Muscle Energy Technique in the Rehabilitative Treatment for Acute and Chronic Non-Specific Neck Pain: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Non-specific neck pain (NNP) affects 30-50% of the general population, and it often leads to severe disability. Several manual therapy techniques are available to reduce pain and disability and to improve cervical range of motion and functional activities. Muscle Energy Technique (MET) showed more evidence for treating such a disorder. The aim of this current scientific literature analysis was to compare the clinical effects of MET with the other manual or rehabilitative treatments for non-specific acute and chronic neck pain. METHODS: The literature search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Medline, PEDro, Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar from 2010 to January 2020. Clinical trials about MET were included. The quality of the trials was assessed according to the PEDro scale. RESULTS: Twenty-one papers according to inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected: 15 studies about non-specific acute neck pain and 6 studies about non-specific chronic neck pain. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that the MET approach has a good clinical effect on reducing neck pain in patients with acute neck pain and improves cervical range of motion in patients with chronic neck pain, and is better if combined with a traditional rehabilitative approach. This review's findings should be considered with caution for physiotherapy practice because of the studies' methodologic limitations. On the basis of the current available and limited evidence, clinicians could combine MET with traditional physiotherapy and other manual techniques when treating people with non-specific neck pain.

Diagnostic Bias in the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Series of Short Cases.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare systems have faced unprecedented pressures. One challenge has been to promptly recognise non-COVID-19 conditions. Cognitive bias due to the availability heuristic may cause difficulties in reaching the correct diagnosis. Confirmation bias may also affect imaging interpretation. We report three cases with an alternative final diagnosis in whom COVID-19 was initially suspected: (a) Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia with unrecognised HIV infection; (b) pulmonary lymphangitis carcinomatosis; and (c) ST elevation myocardial infarction causing acute pulmonary oedema. To help mitigate bias, there is no substitute for thoughtful clinical assessment and critical appraisal when evaluating new information and formulating the differential diagnosis. LEARNING POINTS: The availability heuristic during the recent pandemic may lead to cognitive bias in favour of COVID-19 diagnosis and delayed recognition of other conditions, especially in patients presenting with similar non-specific features.Confirmation bias towards COVID-19 can also affect the interpretation of pulmonary imaging which is central to the investigation of cases with suspected pneumonitis.Diagnostic bias can be mitigated by recognition and allowing time for a thorough clinical history and methodical examination of the patients.

Straighten your back! Self-correction posture and postural balance in "non rehabilitative instructed" multiple sclerosis patients.

BACKGROUD: Patients with MS, regardless of the complexity of the activity or sensory conditions, commonly present a significant postural control deficit compared to healthy subjects. OBJECTIVE: To investigate which postural self-correction strategies are adopted by patients with Multiple Sclerosis versus a group of healthy-subjects and how self-correction can influence the control of postural balance. METHODS: A case-control prospective observational study was conducted. Person with Multiple Sclerosis and a group of healthy volunteers were enrolled. Patients included were instructed with vocal commands, to reach a self-correction posture, and they were compared to healthy subjects. Clinical assessments including Balance, Stabilometry and Postural evaluation of the spine were performed. RESULTS: Sixty patients (30: control-group; 30: treatment-group) were enrolled. In the treatment group, the analysis reported a significant statistical difference between path length and center of pressure speed in self-correction posture with closed-eyes (p = 0,049; 0,047) and an improvement in C7 and L3 levels in self-correction posture (p < 0,01-C7; p < 0,01-L3). There are significant statistical differences about path length between the two groups in all examined conditions (p = 0,0001). At sagittal plane evaluation, results show an increase of all measurements in both posture (C7-neutral posture p = 0,0001; L3-neutral posture p = 0,0001; C7-self-correction posture p = 0,0001; L3-self-correction posture p = 0,0001). CONCLUSION: Further study should investigate dynamic situations and different Multiple Sclerosis forms to complete balance analysis and to establish a correct rehabilitative program with self-correction exercise as powerful focus.