Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (12)
- Part of a Book (2)
Keywords
- Alar ligaments (1)
- Cervical radiculopathy (1)
- Cervical range of motion (1)
- Cervical spine (1)
- Cervicogenic headache (1)
- Classification (1)
- Consensus (1)
- Examination (1)
- Flexion-rotation test (1)
- Flexion–rotation test (1)
Institute
- Fakultät WiSo (14)
Objectives
To develop a time-efficient motor control (MC) test battery while maximising diagnostic accuracy of both a two-level and three-level classification system for patients with non-specific low back pain (LBP).
Design
Case–control study.
Setting
Four private physiotherapy practices in northern Germany.
Participants
Consecutive males and females presenting to a physiotherapy clinic with non-specific LBP (n=65) were compared with 66 healthy-matched controls.
Primary outcome measures
Accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, Youden index, positive/negative likelihood ratio, area under the curve (AUC)) of a clinically driven consensus-based test battery including the ideal number of test items as well as threshold values and most accurate items.
Results
For both the two and three-level categorisation system, the ideal number of test items was 10. With increasing number of failed tests, the probability of having LBP increases. The overall discrimination potential for the two-level categorisation system of the test is good (AUC=0.85) with an optimal cut-off of three failed tests. The overall discrimination potential of the three-level categorisation system is fair (volume under the surface=0.52). The optimal cut-off for the 10-item test battery for categorisation into none, mild/moderate and severe MC impairment is three and six failed tests, respectively.
Conclusion
A 10-item test battery is recommended for both the two-level (impairment or not) and three-level (none, mild, moderate/severe) categorisation of patients with non-specific LBP.
Background
Osteoarthritis of the knee is the most common cause for disability and limited mobility in the elderly, with considerable individual suffering and high direct and indirect disease-related costs. Nonsurgical interventions such as exercise, enhanced physical activity, and self-management have shown beneficial effects for pain reduction, physical function, and quality of life (QoL), but access to these treatments may be limited. Therefore, home therapy is strongly recommended. However, adherence to these programs is low. Patients report lack of motivation, feedback, and personal interaction as the main barriers to home therapy adherence. To overcome these barriers, electronic health (eHealth) is seen as a promising opportunity. Although beneficial effects have been shown in the literature for other chronic diseases such as chronic pain, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes, a systematic literature review on the efficacy of eHealth interventions for patients with osteoarthritis of knee is missing so far.
Objective
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of eHealth-supported home exercise interventions with no or other interventions regarding pain, physical function, and health-related QoL in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee.
Methods
MEDLINE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PEDro were systematically searched using the keywords osteoarthritis knee, eHealth, and exercise. An inverse variance random-effects meta-analysis was carried out pooling standardized mean differences (SMDs) of individual studies. The Cochrane tool was used to assess risk of bias in individual studies, and the quality of evidence across studies was evaluated following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.
Results
The literature search yielded a total of 648 results. After screening of titles, abstracts, and full-texts, seven randomized controlled trials were included. Pooling the data of individual studies demonstrated beneficial short-term (pain SMD=−0.31, 95% CI −0.58 to −0.04, low quality; QoL SMD=0.24, 95% CI 0.05-0.43, moderate quality) and long-term effects (pain −0.30, 95% CI −0.07 to −0.53, moderate quality; physical function 0.41, 95% CI 0.17-0.64, high quality; and QoL SMD=0.27, 95% CI 0.06-0.47, high quality).
Conclusions
eHealth-supported exercise interventions resulted in less pain, improved physical function, and health-related QoL compared with no or other interventions; however, these improvements were small (SMD<0.5) and may not make a meaningful difference for individual patients. Low adherence is seen as one limiting factor of eHealth interventions. Future research should focus on participatory development of eHealth technology integrating evidence-based principles of exercise science and ways of increasing patient motivation and adherence.
Objectives
The aim of this Delphi survey was to establish an international consensus on the most useful outcome measures for research on the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for migraine. This is important, since guidelines for pharmacological trials recommend measuring the frequency of headaches with 50% reduction considered a clinically meaningful effect. It is unclear whether the same recommendations apply to complementary (or adjunct) non-pharmacological approaches, whether the same cut-off levels need to be considered for effectiveness when used as an adjunct or stand-alone intervention, and what is meaningful to patients.
Setting
University-initiated international survey.
Participants
The expert panel was chosen based on publications on non-pharmacological interventions in migraine populations and from personal contacts. 35 eligible researchers were contacted, 12 agreed to participate and 10 completed all 3 rounds of the survey. To further explore how migraine patients viewed potential outcome measures, four migraine patients were interviewed and presented with the same measurement tools as the researchers.
Procedures
The initial Delphi round was based on a systematic search of the literature for outcome measures used in non-pharmacological interventions for headache. Suggested outcome measures were rated by each expert, blinded towards the other members of the panel, for its usefulness on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from definitely not useful to extremely useful. Results were combined using median values and IQRs. Tools rated overall as definitely or probably not useful were excluded from subsequent rounds. Experts further suggested additional outcome measures that were presented to the panel in subsequent rounds. Additionally, experts were asked to rank the most useful tools and provide information on feasible cut-off levels for effectiveness for the three highest ranked tools.
Results
Results suggest the use of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and headache frequency as primary outcome measures. Patient experts suggested the inclusion of a measure of quality of life and evaluation of associated symptoms and fear of attacks.
Conclusions
Recommendations are for the use of the MIDAS, the HIT-6 and headache frequency, in combination with an outcome measure for quality of life. Associated symptoms and fear of attacks should also be considered as secondary outcomes, if relevant for the individual target population. The cut-off level for effectiveness should be lower for non-pharmacological interventions, especially when used as an adjunct to medication.
There is evidence that temporomandibular disorder (TMD) may be a contributing factor to cervicogenic headache (CGH), in part because of the influence of dysfunction of the temporomandibular joint on the cervical spine. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to determine whether orofacial treatment in addition to cervical manual therapy, was more effective than cervical manual therapy alone on measures of cervical movement impairment in patients with features of CGH and signs of TMD. In this study, 43 patients (27 women) with headache for more than 3-months and with some features of CGH and signs of TMD were randomly assigned to receive either cervical manual therapy (usual care) or orofacial manual therapy to address TMD in addition to usual care. Subjects were assessed at baseline, after 6 treatment sessions (3-months), and at 6-months follow-up. 38 subjects (25 female) completed all analysis at 6-months follow-up. The outcome criteria were: cervical range of movement (including the C1-2 flexion-rotation test) and manual examination of the upper 3 cervical vertebra. The group that received orofacial treatment in addition to usual care showed significant reduction in all aspects of cervical impairment after the treatment period. These improvements persisted to the 6-month follow-up, but were not observed in the usual care group at any point. These observations together with previous reports indicate that manual therapists should look for features of TMD when examining patients with headache, particularly if treatment fails when directed to the cervical spine.
Pediatric headache is an increasingly reported phenomenon. Cervicogenic headache (CGH) is a subgroup of headache, but there is limited information about cervical spine physical examination signs in children with CGH. Therefore, a cross-sectional study was designed to investigate cervical spine physical examination signs including active range of motion (ROM), posture determined by the craniovertebral angle (CVA), and upper cervical ROM determined by the flexion–rotation test (FRT) in children aged between 6 and 12 years. An additional purpose was to determine the degree of pain provoked by the FRT. Thirty children (mean age 120.70 months [SD 15.14]) with features of CGH and 34 (mean age 125.38 months [13.14]) age-matched asymptomatic controls participated in the study. When compared to asymptomatic controls, symptomatic children had a significantly smaller CVA (p < 0.001), significantly less active ROM in all cardinal planes (p < 0.001), and significantly less ROM during the FRT (p < 0.001), especially towards the dominant headache side (p < 0.001). In addition, symptomatic subjects reported more pain during the FRT (p < 0.001) and there was a significant negative correlation (r = −0.758, p < 0.001) between the range recorded during the FRT towards the dominant headache side and FRT pain intensity score. This study found evidence of impaired function of the upper cervical spine in children with CGH and provides evidence of the clinical utility of the FRT when examining children with CGH.
Background
A wide range of physical tests have been published for use in the assessment of musculoskeletal dysfunction in patients with headache. Which tests are used depends on a physiotherapist's clinical and scientific background as there is little guidance on the most clinically useful tests.
Objectives
To identify which physical examination tests international experts in physiotherapy consider the most clinically useful for the assessment of patients with headache.
Design/methods
Delphi survey with pre-specified procedures based on a systematic search of the literature for physical examination tests proposed for the assessment of musculoskeletal dysfunction in patients with headache.
Results
Seventeen experts completed all three rounds of the survey. Fifteen tests were included in round one with eleven additional tests suggested by the experts. Finally eleven physical examination tests were considered clinically useful: manual joint palpation, the cranio-cervical flexion test, the cervical flexion-rotation test, active range of cervical movement, head forward position, trigger point palpation, muscle tests of the shoulder girdle, passive physiological intervertebral movements, reproduction and resolution of headache symptoms, screening of the thoracic spine, and combined movement tests.
Conclusions
Eleven tests are suggested as a minimum standard for the physical examination of musculoskeletal dysfunctions in patients with headache.
Objective
To identify assessment tools used to evaluate patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) considered to be clinically most useful by a panel of international experts in TMD physical therapy (PT).
Methods
A Delphi survey method administered to a panel of international experts in TMD PT was conducted over three rounds from October 2017 to June 2018. The initial contact was made by email. Participation was voluntary. An e-survey, according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES), was posted using SurveyMonkey for each round. Percentages of responses were analysed for each question from each round of the Delphi survey administrations.
Results
Twenty-three experts (completion rate: 23/25) completed all three rounds of the survey for three clinical test categories: 1) questionnaires, 2) pain screening tools and 3) physical examination tests. The following was the consensus-based decision regarding the identification of the clinically most useful assessments. (1) Four of 9 questionnaires were identified: Jaw Functional Limitation (JFL-8), Mandibular Function Impairment Questionnaire (MFIQ), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia for Temporomandibular disorders (TSK/TMD) and the neck disability index (NDI). (2) Three of 8 identified pain screening tests: visual analog scale (VAS), numeric pain rating scale (NRS) and pain during mandibular movements. (3) Eight of 18 identified physical examination tests: physiological temporomandibular joint (TMJ) movements, trigger point (TrP) palpation of the masticatory muscles, TrP palpation away from the masticatory system, accessory movements, articular palpation, noise detection during movement, manual screening of the cervical spine and the Neck Flexor Muscle Endurance Test.
Conclusion
After three rounds in this Delphi survey, the results of the most used assessment tools by TMD PT experts were established. They proved to be founded on test construct, test psychometric properties (reliability/validity) and expert preference for test clusters. A concordance with the screening tools of the diagnostic criteria of TMD consortium was noted. Findings may be used to guide policymaking purposes and future diagnostic research.
Identification of differences in clinical presentation and underlying pain mechanisms may assist the classification of patients with neck–arm pain which is important for the provision of targeted best evidence based management. The aim of this study was to: (i) assess the inter-examiner agreement in using specific systems to classify patients with cervical radiculopathy and patients with non-specific neck–arm pain associated with heightened nerve mechanosensitivity (NSNAP); (ii) assess the agreement between two clinical examiners and two clinical experts in classifying these patients, and (iii) assess the diagnostic accuracy of the two clinical examiners. Forty patients with unilateral neck–arm pain were examined by two clinicians and classified into (i) cervical radiculopathy, (ii) NSNAP, (iii) other. The classifications were compared to those made independently by two experts, based on a review of patients' clinical assessment notes. The experts' opinion was used as the reference criterion to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical examiners in classifying each patient group. There was an 80% agreement between clinical examiners, and between experts and 70%–80% between clinical examiners and experts in classifying patients with cervical radiculopathy (kappa between 0.41 and 0.61). Agreement was 72.5%–80% in classifying patients with NSNAP (kappa between 0.43 and 0.52). Clinical examiners' diagnostic accuracy was high (radiculopathy: sensitivity 79%–84%; specificity 76%–81%; NSNAP: sensitivity 78%–100%; specificity 71%–81%). Compared to expert opinion, clinicians were able to identify patients with cervical radiculopathy and patients with NSNAP in 80% of cases, our data supporting the reliability of these classification systems.
Objective
Gross mandibular position and masticatory muscle activity have been shown to influence cervical muscles electromyographic activity. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of three different mandible positions including conscious occlusion, tongue tip against the anterior hard palate (Palate tongue position) and natural resting position (Rest), on sagittal plane cervical spine range of motion (ROM) as well as the flexion-rotation test (FRT) in asymptomatic subjects.
Materials and methods
An experienced single blinded examiner evaluated ROM using an Iphone in 22 subjects (7 females; mean age of 29.91years, SD 5.44).
Results
Intra-rater reliability for range recorded was good for the FRT with ICC (intraclass correlation) 0.95 (95% CI: 0.88–0.98) and good for sagittal plane cervical ROM with ICC 0.90 (95% CI: 0.77–0.96). A repeated measures ANOVA determined that mean ROM recorded during the FRT differed significantly between assessment points (F(1.99, 41.83) = 19.88, P < 0.001). Bonferroni Post hoc tests revealed that both conscious Occlusion and Palate tongue position elicited a significant large reduction in ROM recorded during the FRT from baseline (p < 0.01). Despite this, one activation strategy did not influence ROM more than the other. An additional repeated measures ANOVA determined that mean sagittal cervical ROM did not significantly vary between assessment points (F(2, 42) = 8.18, P = 0.08).
Conclusion
This current study provided further evidence for the influence of the temporomandibular region on upper cervical ROM. Results suggest that clinicians should focus on the natural mandible rest position when evaluating upper cervical mobility.
Introduction
Tests to evaluate the integrity of the alar ligaments are important clinical tools for manual therapists, but there is limited research regarding their validity.
Method
A single blinded examiner assessed alar ligament integrity using the lateral shear test (LST), rotation stress test (RST) and side-bending stress test (SBST) on a sample of convenience comprising 7 subjects with MRI confirmed alar ligament lesions and 11 healthy people. Alar ligament lesions were identified using both supine and high-field strength upright MRI.
Results
The RST had a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 69.2%. The SBST and the LST both showed a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 76.9%. In cases where all three tests were positive, the specificity increased to 84.6%.
Discussion
Tests of manual examination of alar ligament integrity have some diagnostic utility; however, these findings require further corroboration in a larger sample.
Objectives
Cervical movement impairment has been identified as a core component of cervicogenic headache evaluation. However, normal range of motion values in children has been investigated rarely and no study has reported such values for the flexion–rotation test (FRT). The purpose of this study was to identify normal values and side-to-side variation for cervical spine range of motion (ROM) and the FRT, in asymptomatic children aged 6–12 years. Another important purpose was to identify the presence of pain during the FRT.
Methods
Thirty-four asymptomatic children without history of neck pain or headache (26 females and 8 males, mean age 125.38 months [SD 13.14]) were evaluated. Cervical spine cardinal plane ROM and the FRT were evaluated by a single examiner using a cervical ROM device.
Results
Values for cardinal plane ROM measures are presented. No significant gender difference was found for any ROM measure. Mean difference in ROM for rotation, side flexion, and the FRT were less than one degree. However, intra-individual variation was greater, with lower bound scores of 9.32° for rotation, 5.30° for side flexion, and 10.89° for the FRT. Multiple linear regression analysis indicates that movement in the cardinal planes only explains 19% of the variance in the FRT. Pain scores reported following the FRT were less than 2/10.
Discussion
Children have consistently greater cervical spine ROM than adults. In children, side-to-side variation in rotation and side flexion ROM and range recorded during the FRT indicates that the clinician should be cautious when using range in one direction to determine impairment in another. Range recorded during the FRT is independent of cardinal movement variables, which further adds to the importance of the FRT, as a test that mainly evaluates range of movement of the upper cervical spine.