running vs brisk walking) ० Aerobic versus non-exercise interventions (eg, medications, education) We did not assess specific comparisons involving aerobic exercise versus other exercise interventions (eg, resistance exercise, aquatic exercise, flexibility exercise, mixed exercise). Other systematic reviews have examined or will examine these comparisons (Bidonde 2014; Busch 2013). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry up to June 2016, unrestricted by language, and we reviewed the reference lists of retrieved trials to identify potentially relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia that compared aerobic training interventions (dynamic physical activity that increases breathing and heart rate to submaximal levels for a prolonged period) versus no exercise or another intervention. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed a risk of bias assessment, and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. We used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences between groups. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 RCTs (839 people). Studies were at risk of selection, performance, and detection bias (owing to lack of blinding for self-reported outcomes) and had low risk of attrition and reporting bias. We prioritized the findings when aerobic exercise was compared with no exercise control and present them fully here.Eight trials (with 456 participants) provided low-quality evidence for pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function; and moderate-quality evidence for withdrawals and HRQL at completion of the intervention (6 to 24 weeks). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcome measures were self-reported and were expressed on a 0 to 100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs)/standardized mean differences (SMDs) indicate improvement). Effects for aerobic exercise versus control were as follows: HRQL: mean 56.08; five studies; N = 372; MD -7.89, 95% CI -13.23 to -2.55; absolute improvement of 8% (3% to 13%) and relative improvement of 15% (5% to 24%); pain intensity: mean 65.31; six studies; N = 351; MD -11.06, 95% CI -18.34 to -3.77; absolute improvement of 11% (95% CI 4% to 18%) and relative improvement of 18% (7% to 30%); stiffness: mean 69; one study; N = 143; MD -7.96, 95% CI -14.95 to -0.97; absolute difference in improvement of 8% (1% to 15%) and relative change in improvement of 11.4% (21.4% to 1.4%); physical function: mean 38.32; three studies; N = 246; MD -10.16, 95% CI -15.39 to -4.94; absolute change in improvement of 10% (15% to 5%) and relative change in improvement of 21.9% (33% to 11%); and fatigue: mean 68; three studies; N = 286; MD -6.48, 95% CI -14.33 to 1.38; absolute change in improvement of 6% (12% improvement to 0.3% worse) and relative change in improvement of 8% (16% improvement to 0.4% worse). Pooled analysis resulted in a risk ratio (RR) of moderate quality for withdrawals (17 per 100 and 20 per 100 in control and intervention groups, respectively; eight studies; N = 456; RR 1.25, 95%CI 0.89 to 1.77; absolute change of 5% more withdrawals with exercise (3% fewer to 12% more).Three trials provided low-quality evidence on long-term effects (24 to 208 weeks post intervention) and reported that benefits for pain and function persisted but did not for HRQL or fatigue. Withdrawals were similar, and investigators did not assess stiffness and adverse events.We are uncertain about the effects of one aerobic intervention versus another, as the evidence was of low to very low quality and was derived from single trials only, precluding meta-analyses. Similarly, we are uncertain of the effects of aerobic exercise over active controls (ie, education, three studies; stress management training, one study; medication, one study) owing to evidence of low to very low quality provided by single trials. Most studies did not measure adverse events; thus we are uncertain about the risk of adverse events associated with aerobic exercise. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: When compared with control, moderate-quality evidence indicates that aerobic exercise probably improves HRQL and all-cause withdrawal, and low-quality evidence suggests that aerobic exercise may slightly decrease pain intensity, may slightly improve physical function, and may lead to little difference in fatigue and stiffness. Three of the reported outcomes reached clinical significance (HRQL, physical function, and pain). Long-term effects of aerobic exercise may include little or no difference in pain, physical function, and all-cause withdrawal, and we are uncertain about long-term effects on remaining outcomes. We downgraded the evidence owing to the small number of included trials and participants across trials, and because of issues related to unclear and high risks of bias (performance, selection, and detection biases). Aerobic exercise appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), although evidence on adverse events is scarce, so we are uncertain about its safety.

Gaps exist in the current guidance on the use of randomized controlled trial study protocols in systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVES: The use of trial registry records and randomized controlled trial (RCT) study protocols can assist systematic reviewers in evaluating and, possibly, minimizing publication and selective reporting biases. This study examined current guidance on the use of registry records and RCT study protocols from key systematic review organizations, institutes, and collaborations. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Handbooks, guidelines, and standard documents from key systematic review organizations and the EQUATOR network database were identified. Textual excerpts providing guidance on the use of trial registry records, RCT protocols, and ongoing/unpublished studies were extracted independently by two reviewers and coded into a systematic review framework. RESULTS: Eleven documents published in English between 2009 and 2016 were included. Guidance for using RCT protocols and trial registry records was provided for 7 of 16 framework categories, and guidance for using unpublished and ongoing studies was available for 8 of 16 categories. CONCLUSION: This study identified gaps and ambiguities in language in guidance on the use of RCT protocols and trial registry records. To encourage and assist reviewers to use trial registry records and RCT study protocols in systematic reviews, current guidance should be expanded and clarified.

Receptive and expressive English language assessments used for young children: a scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: The majority of a child's language development occurs in the first 5 years of life when brain development is most rapid. There are significant long-term benefits to supporting all children's language and literacy development such as maximizing their developmental potential (i.e., cognitive, linguistic, social-emotional), when children are experiencing a critical period of development (i.e., early childhood to 9 years of age). A variety of people play a significant role in supporting children's language development, including parents, guardians, family members, educators, and/or speech-language pathologists. Speech-language pathologists and educators are the professionals who predominantly support children's language development in order for them to become effective communicators and lay the foundation for later developing literacy skills (i.e., reading and writing skills). Therefore, these professionals need formal and informal assessments that provide them information on a child's understanding and/or use of the increasingly complex aspects of language in order to identify and support the receptive and expressive language learning needs of diverse children during their early learning experiences (i.e., aged 1.5 to 9 years). However, evidence on what methods and tools are being used is lacking. METHODS: The authors will carry out a scoping review of the literature to identify studies and map the receptive and expressive English language assessment methods and tools that have been published and used since 1980. Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) six-stage approach to conducting a scoping review was drawn upon to design the protocol for this investigation: (1) identifying the research question; (2) identifying relevant studies; (3) study selection; (4) charting the data; (5) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results; and (6) consultation. DISCUSSION: This information will help these professionals identify and select appropriate assessment methods or tools that can be used to support development and/or identify areas of delay or difficulty and plan, implement, and monitor the progress of interventions supporting the development of receptive and expressive language skills in individuals with diverse language needs (e.g., typically developing children, children with language delays and disorders, children learning English as a second or additional language, Indigenous children who may be speaking dialects of English). Researchers plan to evaluate the effectiveness of the assessment methods or tools identified in the scoping review as an extension of this study.

Dance for Adults With Fibromyalgia-What Do We Know About It? Protocol for a Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia is a chronic disorder characterized by widespread muscular tenderness, pain, fatigue, and cognitive difficulties. Nonpharmacological treatment options, such as physical activity, are important for people with fibromyalgia. There are strong recommendations to support engagement in physical activity for symptom management among adults with fibromyalgia. Dance is a mode of physical activity that may allow individuals with fibromyalgia to improve their physical function, health, and well-being. Dance has the potential to promote improved pain processing while simultaneously providing the health and social benefits of engaging in physical activity that contributes to symptom management. However, we are unaware of current evidence on dance as a nonpharmacological/physical activity intervention for adults with fibromyalgia. OBJECTIVE: The aims of the study are to provide an overview of the extant evidence to understand how dance is used for individuals with fibromyalgia; to examine the extent, range, and nature of research activity in the area; and to determine the value of undertaking a full systematic review. METHODS: Scoping reviews are useful to comprehensively and systematically map the literature and identify key evidence, or research gaps. The search strategy will involve electronic databases including Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Literature in the Health Sciences in Latin America and the Caribbean (LILACS), Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), International Bibliography of Theatre and Dance, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Trip, Proquest Theses/Dissertations, Web of Science, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The study will be mapped in seven stages: (1) identifying the research questions, (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) selecting the studies, (4) charting the data, (5) collating, summarizing and reporting the results, (6) consulting, and (7) disseminating the knowledge. RESULTS: The search, title, and abstract are now completed; full text screening was carried out and authors are awaiting interlibrary loans and translations. Data extraction will start shortly after full text 'screening' is completed. Completion is expected in Fall 2017. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this will be the first attempt to systematically identify knowledge of dance as a potential intervention for adults with fibromyalgia. This scoping review offers a feasible means for describing the evidence specific to dance and fibromyalgia; results will provide unique insights concerning the breadth and depth of literature in the area. An analysis of this body of literature as a whole may reveal new research directions or unknown ways this intervention could strengthen current management approaches of the disease.

Equity in Whom Gets Studied: A Systematic Review Examining Geographical Region, Gender, Commodity, and Employment Context in Research of Low Back Disorders in Farmers.

Farmers are at high risk of having low back disorders (LBDs). Agriculture employs half the global workforce, but it is unclear whether all farming populations are represented equitably in the LBD literature. This systematic review quantifies the number and quality of research studies by geographical region, agricultural commodity, and farmer characteristics. MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus, and Embase databases were searched using conceptual groups of search terms: "farming" and "LBD." Screening and extraction were performed by two researchers in parallel, then reconciled through discussion. Extracted study characteristics included location of study; commodity produced; worker sex, ethnicity, and migration status; type of employment; and study quality. These were compared with agricultural employment statistics from the International Labour Organization and World Bank. From 125 articles, roughly half (67) did not specify the employment context of the participants in terms of migration status or subsistence versus commercial farming. Although in many regions worldwide women make up the bulk of the workforce, only a minority of low back disorder studies focus on women. Despite the predominance of the agricultural workforce in developing nations, 91% of included studies were conducted in developed nations. There was no significant difference in study quality by geographic region. The nature of the world's agricultural workforce is poorly represented by the literature when it comes to LBD research. If developing nations, female sex, and migrant work are related to increased vulnerability, then these groups need more representation to achieve equitable occupational health study.

Benchmarking participation of Canadian university health sciences librarians in systematic reviews.

This study describes the current state of Canadian university health sciences librarians' knowledge about, training needs for, and barriers to participating in systematic reviews (SRs). A convenience sample of Canadian librarians was surveyed. Over half of the librarians who had participated in SRs acknowledged participating in a traditional librarian role (e.g., search strategy developer); less than half indicated participating in any one nontraditional librarian role (e.g., data extractor). Lack of time and insufficient training were the most frequently reported barriers to participating in SRs. The findings provide a benchmark for tracking changes in Canadian university health sciences librarians' participation in SRs.