Reliability and validity of clinical tests to assess posture, pain location, and cervical spine mobility in adults with neck pain and its associated disorders: Part 4. A systematic review from the cervical assessment and diagnosis research evaluation (CADRE) collaboration.

PURPOSE: To determine the reliability and validity of clinical tests to assess posture, pain location, and cervical spine mobility in adults with grades I-IV neck pain and associated disorders (NAD). METHODS: We systematically searched electronic databases to update the systematic review of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. Eligible reliability and validity studies were critically appraised using modified versions of the QAREL and QUADAS-2 instruments, respectively. Evidence from low risk of bias studies were synthesized following best evidence synthesis principles. RESULTS: We screened 14302 articles, critically appraised 46 studies, and found 32 low risk of bias articles (14 reliability and 18 validity studies). We found preliminary evidence of: 1) reliability of visual inspection, aided with devices (CROM and digital caliper) to assess head posture; 2) reliability and validity of soft tissue palpation to locate tender/trigger points in muscles; 3) reliability and validity of joint motion palpation to assess stiffness and pain provocation in combination; and 4) range of motion tests using visual estimation (in cervical extension only) or devices (digital caliper, goniometer, inclinometer) to assess cervical mobility. CONCLUSIONS: We found little evidence to support the reliability and validity of clinical tests to assess head posture, pain location and cervical mobility in adults with NAD grades I-III. More advanced validity studies are needed to inform the clinical utility of tests used to evaluate patients with NAD.

Clinical practice guidelines for the noninvasive management of low back pain: A systematic review by the Ontario Protocol for Traffic Injury Management (OPTIMa) Collaboration.

We conducted a systematic review of guidelines on the management of low back pain (LBP) to assess their methodological quality and guide care. We synthesized guidelines on the management of LBP published from 2005 to 2014 following best evidence synthesis principles. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane, DARE, National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database, Health Technology Assessment Database, Index to Chiropractic Literature and grey literature. Independent reviewers critically appraised eligible guidelines using AGREE II criteria. We screened 2504 citations; 13 guidelines were eligible for critical appraisal, and 10 had a low risk of bias. According to high-quality guidelines: (1) all patients with acute or chronic LBP should receive education, reassurance and instruction on self-management options; (2) patients with acute LBP should be encouraged to return to activity and may benefit from paracetamol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or spinal manipulation; (3) the management of chronic LBP may include exercise, paracetamol or NSAIDs, manual therapy, acupuncture, and multimodal rehabilitation (combined physical and psychological treatment); and (4) patients with lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy may benefit from spinal manipulation. Ten guidelines were of high methodological quality, but updating and some methodological improvements are needed. Overall, most guidelines target nonspecific LBP and recommend education, staying active/exercise, manual therapy, and paracetamol or NSAIDs as first-line treatments. The recommendation to use paracetamol for acute LBP is challenged by recent evidence and needs to be revisited. SIGNIFICANCE: Most high-quality guidelines recommend education, staying active/exercise, manual therapy and paracetamol/NSAIDs as first-line treatments for LBP. Recommendation of paracetamol for acute LBP is challenged by recent evidence and needs updating.

Manipulation and mobilization in the treatment of chronic pain.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review was to determine how effective manipulation and mobilization are in the treatment of chronic pain. METHODOLOGY: The literature search identified three systematic reviews addressing the effectiveness of manipulation and mobilization for low back pain, two systematic reviews addressing chronic neck pain, three randomized controlled trials addressing post-traumatic headache and neck pain, and one systematic review and one randomized controlled trial addressing upper limb (including shoulder) disorders. RESULTS: Most studies lacked details of the specific interventions, which were often combined with other interventions, and this could have enhanced or masked effectiveness. Subject groups were heterogeneous, and investigators did not indicate effectiveness for subgroups. Systematic reviews of chronic low back pain found evidence of effectiveness compared with placebo and with usual care. Evidence from the systematic reviews for chronic neck pain and from the systematic review and randomized controlled trial for chronic soft tissue shoulder disorders was contradictory. For post-traumatic headache, the randomized controlled trials reported a time-limited positive benefit or no different effects than comparison treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Manipulation and mobilization are more effective for chronic low back pain than placebos or usual care for up to 6 months (level 2). For chronic post-traumatic headache, evidence of effectiveness of manipulation and mobilization is limited (level 3). Manipulation and mobilization may or may not be effective for either chronic neck pain or chronic soft tissue shoulder disorders (level 4b).

Exercise in the treatment of chronic pain.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review was to determine how effective exercise is in the treatment of chronic pain. METHODOLOGY: The literature search identified three systematic reviews and three randomized controlled trials addressing the effectiveness of exercise for the management of chronic low back pain, one systematic review and one randomized controlled trial addressing chronic neck pain, two systematic reviews and three randomized controlled trials addressing upper extremity pain, and three randomized controlled trials addressing fibromyalgia. RESULTS: Randomized controlled trials were better than systematic reviews for providing details of patient subgroups and of exercise programs, but there was a general lack of evaluation of the different subgroups. The studies also failed to assess the different duration and frequency of exercise programs. For chronic low back pain, a systematic review and two of the three randomized controlled trials found exercise to be effective: other findings were uncertain. For chronic neck pain, both the systematic review and the randomized controlled trial provided generally uncertain results, with only one positive-result study in the systematic review. For upper extremity, positive effects of exercise were shown for chronic lateral epicondylitis and for specific soft tissue shoulder disorders. For fibromyalgia, two of the three randomized controlled trials showed effectiveness of exercise. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise is effective for the management of chronic low back pain for up to 1 year after treatment and for fibromyalgia syndrome for up to 6 months (level 2). There is conflicting evidence (level 4b) about which exercise program is effective for chronic low back pain. For chronic neck pain and for chronic soft tissue shoulder disorders and chronic lateral epicondylitis, evidence of effectiveness of exercise is limited (level 3).

Congruence between decisions to initiate chiropractic spinal manipulation for low back pain and appropriateness criteria in North America.

BACKGROUND: Recent U.S. practice guidelines recommend spinal manipulation for some patients with low back pain. If followed, these guidelines are likely to increase the number of persons referred for chiropractic care. Concerns have been raised about the appropriate use of chiropractic care, but systematic data are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To determine the appropriateness of chiropractors' decisions to use spinal manipulation for patients with low back pain. DESIGN: Retrospective review of chiropractic office records against preset criteria for appropriateness that were developed from a systematic review of the literature and a nine-member panel of chiropractic and medical specialists. Appropriateness criteria reflect the expected balance between risk and benefit. SETTING: 131 of 185 (71%) chiropractic offices randomly sampled from sites in the United States and Canada. PATIENTS: 10 randomly selected records of patients presenting with low back pain from each office (1310 patients total). MEASUREMENTS: Sociodemographic data on patients and chiropractors; use of health care services by patients; assessment of the decision to initiate spinal manipulation as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate. RESULTS: Of the 1310 patients who sought chiropractic care for low back pain, 1088 (83%) had spinal manipulation. For 859 of these patients (79%), records contained data sufficient to determine whether care was congruent with appropriateness criteria. Care was classified as appropriate in 46% of cases, uncertain in 25% of cases, and inappropriate in 29% of cases. Patients who did not undergo spinal manipulation were less likely to have a presentation judged appropriate and were more likely to have a presentation judged inappropriate than were patients who did undergo spinal manipulation (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of chiropractic spinal manipulation judged to be congruent with appropriateness criteria is similar to proportions previously described for medical procedures; thus, the findings provide some reassurance about the appropriate application of chiropractic care. However, more than one quarter of patients were treated for indications that were judged inappropriate. The number of inappropriate decisions to use chiropractic spinal manipulation should be decreased.

Psychometric properties of the neck disability index.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if a response set bias existed, to assess the factor structure and internal consistency, and to compare Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores with visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for pain intensity. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although neck pain is a common problem, few instruments exist to assess the disability that accompanies it. The NDI is a 10 item paper-and-pencil measure of disability resulting from neck pain. STUDY DESIGN: A cross sectional study evaluating the psychometric properties of the NDI. METHODS: Seven modified versions of the original NDI were developed to assess the presence or absence of response set bias using a one-way analysis of variance. Internal consistency was measured by a Cronbach alpha, two factor analyses (exploratory and confirmatory) were conducted to examine the structure of the NDI and stepwise regression analysis was used to examine the variables most predictive of VAS scores. RESULTS: Results from 237 neck pain patients show that the responses given on the eight versions of the NDI are a function of the content and not of the format in which the items are presented. The NDI has stable psychometric characteristics, evidenced by high internal consistency (alpha = .92). In both factor analyses, one factor was extracted. CONCLUSIONS: The NDI possesses stable psychometric properties and provides an objective means of assessing the disability of patients suffering from neck pain.

A comparison of radiographic and electrogoniometric angles in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study of a consecutive group of adolescent patients presenting to a scoliosis clinic for routine assessment or monitoring of their scoliosis, excluding postsurgical patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In vitro studies suggested electrogoniometry could be useful in the evaluation of scoliosis. No prior in vitro study had been performed. OBJECTIVES: To determine the reliability and validity of an electrogoniometric instrument, the Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System, in assessing adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. METHODS: Thirty-one patients were examined, radiographed, and scanned with the Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System twice by two different examiners. The magnitudes of the curves derived from the Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System scans were compared with each other and with the Cobb angles measured from standing radiographs. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient (a measure of agreement, ranging from 0 to 1, where 1 represents complete agreement) for the intraexaminer reliability of the Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System ranged from 0.71 to 0.83. The interexaminer reliability intraclass correlation coefficient of the Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System was 0.58, with a mean difference between examiners of 5.5 degrees (SD = 5 degrees), and limits of agreement (mean difference +/-2 SD) ranging from -4.5 degrees to 15.6 degrees. The Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System and the radiographically derived Cobb angle correlation was 0.64, but the mean difference between the methods was 3.7 degrees (SD = 11.1), with limits of agreement from 18.4 degrees to 25.9 degrees. CONCLUSION: The Metrecom Skeletal Analysis System does not provide sufficient clinical precision to substitute for the Cobb angle measured from spinal radiographic measurements in the management of adolescents with scoliosis.

The short-term effect of a spinal manipulation on pain/pressure threshold in patients with chronic mechanical low back pain.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the pain/pressure threshold of selected myofascial points in subjects with chronic mechanical back pain after a single manipulation or mobilization. DESIGN: The study design was a randomized control trial. SETTING: Chiropractic College outpatient clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty subjects aged 18-50 yr (mean age 31 yr, SD = 7 yr) with chronic mechanical low back pain (mean duration of pain 74 months, SD = 83 months) were randomized into two groups. One group received a manipulation and the other received a mobilization. OUTCOME MEASURE: Pain/pressure threshold of selected myofascial points were measured before, immediately after, and 15 and 30 min postintervention. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were allocated to the manipulation group and 14 to the mobilization group. Repeated measured analysis of variance for all locations failed to show clinical or statistical significance (p > .287). The overall effect between treatments and the interaction between treatment and time was not significant (p > .268). CONCLUSION: The absence of significant changes may be attributed to the selection of myofascial points, the instrument sensitivity to small changes, the differences in baseline measures and the absence of effect from one intervention.

Scapholunate failure: a long term clinical follow-up.

Rotary subluxation of the carpal scaphoid is a rare condition that may lead to collapse of the wrist. The subluxation is the result of disruption of the scapholunate interosseous ligament, often secondary to scaphoid fracture or significant trauma. The characteristic clinical and radiographic findings are discussed. Controversy exists regarding treatment, but lack of treatment predisposes the wrist to degenerative changes. A case report is discussed which illustrates the salient features of this condition.

The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity.

Injuries to the cervical spine, especially those involving the soft tissues, represent a significant source of chronic disability. Methods of assessment for such disability, especially those targeted at activities of daily living which are most affected by neck pain, are few in number. A modification of the Oswestry Low Back Pain Index was conducted producing a 10-item scaled questionnaire entitled the Neck Disability Index (NDI). Face validity was ensured through peer-review and patient feedback sessions. Test-retest reliability was conducted on an initial sample of 17 consecutive "whiplash"-injured patients in an outpatient clinic, resulting in good statistical significance (Pearson's r = 0.89, p less than or equal to .05). The alpha coefficients were calculated from a pool of questionnaires completed by 52 such subjects resulting in a total index alpha of 0.80, with all items having individual alpha scores above 0.75. Concurrent validity was assessed in two ways. First, on a smaller subset of 10 patients who completed a course of conservative care, the percentage of change on NDI scores before and after treatment was compared to visual analogue scale scores of percent of perceived improvement in activity levels. These scores correlated at 0.60. Secondly, in a larger subset of 30 subjects, NDI scores were compared to scores on the McGill Pain Questionnaire, with similar moderately high correlations (0.69-0.70). While the sample size of some of the analyses is somewhat small, this study demonstrated that the NDI achieved a high degree of reliability and internal consistency.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The role of experience in clinical accuracy.

A randomized controlled trial was performed to study the effect of various teaching techniques on students performing sacroiliac motion palpation tests. This trial assessed the interexaminer reliability of interns in their final year at a chiropractic college, and compared their results prior to and following 1 year of clinical experience. The study also compared the intra- and interexaminer reliability of experienced clinicians. The results were analyzed via the Kappa coefficient. Kappa values for interns ranged from 0.00 to 0.30, with no significant differences noted at the end of 1 year of clinical experience. The interexaminer reliability of experienced clinicians was 0.00 to 0.167, whereas their intraexaminer reliability ranged from 0.15 to 1.00. These results question the role of experience in improving clinical accuracy between examiners performing sacroiliac motion palpation. Results analyzed for intraexaminer agreement were moderate to almost perfect. We conclude that experience does not play a significant role in the diagnostic test analyzed, but rather that clinicians may establish their own criteria by which to determine the standards of a given test.

Prevalence of back pain in chiropractors.

An epidemiological survey was made of the prevalence of back pain in a sample of 320 Canadian chiropractors. In addition, demographic, postural and other variables were studied to determine their effect on back pain. The overall prevalence of back pain was 87%. Low back pain was claimed by 74% of responding chiropractors. It was found that male chiropractors complained most frequently of lumbar pain, while among female respondents thoracic pain was most common. No apparent correlation was found between back pain and operating postures or table heights. Yet, 82% of the chiropractors that believed their back pain was aggravated by practice made these kinds of changes to avoid pain.