PRISM-Pain Recovery and Integrative Systems Model: A Process-Based Cognitive-Behavioral Approach for Physical Therapy.

The Academy of Orthopedic Physical Therapy Pain Education Manual supports the advancement of modern pain content, and the National Institutes of Health Federal Pain Research Strategy has called for new models for pain management. This Perspective proposes the Pain Recovery and Integrative Systems Model (PRISM) as a new model that addresses the multidimensional nature of pain. PRISM is a salutogenic, integrative, process-based cognitive-behavioral model designed for physical therapist education and practice. PRISM aligns with national and international initiatives to better understand and manage pain, thereby mitigating the global opioid crisis. PRISM aims to address the multidimensional nature of pain while building resilience, nurturing growth, and facilitating pain recovery. IMPACT: PRISM is a salutogenic, integrative, process-based cognitive-behavioral model to guide physical therapists in managing the multidimensional nature of pain.

Efficacy of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization in comparison to gastrocnemius-soleus stretching for dorsiflexion range of motion: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of IASTM of the gastrocnemius-soleus complex in comparison to a traditional stretching intervention on dorsiflexion ROM. METHODS: Sixty healthy participants were randomly allocated to one of 3 groups: IASTM (n = 20), stretching (n = 20), or control group (n = 20). The dependent variables for this study was dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM) via three measurement methods which included Modified root position 1- knee extended (MRP1), Modified root position 2- knee flexed (MRP2), and weight bearing lunge test (WBLT). A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was utilized to analyze the ROM differences between the groups (IASTM, stretching, and control groups), with a post-hoc Tukey and pairwise least significant difference tests to assess individual pairwise differences between the groups. RESULTS: The MANOVA found significant ROM differences between the three intervention groups (F6,110 = 2.40, p = .032). Statistically significant differences were identified between both the IASTM and control as well as the stretching and control group through the WBLT and MRP2 assessments, but not in the MRP1 assessment. Further, there was no statistically significant difference between the IASTM and stretching groups using any of the three methods. CONCLUSION: A single session of IASTM or stretching increased ankle dorsiflexion ROM in WBLT and MRP2. No significant difference was noted in the MRP1. Both IASTM and stretching appear to have a greater effect on soleus muscle flexibility as evidenced by ROM gains measured with the knee in a flexed position. No clinically significant difference was identified between the intervention groups in weight-bearing conditions; thus empowering patients with the use of self-stretching would seemingly be reasonable and efficient. Combined effects of stretching and IASTM warrant further investigation for increasing dorsiflexion range of motion as a summative effect is unknown.

The Influence of an Active Treatment Approach in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review.

Introduction. Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common medical conditions in the United States. Clinical practice guidelines recommend active treatment approaches; however, there continues to be a significant disparity in how patients with LBP are treated. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the reported efficacy of active treatment approaches as recommended by clinical practice guidelines on LBP treatment on patient outcomes. Methods. Between the months of June and August 2015, a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Medline (EBSCO Host), and CINAHL (EBSCO Host) databases was performed. The search was restricted to articles that were published in a peer-reviewed journal, published in the English language, examined patient outcomes with a determined scale, determined the usage of an established clinical practice guideline for LBP treatment, reported at least one outcome measure, and specified either nonspecific or acute LBP. Results. Fifty-three articles were initially identified, with 4 articles ultimately meeting the criteria after screening. Articles scored between 17 and 20 points based on a maximum total score of 26 on the modified Downs and Black checklist. Conclusion. Studies identified in this review indicate that adherence to an active treatment approach as recommended by clinical practice guidelines may result in improved patient outcomes.

The Short-Term Effect of Kettlebell Swings on Lumbopelvic Pressure Pain Thresholds: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Keilman, BM, Hanney, WJ, Kolber, MJ, Pabian, PS, Salamh, PA, Rothschild, CE, and Liu, X. The short-term effect of kettlebell swings on lumbopelvic pressure pain thresholds: a randomized controlled trial. J Strength Cond Res 31(11): 3001-3009, 2017-The purpose of this study was to investigate the short-term effect of kettlebell swings (KBSs) on lumbopelvic pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in healthy adults. Sixty participants (male = 23, female = 37, mean age = 25.12 ± 2.86 years, height = 170.73 ± 9.2 cm, mass = 70.49 ± 13.32 kg) were randomized into one of 2 groups. The experimental group performed a warm-up followed by 8 consecutive 20-second rounds of KBS with 10-second rest periods. The control group performed the warm-up alone. An evaluator blinded to group assignment, assessed PPTs immediately before and after the intervention using a handheld pressure algometer. The algometer was applied to the regions of the right paravertebral (PVM), quadratus lumborum (QL), and piriformis (PF) muscles perpendicular to the skin based on standardized palpation procedures. The participants were instructed to report when sensation changed from "comfortable pressure" to "slightly unpleasant pain." No significant group differences existed at baseline for PPTs (PVM p = 0.068; QL p = 0.134, & PF p = 0.105). Significant group by time interactions existed for each site after the interventions (PVM, p = 0.018; QL, p = 0.004; PF, p = 0.026) favoring the KBS group. Results suggest that KBSs create a reduction in muscle sensitivity to noxious pressure based on pressure algometry measurements. These findings may be due to the unique cyclic muscle contraction associated with KBSs, which has been proposed to facilitate removal of muscle metabolites. The findings of this study provide a foundation for future studies to examine the use of this type of training in patients with low back pain of a muscular etiology or postexercise muscle soreness. Furthermore, future studies should evaluate specific mechanisms for these effects.

The effects of a standardized belly dance program on perceived pain, disability, and function in women with chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: An alternative approach to facilitate movement and control through the trunk and pelvis is belly dancing. Investigations of belly dancing mechanics indicate similar muscular activation patterns of those known to influence chronic low back pain (cLBP). However, no documented studies have examined its effectiveness as a treatment for cLBP. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of a standardized belly dance program in women with cLBP. METHODS: A single subject design was used to evaluate weekly outcomes during a three-week baseline period, six-week belly dance program, and again at a two-month follow-up. Outcome measures for pain, disability, function, and fear-avoidance beliefs were utilized. RESULTS: Two subjects completed the program. No significant differences were noted during the baseline assessment period. At two months, subject one demonstrated change scores of -1.12, -1%, and 2.2 for pain, disability, and function respectively while subject two demonstrated change scores of 5.4, 5%, and 1.1 for pain, disability, and function, respectively. Subject one showed a clinically significant change score for both fear avoidance of work and physical activity, with score changes of 4 and 3.3, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest a standardized belly dance program may positively influence pain and function in women with cLBP.

The Influence of Exercise on Perceived Pain and Disability in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is an increasingly prevalent condition that has major health and economic implications. While there are many options for the treatment of LSS, exercise is widely considered a first-line intervention as it is associated with reduced complications and cost as compared to more invasive options. Currently, it is not clear if exercise is an effective approach to managing pain and perceived disability in patients with symptomatic LSS. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the published literature that has investigated exercise as a primary intervention for LSS. A search was conducted in electronic databases including PubMed, PEDro, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, and AMED using the key words lumbar spinal stenosis, exercise, physical therapy, rehabilitation, and conservative treatment. Inclusion criteria consisted of published randomized controlled trials written in English that included exercise as the primary treatment in at least one of the groups, and had reported measures of pain and disability clearly stated. The search identified 310 studies of which 5 met all the inclusion parameters. Exercise appears to be an efficacious intervention for pain, disability, analgesic intake, depression, anger, and mood disturbance among patients with LSS. Further research is needed to determine which type of exercise is the most effective in managing symptoms associated with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Prevalence of Musculoskeletal Injury Among Collegiate Marching Band and Color Guard Members.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence of musculoskeletal injury (MSI) in collegiate marching band and color guard members and the associated factors. METHODS: An electronic survey was developed and delivered via the Qualtrics survey platform to collegiate marching band and color guard members in the United States. Information collected included demographics; years of experience; training and performance characteristics; footwear worn; instrument played/equipment used; participation in stretching/strengthening programs; injury prevalence and type; treatment sought for injury; and participation time lost due to injury. RESULTS: There were 1,379 (792 female, 587 male) members of 21 collegiate marching bands who completed the survey. Respondents had an average age of 19.8 yrs, height 171.9 cm, weight 72.3 kg, and BMI 24.4 kg/m2. Twenty-five percent of respondents reported sustaining a MSI as a result of participating in marching band or color guard. Females were 20% more likely to sustain a MSI and 87.7% of MSI involved the lower extremity. A significant difference in BMI was found between those who did and did not sustain a MSI (p=0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Members of collegiate marching band and color guard may be at risk of sustaining a MSI due to the repetitive nature of the activities performed during practice and performance. The lower extremity is more prone to injury, and a higher BMI may be a risk factor for MSI in this population.

The risks and benefits of running barefoot or in minimalist shoes: a systematic review.

CONTEXT: The popularity of running barefoot or in minimalist shoes has recently increased because of claims of injury prevention, enhanced running efficiency, and improved performance compared with running in shoes. Potential risks and benefits of running barefoot or in minimalist shoes have yet to be clearly defined. OBJECTIVE: To determine the methodological quality and level of evidence pertaining to the risks and benefits of running barefoot or in minimalist shoes. DATA SOURCES: In September 2013, a comprehensive search of the Ovid MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, and CINAHL databases was performed by 2 independent reviewers. STUDY SELECTION: Included articles were obtained from peer-reviewed journals in the English language with no limit for year of publication. Final inclusion criteria required at least 1 of the following outcome variables: pain, injury rate, running economy, joint forces, running velocity, electromyography, muscle performance, or edema. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers appraised each article using the Downs and Black checklist and appraised each for level of evidence. RESULTS: Twenty-three articles met the criteria for this review. Of 27 possible points on the Downs and Black checklist, articles scored between 13 and 19 points, indicating a range of evidence from very limited to moderate. Moderate evidence supports the following biomechanical differences when running barefoot versus in shoes: overall less maximum vertical ground reaction forces, less extension moment and power absorption at the knee, less foot and ankle dorsiflexion at ground contact, less ground contact time, shorter stride length, increased stride frequency, and increased knee flexion at ground contact. CONCLUSION: Because of lack of high-quality evidence, no definitive conclusions can be drawn regarding specific risks or benefits to running barefoot, shod, or in minimalist shoes.

Differential diagnosis of deep gluteal pain in a female runner with pelvic involvement: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Gluteal injuries, proximal hamstring injuries, and pelvic floor disorders have been reported in the literature among runners. Some suggest that hip, pelvis, and/or groin injuries occur in 3.3% to 11.5% of long distance runners. The purpose of this case report is to describe the differential diagnosis and treatment approach for a patient presenting with combined hip and pelvic pain. CASE DESCRIPTION: A 45-year-old female distance runner was referred to physical therapy for proximal hamstring pain that had been present for several months. This pain limited her ability to tolerate sitting and caused her to cease running. Examination of the patient's lumbar spine, pelvis, and lower extremity led to the initial differential diagnosis of hamstring syndrome and ischiogluteal bursitis. The patient's primary symptoms improved during the initial four visits, which focused on education, pain management, trunk stabilization and gluteus maximus strengthening, however pelvic pain persisted. Further examination led to a secondary diagnosis of pelvic floor hypertonic disorder. Interventions to address the pelvic floor led to resolution of symptoms and return to running. OUTCOMES: Pain level on the Visual Analog Scale decreased from 7/10 to 1/10 over the course of treatment. The patient was able to return to full sport activity and improved sitting tolerance to greater then two hours without significant discomfort. DISCUSSION: This case suggests the interdependence of lumbopelvic and lower extremity kinematics in complaints of hamstring, posterior thigh and pelvic floor disorders. This case highlights the importance of a thorough examination as well as the need to consider a regional interdependence of the pelvic floor and lower quarter when treating individuals with proximal hamstring pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4.

Primitive running: a survey analysis of runners' interest, participation, and implementation.

Running is a sport that has continued to see growth in numbers over the years. Recently, there has been a movement promoting running barefoot and in light, "minimalist" shoes. Advocates of barefoot running believe that a more primitive style of running may result in fewer running-related injuries and even possibly improve performance. To identify the current interest level and participation in barefoot or minimalist shod running, an electronic survey was developed and dispersed to 6,082 runners. The survey instrument examined demographics, motivating factors, used resources, perceived barriers, and expectations in runners who add barefoot or in minimalist shod running to their training. Seven hundred eighty-five (13%) runners completed the survey. Six hundred and thirty (75.7%) indicated they were at least somewhat interested in running barefoot or in minimalist shoes. One hundred seventy-two (21.9%) runners had previously tried barefoot running, whereas 239 (30.4%) had previously tried minimalist shoes. The primary motivating factor for those running barefoot or in minimalist shoes (n = 283) was to prevent future injury (n = 97, 34.3%). Advice from friends (n = 68, 24.5%) or books (n = 68, 24.5%) was the most commonly used resource in transitioning to barefoot or minimalist shod running. Fear of possible injury (n = 424, 54%) was the most prevalent perceived barrier in transitioning to barefoot or minimalist shod running. An overwhelming 671 (85.5%) indicated that they were at least somewhat likely to continue with or to add barefoot or minimalist shod running if provided sufficient instruction. Runners who are men, of younger age, and who consider themselves elite runners are somewhat more likely to be interested in barefoot or minimalist shod running.