Assessing the performance of AI chatbots in answering patients' common questions about low back pain.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy and readability of the answers generated by large language model (LLM)-chatbots to common patient questions about low back pain (LBP). METHODS: This cross-sectional study analysed responses to 30 LBP-related questions, covering self-management, risk factors and treatment. The questions were developed by experienced clinicians and researchers and were piloted with a group of consumer representatives with lived experience of LBP. The inquiries were inputted in prompt form into ChatGPT 3.5, Bing, Bard (Gemini) and ChatGPT 4.0. Responses were evaluated in relation to their accuracy, readability and presence of disclaimers about health advice. The accuracy was assessed by comparing the recommendations generated with the main guidelines for LBP. The responses were analysed by two independent reviewers and classified as accurate, inaccurate or unclear. Readability was measured with the Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES). RESULTS: Out of 120 responses yielding 1069 recommendations, 55.8% were accurate, 42.1% inaccurate and 1.9% unclear. Treatment and self-management domains showed the highest accuracy while risk factors had the most inaccuracies. Overall, LLM-chatbots provided answers that were 'reasonably difficult' to read, with a mean (SD) FRES score of 50.94 (3.06). Disclaimer about health advice was present around 70%-100% of the responses produced. CONCLUSIONS: The use of LLM-chatbots as tools for patient education and counselling in LBP shows promising but variable results. These chatbots generally provide moderately accurate recommendations. However, the accuracy may vary depending on the topic of each question. The reliability level of the answers was inadequate, potentially affecting the patient's ability to comprehend the information.

Clinical indicators to monitor health care in low back pain: a scoping review.

Clinical care indicators for low back pain can be used to monitor healthcare practices and consequently be used to evaluate success of strategies to improve care quality. The aim of this study was to identify the clinical care indicators that have been used to measure appropriateness of health care for patients with low back pain. We conducted a systematic search of five electronic databases and Google to identify clinical care indicators that have been used to measure any aspect of care for people with low back pain. Care indicators were narratively described according to their type (i.e. structure, process, or outcomes) and categorized by their purpose (e.g. to measure aspects related to assessment, imaging requests, treatment/prevention, and outcomes). A total of 3562 and 2180 records were retrieved from electronic databases and Google searches, respectively. We identified 280 indicators related to low back pain care from 40 documents and publications. Most quality indicators were process indicators (n = 213, 76%), followed by structure (n = 41, 15%) and outcome indicators (n = 26, 9%). The most common indicators were related to imaging requests (n = 41, 15%), referral to healthcare providers (n = 30, 11%), and shared decision-making (n = 21, 7%). Our review identified a range of clinical care indicators that have been used to measure the quality of health care for people with low back pain. Our findings will support a Delphi study to reach international consensus on what would be the most important and feasible indicators for a minimum dataset to be collected globally.

Clinical care standards for the management of low back pain: a scoping review.

The objective of this study is to compare and contrast the quality statements and quality indicators across clinical care standards for low back pain. Searches were performed in Medline, guideline databases, and Google searches to identify clinical care standards for the management of low back pain targeting a multidisciplinary audience. Two independent reviewers reviewed the search results and extracted relevant information from the clinical care standards. We compared the quality statements and indicators of the clinical care standards to identify the consistent messages and the discrepancies between them. Three national clinical care standards from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom were included. They provided from 6 to 8 quality statements and from 12 to 18 quality indicators. The three standards provide consistent recommendations in the quality statements related to imaging, and patient education/advice and self-management. In addition, the Canadian and Australian standards also provide consistent recommendations regarding comprehensive assessment, psychological support, and review and patient referral. However, the three clinical care standards differ in the statements related to psychological assessment, opioid analgesics, non-opioid analgesics, and non-pharmacological therapies. The three national clinical care standards provide consistent recommendations on imaging and patient education/advice, self-management of the condition, and two standards (Canadian and Australian) agree on recommendations regarding comprehensive assessment, psychological support, and review and patient referral. The standards differ in the quality statements related to psychological assessment, opioid prescription, non-opioid analgesics, and non-pharmacological therapies.

Compared to what? An analysis of comparators in trials informing the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) low back pain guideline.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability globally. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been developed in hopes of encouraging evidence-based care for LBP. However, poor quality of trials that underpin CPGs can lead to misleading recommendations for LBP. OBJECTIVES: To categorize the comparator used in trials included in the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) LBP CPG and describe the proportion and association of suboptimal comparators with NICE recommendation. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis to describe the proportion of trials included in the NICE LBP CPG that used a suboptimal comparator. If comparators used an ineffective treatment, a treatment of unknown effectiveness, or no or minimal treatment then they were considered suboptimal. RESULTS: We included 408 trials and analyzed 580 comparators used in the trials. 30.9% of the comparators used in the trials were suboptimal. Trials testing invasive treatments (32.4%) had the highest proportion of suboptimal comparators followed by non-surgical (32.3%) and pharmacological (19.0%) treatments. Trials using suboptimal treatments were less likely to have their treatment recommended (odds ratio: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.47, 0.98) for use by NICE. CONCLUSION: There is a concerning proportion of suboptimal comparators used in LBP trials that may be misleading CPG recommendations, funding allocation decisions, and ultimately clinical practice. Efforts to increase the use of optimal comparators in LBP trials are urgently needed to better understand what treatments should be recommended.

1,4-Diaryl-1,2,3-triazole neolignan-celecoxib hybrids inhibit experimental arthritis induced by zymosan.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease that causes cartilage damage. Anti-inflammatories are widely used in the management of RA, but they can have side effects such as gastrointestinal and/or cardiovascular disorders. Studies published by our group showed that the synthesis of hybrid triazole analogs neolignan-celecoxib containing the substituent groups sulfonamide (L15) or carboxylic acid (L18) exhibited anti-inflammatory activity in an acute model of inflammation, inhibited expression of P-selectin related to platelet activation and did not induce gastric ulcer, minimizing the related side effects. In continuation, the present study evaluated the anti-inflammatory effects of these analogs in an experimental model of arthritis and on the functions of one of the important cells in this process, macrophages. Mechanical hyperalgesia, joint edema, leukocyte recruitment to the joint and damage to cartilage in experimental arthritis and cytotoxicity, spread of disease, phagocytic activity and nitric oxide (NO) and hydrogen peroxide production by macrophages were evaluated. Pre-treatment with L15 and L18 reduced mechanical hyperalgesia, joint edema and the influx of leukocytes into the joint cavity after different periods of the stimulus. The histological evaluation of the joint showed that L15 and L18 reduced cartilage damage and there was no formation of rheumatoid pannus. Furthermore, L15 and L18 were non-cytotoxic. The analogs inhibited the spreading, the production of NO and hydrogen peroxide. L15 decreased the phagocytosis. Therefore, L15 and L18 may be potential therapeutic prototypes to treat chronic inflammatory diseases such as RA.

Can language enhance physical therapists' willingness to follow Choosing Wisely recommendations? A best-worst scaling study.

BACKGROUND: Choosing Wisely recommendations could reduce physical therapists' use of low-value care. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether language influences physical therapists' willingness to follow the Australian Physiotherapy Association's (APA) Choosing Wisely recommendations. DESIGN: Best-worst Scaling survey METHODS: The six original APA Choosing Wisely recommendations were modified based on four language characteristics (level of detail, strength- qualified/unqualified, framing, and alternatives to low-value care) to create 60 recommendations. Physical therapists were randomised to a block of seven choice tasks, which included four recommendations. Participants indicated which recommendation they were most and least willing to follow. A multinomial logistic regression model was used to create normalised (0=least preferred; 10=most preferred) and marginal preference scores. RESULTS: 215 physical therapists (48.5% of 443 who started the survey) completed the survey. Participants' mean age (SD) was 38.7 (10.6) and 47.9% were female. Physical therapists were more willing to follow recommendations with more detail (marginal preference score of 1.1) or that provided alternatives to low-value care (1.3) and less willing to follow recommendations with negative framing (-1.3). The use of qualified ('don't routinely') language (vs. unqualified - 'don't') did not affect willingness. Physical therapists were more willing to follow recommendations to avoid imaging for non-specific low back pain (3.9) and electrotherapy for low back pain (3.8) vs. recommendation to avoid incentive spirometry after upper abdominal and cardiac surgery. CONCLUSION: Physical therapists were more willing to follow recommendations that provided more detail, alternatives to low-value care, and were positively framed. These findings can inform the development of future Choosing Wisely recommendations and could help reduce low-value physical therapy.

Patients Who Present with Functional Limitations, Limited Range of Motion and Reduced Muscle Strength 6 Months after Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Objective To evaluate levels of pain, range of motion, hip isometric peak torque, and functional task performance in patients 6 months after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and to compare them to asymptomatic control participants (CG). Methods We recruited participants with unilateral THA due to hip osteoarthritis (OA) within a median of 6 months who had not developed postoperative complications. We assessed the pain levels, hip range of motion, peak isometric torque, self-reported assessment (Harris Hip Score) and objectively measured function (Timed Up & Go Test [TUG]) of the patients. The THA group was compared with a group of asymptomatic participants ≥50 years old recruited in the community. Comparisons are presented as mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results A total of 23 participants were included in each group. Pain levels were low in the THA group (1.48 [1.60]), and 91.3% of the patients reported to be satisfied with the surgical procedure. Participants in the THA group reported significantly lower objectively measured (THA 12.2 [10.0-21.6]; CG 9.0 [6.7-12.2]) and self-reported function (THA 78.5 [43.8-93.9]; CG 100.0 [95.8-100.0]) compared with CG. The THA group also had significantly reduced range of motion for flexion ( p < 0.001), internal ( p < 0.001) and external rotation ( p = 0.003) movements and reduced peak torque for flexion ( p < 0.001), extension ( p < 0.001), abduction ( p < 0.001) and adduction ( p = 0.024) movements compared with participants of the CG. Conclusions Despite reporting overall low pain scores and satisfaction with the surgery, the patients present with functional limitations, limited range of motion, and reduced muscle strength 6 months after THA. Evidence Level 3b.

Patients Who Present with Functional Limitations, Limited Range of Motion and Reduced Muscle Strength 6 Months after Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Cross-Sectional Study / Pacientes que apresentam limitações funcionais, amplitude de movimento limitada e força muscular reduzida, 6 meses após a artroplastia total do quadril: Um estudo de corte transversal

Abstract Objective To evaluate levels of pain, range of motion, hip isometric peak torque, and functional task performance in patients 6 months after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and to compare them to asymptomatic control participants (CG). Methods We recruited participants with unilateral THA due to hip osteoarthritis (OA) within a median of 6 months who had not developed postoperative complications. We assessed the pain levels, hip range of motion, peak isometric torque, self-reported assessment (Harris Hip Score) and objectively measured function (Timed Up & Go Test [TUG]) of the patients. The THA group was compared with a group of asymptomatic participants ≥50 years old recruited in the community. Comparisons are presented as mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results A total of 23 participants were included in each group. Pain levels were low in the THA group (1.48 [1.60]), and 91.3% of the patients reported to be satisfied with the surgical procedure. Participants in the THA group reported significantly lower objectively measured (THA 12.2 [10.0-21.6]; CG 9.0 [6.7-12.2]) and self-reported function (THA 78.5 [43.8-93.9]; CG 100.0 [95.8-100.0]) compared with CG. The THA group also had significantly reduced range of motion for flexion (p< 0.001), internal (p< 0.001) and external rotation (p= 0.003) movements and reduced peak torque for flexion (p< 0.001), extension (p< 0.001), abduction (p< 0.001) and adduction (p= 0.024) movements compared with participants of the CG. Conclusions Despite reporting overall low pain scores and satisfaction with the surgery, the patients present with functional limitations, limited range of motion, and reduced muscle strength 6 months after THA. Evidence Level 3b

Resumo Objetivo Avaliar os níveis de intensidade da dor, amplitude de movimento, pico de torque isométrico do quadril e desempenho da tarefa funcional em pacientes 6 meses após a artroplastia total do quadril (ATQ), e comparar estes valores com os de participantes assintomáticos do grupo controle (GC). Métodos Recrutamos participantes com ATQ unilateral devida a osteoartrite (OA) do quadril, dentro de uma mediana de tempo de 6 meses, que não tinham desenvolvido complicações pós-operatórias. Os participantes foram avaliados quanto à intensidade da dor, à amplitude de movimento do quadril, ao pico de torque isométrico, à autoavaliação (questionário de avaliação do quadril Harris Hip Score [HHS, na sigla em inglês) e à função medida objetivamente por meio do teste Timed Up and Go (TUG, na sigla em inglês). O grupo ATQ foi comparado com um grupo de participantes assintomáticos com idade ≥ 50 anos recrutados na comunidade. As comparações são apresentadas como diferenças médias (DMs) e intervalos de confiança (ICs) de 95%. Resultados Cada grupo contou com 23 participantes. A intensidade da dor foi baixa no grupo ATQ (1,48 [1,60]), sendo que 91,3% dos pacientes relataram estar satisfeitos com o procedimento cirúrgico. Os participantes do grupo ATQ relataram uma função medida objetivamente significativamente menor (ATQ 12,2 [10,0-21,6]; GC 9,0 [6,7-12,2]) e a função autoavaliação (ATQ 78,5 [43,8-93,9]; GC 100,0 [95,8-100,0]), em comparação com o GC. O grupo ATQ também teve reduzida de forma significativa a amplitude de movimento para flexão (p< 0,001), os movimentos internos (p< 0,001) e de rotação externa (p= 0,003). O grupo ATQ também apresentou pico de torque reduzido para flexão (p< 0,001), extensão (p <0,001), movimentos de abdução (p< 0,001) e adução (p = 0,024) em comparação com os participantes do GC. Conclusões Apesar de informarem escores gerais de dor de baixa intensidade e satisfação com a cirurgia, os pacientes apresentaram limitações funcionais, amplitude de movimento limitada e redução da força muscular após 6 meses do procedimento cirúrgico de ATQ. Nível de Evidência3B.

A content analysis of online information about the benefits and harms of spine surgery.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether online information about the benefits and harms of surgery contains an accurate description of evidence. OBJECTIVE: To describe the proportion of webpages containing information about surgery for spinal pain (decompression and fusion) that accurately described the evidence on the benefits of surgery, described harms, and provided quantitative estimates of these harms. METHODS: We performed a content analysis of webpages containing information about spine surgery. Two reviewers identified webpages and extracted data. Primary outcomes were the proportion of webpages that accurately described the evidence on the benefits, described harms, and provided quantitative estimates of these harms. RESULTS: We included 117 webpages. Only 29 (25%) webpages accurately described the evidence on the benefits of spine surgery, and more webpages on decompression accurately described the evidence compared to webpages on fusion (31% vs 15%, difference in proportions = 16%; 95% CI: 2%, 31%). Harms of surgery were described in most webpages (n = 76, 65%), but a much smaller proportion of webpages (n = 18, 15%) provided a quantitative estimate for the mentioned harms. CONCLUSIONS: Most webpages failed to accurately describe the benefits and harms of decompression and fusion surgeries for spinal pain. Unbiased consumer resources and educating the public on how to critically evaluate health claims are important steps to improve knowledge on the benefits and harms of spine surgery.

Meditation for adults with non-specific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We aim to determine the effectiveness of meditation for adults with non-specific low back pain. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, PEDro, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO databases for randomized controlled trials that investigated the effectiveness of meditation in adults with non-specific low back pain. Two reviewers rated risk of bias using the PEDro scale and the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. RESULTS: We included eight trials with a total of 1,234 participants. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that meditation is better than usual care for disability at short-term (SMD = -0.22; 95% CI = -0.42 to -0.02). We also found that meditation is better than usual care for pain intensity at long-term (SMD = -0.28; 95% CI = -0.54 to -0.02). There is no significant difference for pain intensity between meditation and minimal intervention or usual care at short and intermediate-term. We did not find differences between meditation and minimal intervention for disability at intermediate-term or usual care in any follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: We found small effect sizes and moderate-certainty evidence that meditation is slightly better than minimal intervention in the short-term for disability. Low-certainty of evidence suggests that meditation is slightly better than usual care for pain in the long-term. Meditation appears to be safe with most trials reporting no serious adverse events.

A look into the challenges and complexities of managing low back pain in Mexico.

Low back pain is a global health problem. In Mexico it is one of the most common musculoskeletal conditions as well as the leading cause of disability. This review provides an overview of the challenges and complexities of managing low back pain in Mexico. It begins with an explanation of the Mexican healthcare system and an overview of the burden of low back pain. Usual care for low back pain in Mexico is then contrasted with recommended best practice care to highlight common evidence-practice gaps and drivers of poor care. Finally, solutions are proposed based on positive experiences from other countries. Delving into the Mexican health framework and the burden of low back pain will provide a better understanding of why it is important to pay attention to this musculoskeletal disorder. Potential steps required to reduce the burden are also outlined to benefit not only the people suffering from low back pain but also the Mexican economy and society.

TOPS - a randomized controlled trial of exercise and education to prevent recurrence of low back pain: statistical analysis plan.

BACKGROUND: This a priori statistical analysis plan describes the methods of analysis for the Trial Of Prevention Strategies for low back pain (TOPS). OBJECTIVES: TOPS aimed to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of exercise and education classes compared with a minimal intervention control in preventing recurrence of low back pain (LBP) in people who have recently recovered from an episode of LBP. METHODS: TOPS is a superiority, pragmatic, parallel-group randomized controlled trial with allocation concealment, blinded outcome assessors, and intention-to-treat analysis. Participants were randomized to a physical therapist-led exercise and education program for 12 weeks or minimal intervention. The primary outcome was days to recurrence of an episode of LBP. The three key secondary outcomes were days to recurrence of an episode of LBP resulting in (1) activity limitation, (2) care seeking for LBP; and (3) work absence of at least 1 day. Differences in survival curves for the primary (days to recurrence) and secondary outcome (days to LBP with activity limitation, days to care seeking due to LBP, and days to work absence due to LBP) will be compared using Cox regression. Hazard ratios (HRs) and median survival times with 95% confidence intervals (CI) will be calculated. The number of adverse events, including serious adverse events will be reported and the proportion of adverse events between groups will be compared using a Chi-squared test. DISCUSSION: This paper will provide a detailed description of the planned analyses for the TOPS trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615000939594).

Has physical therapists' management of musculoskeletal conditions improved over time?

BACKGROUND: Our 2019 systematic review found that up to 63% of physical therapists provided recommended care for musculoskeletal conditions, up to 43% provided non-recommended care, and up to 81% provided care of unknown value. We included studies published as early as 1993 and as recent as 2017. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether physical therapists' treatment choices for musculoskeletal conditions have improved over time. METHODS: For the original review, we included studies (until April 2018) that quantified physical therapy treatment choices for musculoskeletal conditions through surveys of physical therapists, audits of clinical notes, and other methods (e.g. clinical observation). Using medians and interquartile ranges, we summarised the percentage of physical therapists who provided treatments that were recommended, not recommended, and of unknown value. For this analysis, we stratified the findings from the above systematic review by decade (1990-1999, 2000-2009, 2010-2018). RESULTS: The median percentage of physical therapists who provided recommended treatments (40% from 1990 to 1999, 50% from 2000 to 2009, and 35% from 2010 to 2018) and non-recommended treatments (41%, 28%, and 39% respectively) has not changed over time. However, more physical therapists seem to be providing treatments of unknown value (41% from 1990 to 1999, 55% from 2000 to 2009, and 70% from 2010 to 2018). CONCLUSION: Possible explanations for this trend include the growing need for clinical innovation, challenge of keeping up to date with evidence, increased exposure to treatments of unknown value, belief that evidence is not relevant to practice, and possible limitations of the data. Strategies to help physical therapists replace non-recommended care with recommended care are discussed.

Short-Term Effects of Different Rates of Thoracic Mobilization on Pressure Pain Thresholds in Asymptomatic Individuals: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to determine the effects of different rates of thoracic spine passive accessory intervertebral mobilization (PAIVM) on pressure pain threshold (PPT) at T4. The secondary aim was to investigate the widespread effects of different rates of thoracic PAIVM. METHODS: Twenty asymptomatic participants were randomly assigned to 3 experimental conditions: posteroanterior rotatory thoracic PAIVM at 2 Hz, 0.5 Hz, and placebo. Each participant received all 3 experimental conditions in a random order with a washout period of at least 48 hours between each procedure. The PPT was measured in 3 different points: pre-treatment, immediately after, and 15 minutes after the treatment at C7 and T4 spinous process, first interossei dorsal on the right and left hands and tibial tuberosity bilaterally. A repeated-measures analysis of covariance adjusted by baseline values was used to assess between-group differences at each point. Pairwise comparisons were adjusted for multiple tests with a Bonferroni correction. A P value < .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: There was no between-group differences on PPT at T4 when comparing 0.5 Hz (mean difference -0.29; 95% CI -0.99 to 0.42; P = .999) or 2 Hz (mean difference -0.37; 95% CI -1.1 to 0.33; P = .528) to placebo. CONCLUSION: None of the mobilization techniques in this study (0.5 Hz, 2 Hz, and placebo) showed a significant change of PPT both locally and at distant sites at any point in asymptomatic participants.

Tackling low back pain in Brazil: a wake-up call.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain is the leading cause of years lived with disability in Brazil based upon Global Burden of Disease estimates. Since 1990, the number of years lived with disability has increased by 79.7%, and this number is expected to continue to rise due to population growth and ageing. Yet, similarly to other countries, little attention has been given to it in both the public and private health systems, arguably making it an overlooked epidemic in Brazil. There is evidence that Brazil has adopted unwarranted practices in the management of low back pain in a similar manner to what has been observed in high-income countries. To tackle the burden of low back pain in Brazil, we need highly coordinated efforts from government, the private sector, universities, health workers and civil society. OBJECTIVE: This masterclass intends to provide an overview of the challenges faced by Brazil in relation to low back pain management and propose potential solutions that could potentially be implemented based on experiences reported in the literature.

Measurement properties of the craniocervical flexion test: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Neck pain is the leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide and it accounts for high economic and societal burden. Altered activation of the neck muscles is a common musculoskeletal impairment presented by patients with neck pain. The craniocervical flexion test with pressure biofeedback unit has been widely used in clinical practice to assess function of deep neck flexor muscles. This systematic review will assess the measurement properties of the craniocervical flexion test for assessing deep cervical flexor muscles. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a protocol for a systematic review that will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, PEDro, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus and Science Direct will be systematically searched from inception. Studies of any design that have investigated and reported at least one measurement property of the craniocervical flexion test for assessing the deep cervical flexor muscles will be included. All measurement properties will be considered as outcomes. Two reviewers will independently rate the risk of bias of individual studies using the updated COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments risk of bias checklist. A structured narrative synthesis will be used for data analysis. Quantitative findings for each measurement property will be summarised. The overall rating for a measurement property will be classified as 'positive', 'indeterminate' or 'negative'. The overall rating will be accompanied with a level of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval and patient consent are not required since this is a systematic review based on published studies. Findings will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017062175.

Neurodynamic treatment for patients with nerve-related leg pain: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate if neurodynamic treatment is more effective than advice to remain active in patients with nerve-related leg pain. DESIGN: Parallel-group randomized controlled trial blinded to the outcome assessor conducted in Porto Alegre, Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty patients recruited from the community and private practices. INTERVENTION: Patients will be randomly assigned to receive four sessions of neurodynamic treatment over two weeks comprising passive lumbar foramen opening and neurodynamic sliders plus home exercises or advice to remain active. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Leg pain intensity, disability, low back pain intensity, functional ability, symptoms distribution and global impression of recovery will be assessed at two and four weeks after randomization. ANALYSIS: A linear mixed model will be employed for each outcome following intention to treat principles.

Neurodynamic treatment did not improve pain and disability at two weeks in patients with chronic nerve-related leg pain: a randomised trial.

QUESTION: In people with nerve-related leg pain, does adding neurodynamic treatment to advice to remain active improve leg pain, disability, low back pain, function, global perceived effect and location of symptoms? DESIGN: Randomised trial with concealed allocation and intention-to-treat analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty participants with nerve-related leg pain recruited from the community. INTERVENTIONS: The experimental group received four sessions of neurodynamic treatment. Both groups received advice to remain active. OUTCOME MEASURES: Leg pain and low back pain (0, none, to 10, worst), Oswestry Disability Index (0, none, to 100, worst), Patient-Specific Functional Scale (0, unable to perform, to 30, able to perform), global perceived effect (-5 to 5) and location of symptoms were measured at 2 and 4 weeks after randomisation. Continuous outcomes were analysed by linear mixed models. Location of symptoms was assessed by relative risk (95% CI). RESULTS: At 2 weeks, the experimental group did not have significantly greater improvement than the control group in leg pain (MD -1.1, 95% CI -2.3 to 0.1) or disability (MD -3.3, 95% CI -9.6 to 2.9). At 4 weeks, the experimental group experienced a significantly greater reduction in leg pain (MD -2.4, 95% CI -3.6 to -1.2) and low back pain (MD -1.5, 95% CI -2.8 to -0.2). The experimental group also improved significantly more in function at 2 weeks (MD 5.2, 95% CI 2.2 to 8.2) and 4 weeks (MD 4.7, 95% CI 1.7 to 7.8), as well as global perceived effect at 2 weeks (MD 2.5, 95% CI 1.6 to 3.5) and 4 weeks (MD 2.9, 95% CI 1.9 to 3.9). No significant between-group differences occurred in disability at 4 weeks and location of symptoms. CONCLUSION: Adding neurodynamic treatment to advice to remain active did not improve leg pain and disability at 2 weeks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01954199. [Ferreira G, Stieven F, Araujo F, Wiebusch M, Rosa C, Plentz R, et al. (2016) Neurodynamic treatment did not improve pain and disability at two weeks in patients with chronic nerve-related leg pain: a randomised trial.Journal of Physiotherapy62: 197-202].