-
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Jan 2021This study aims to compare conservative versus surgical management for patients with full-thickness RC tear in terms of clinical and structural outcomes at 1 and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This study aims to compare conservative versus surgical management for patients with full-thickness RC tear in terms of clinical and structural outcomes at 1 and 2 years of follow-up.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Google Scholar and reference lists of retrieved articles was performed since the inception of each database until August 2020. According to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, two independent authors screened all suitable studies for the inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Only randomised controlled trials comparing conservative and surgical management of full-thickness RC tear in adults were included. The primary outcome measure was the effectiveness of each treatment in terms of Constant-Murley score (CMS) and VAS pain score at different time points. The secondary outcome was the integrity of the repaired tendon evaluated on postoperative MRI at different time points. The GRADE guidelines were used to assess the critical appraisal status and quality of evidence.
RESULTS
A total of six articles met the inclusion criteria. The average value of CMS score at 12 months of follow-up was 77.6 ± 14.4 in the surgery group and 72.8 ± 16.5 in the conservative group, without statistically significant differences between the groups. Similar results were demonstrated at 24 months of follow-up. The mean of VAS pain score at 12 months of follow-up was 1.4 ± 1.6 in the surgery group and 2.4 ± 1.9 in the conservative group. Quantitative synthesis showed better results in favour of the surgical group in terms of VAS pain score one year after surgery (- 1.08, 95% CI - 1.58 to - 0.58; P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
At a 2-year follow-up, shoulder function evaluated in terms of CMS was not significantly improved. Further high-quality level-I randomised controlled trials at longer term follow-up are needed to evaluate whether surgical and conservative treatment provide comparable long-term results.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Arthroscopy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rotator Cuff; Rotator Cuff Injuries; Shoulder; Shoulder Pain; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33419401
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-020-03872-4 -
The Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports... Mar 2020To update a systematic review published in 2013 that focused on evaluating the effectiveness of interventions within the scope of physical therapy, including exercise,...
OBJECTIVE
To update a systematic review published in 2013 that focused on evaluating the effectiveness of interventions within the scope of physical therapy, including exercise, manual therapy, electrotherapy, and combined or multimodal approaches to managing shoulder pain.
DESIGN
Umbrella review.
LITERATURE SEARCH
An electronic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and CINAHL was undertaken. Methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) checklist for systematic reviews.
STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA
Nonsurgical treatments for subacromial shoulder pain.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Sixteen systematic reviews were retrieved. Results were summarized qualitatively.
RESULTS
A strong recommendation can be made for exercise therapy as the first-line treatment to improve pain, mobility, and function in patients with subacromial shoulder pain. Manual therapy may be integrated, with a strong recommendation, as additional therapy. There was moderate evidence of no effect for other commonly prescribed interventions, such as laser therapy, extracorporeal shockwave therapy, pulsed electromagnetic energy, and ultrasound.
CONCLUSION
There is a growing body of evidence to support exercise therapy as an intervention for subacromial shoulder pain. Ongoing research is required to provide guidance on exercise type, dose, duration, and expected outcomes. A strong recommendation may be made regarding the inclusion of manual therapy in the initial treatment phase. .
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Combined Modality Therapy; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Exercise Therapy; Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy; Humans; Injections; Laser Therapy; Magnetic Field Therapy; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Shoulder Impingement Syndrome; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 31726927
DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2020.8498 -
The Journal of Manual & Manipulative... Feb 2022To determine the effectiveness of manual therapy (MT) for functional outcomes in patients with distal radius fracture (DRF). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To determine the effectiveness of manual therapy (MT) for functional outcomes in patients with distal radius fracture (DRF).
METHODS
An electronic search was performed in the Medline, Central, Embase, PEDro, Lilacs, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases. The eligibility criteria for selecting studies included randomized clinical trials that included MT techniques with or without other therapeutic interventions in functional outcomes, such as wrist or upper limb function, pain, grip strength, and wrist range of motion in patients older than 18 years with DRF.
RESULTS
Eight clinical trials met the eligibility criteria; for the quantitative synthesis, six studies were included. For supervised physiotherapy plus joint mobilization versus home exercise program at 6 weeks follow-up, the mean difference (MD) for wrist flexion was 7.1 degrees (p = 0.20), and extension was 11.99 degrees (p = 0.16). For exercise program plus mobilization with movement versus exercise program at 12 weeks follow-up, the PRWE was -10.2 points (p = 0.02), the DASH was -9.86 points (p = 0.0001), and grip strength was 3.9 percent (p = 0.25). For conventional treatment plus manual lymph drainage versus conventional treatment, for edema the MD at 3-7 days was -14.58 ml (p = 0.03), at 17-21 days -17.96 ml (p = 0.009), at 33-42 days -15.34 ml (p = 0.003), and at 63-68 days -13.97 ml (p = 0.002).
CONCLUSION
There was very low to high evidence according to the GRADE rating. Adding mobilization with movement and manual lymphatic drainage showed statistically significant differences in wrist, upper limb function, and hand edema in patients with DRF.
Topics: Exercise Therapy; Humans; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Physical Therapy Modalities; Radius Fractures; Range of Motion, Articular
PubMed: 34668847
DOI: 10.1080/10669817.2021.1992090 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2019This review is one in a series of Cochrane Reviews of interventions for shoulder disorders. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This review is one in a series of Cochrane Reviews of interventions for shoulder disorders.
OBJECTIVES
To synthesise the available evidence regarding the benefits and harms of rotator cuff repair with or without subacromial decompression in the treatment of rotator cuff tears of the shoulder.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov and WHO ICRTP registry unrestricted by date or language until 8 January 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including adults with full-thickness rotator cuff tears and assessing the effect of rotator cuff repair compared to placebo, no treatment, or any other treatment were included. As there were no trials comparing surgery with placebo, the primary comparison was rotator cuff repair with or without subacromial decompression versus non-operative treatment (exercises with or without glucocorticoid injection). Other comparisons were rotator cuff repair and acromioplasty versus rotator cuff repair alone, and rotator cuff repair and subacromial decompression versus subacromial decompression alone. Major outcomes were mean pain, shoulder function, quality of life, participant-rated global assessment of treatment success, adverse events and serious adverse events. The primary endpoint for this review was one year.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodologic procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine trials with 1007 participants. Three trials compared rotator cuff repair with subacromial decompression followed by exercises with exercise alone. These trials included 339 participants with full-thickness rotator cuff tears diagnosed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or ultrasound examination. One of the three trials also provided up to three glucocorticoid injections in the exercise group. All surgery groups received tendon repair with subacromial decompression and the postoperative exercises were similar to the exercises provided for the non-operative groups. Five trials (526 participants) compared repair with acromioplasty versus repair alone; and one trial (142 participants) compared repair with subacromial decompression versus subacromial decompression alone. The mean age of trial participants ranged between 56 and 68 years, and females comprised 29% to 56% of the participants. Symptom duration varied from a mean of 10 months up to 28 months. Two trials excluded tears with traumatic onset of symptoms. One trial defined a minimum duration of symptoms of six months and required a trial of conservative therapy before inclusion. The trials included mainly repairable full-thickness supraspinatus tears, six trials specifically excluded tears involving the subscapularis tendon. All trials were at risk of bias for several criteria, most notably due to lack of participant and personnel blinding, but also for other reasons such as unclearly reported methods of random sequence generation or allocation concealment (six trials), incomplete outcome data (three trials), selective reporting (six trials), and other biases (six trials). Our main comparison was subacromial decompression versus non-operative treatment and results are reported for the 12 month follow up. At one year, moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias) from 3 trials with 258 participants indicates that surgery probably provides little or no improvement in pain; mean pain (range 0 to 10, higher scores indicate more pain) was 1.6 points with non-operative treatment and 0.87 points better (0.43 better to 1.30 better) with surgery.. Mean function (zero to 100, higher score indicating better outcome) was 72 points with non-operative treatment and 6 points better (2.43 better to 9.54 better) with surgery (3 trials; 269 participants), low-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision). Participant-rated global success rate was 873/1000 after non-operative treatment and 943/1000 after surgery corresponding to (risk ratio (RR) 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.22; low-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision). Health-related quality of life was 57.5 points (SF-36 mental component score, 0 to 100, higher score indicating better quality of life) with non-operative treatment and 1.3 points worse (4.5 worse to 1.9 better) with surgery (1 trial; 103 participants), low-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision). We were unable to estimate the risk of adverse events and serious adverse events as only one event was reported across the trials (very low-certainty evidence; downgraded once due to bias and twice due to very serious imprecision).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
At the moment, we are uncertain whether rotator cuff repair surgery provides clinically meaningful benefits to people with symptomatic tears; it may provide little or no clinically important benefits with respect to pain, function, overall quality of life or participant-rated global assessment of treatment success when compared with non-operative treatment. Surgery may not improve shoulder pain or function compared with exercises, with or without glucocorticoid injections. The trials included have methodology concerns and none included a placebo control. They included participants with mostly small degenerative tears involving the supraspinatus tendon and the conclusions of this review may not be applicable to traumatic tears, large tears involving the subscapularis tendon or young people. Furthermore, the trials did not assess if surgery could prevent arthritic changes in long-term follow-up. Further well-designed trials in this area that include a placebo-surgery control group and long follow-up are needed to further increase certainty about the effects of surgery for rotator cuff tears.
Topics: Aged; Arthroscopy; Decompression, Surgical; Exercise Therapy; Female; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rotator Cuff; Rotator Cuff Injuries; Shoulder Impingement Syndrome; Shoulder Pain; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31813166
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013502 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2023Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a compression neuropathy of the median nerve causing pain and numbness and tingling typically in the thumb, index and middle finger. It... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a compression neuropathy of the median nerve causing pain and numbness and tingling typically in the thumb, index and middle finger. It sometimes results in muscle wasting, diminished sensitivity and loss of dexterity. Splinting the wrist (with or without the hand) using an orthosis is usually offered to people with mild-to-moderate findings, but its effectiveness remains unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of splinting for people with CTS.
SEARCH METHODS
On 12 December 2021, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP with no limitations. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials were included if the effect of splinting could be isolated from other treatment modalities. The comparisons included splinting versus no active treatment (or placebo), splinting versus another disease-modifying non-surgical treatment, and comparisons of different splint-wearing regimens. We excluded studies comparing splinting with surgery or one splint design with another. We excluded participants if they had previously undergone surgical release.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, assessed study risk of bias and the certainty in the body of evidence for primary outcomes using the GRADE approach, according to standard Cochrane methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 29 trials randomising 1937 adults with CTS. The trials ranged from 21 to 234 participants, with mean ages between 42 and 60 years. The mean duration of CTS symptoms was seven weeks to five years. Eight studies with 523 hands compared splinting with no active intervention (no treatment, sham-kinesiology tape or sham-laser); 20 studies compared splinting (or splinting delivered along with another non-surgical intervention) with another non-surgical intervention; and three studies compared different splinting regimens (e.g. night-time only versus full time). Trials were generally at high risk of bias for one or more domains, including lack of blinding (all included studies) and lack of information about randomisation or allocation concealment in 23 studies. For the primary comparison, splinting compared to no active treatment, splinting may provide little or no benefits in symptoms in the short term (< 3 months). The mean Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) Symptom Severity Scale (SSS) (scale 1 to 5, higher is worse; minimal clinically important difference (MCID) 1 point) was 0.37 points better with splint (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 better to 0.08 worse; 6 studies, 306 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared with no active treatment. Removing studies with high or unclear risk of bias due to lack of randomisation or allocation concealment supported our conclusion of no important effect (mean difference (MD) 0.01 points worse with splint; 95% CI 0.20 better to 0.22 worse; 3 studies, 124 participants). In the long term (> 3 months), we are uncertain about the effect of splinting on symptoms (mean BCTQ SSS 0.64 better with splinting; 95% CI 1.2 better to 0.08 better; 2 studies, 144 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Splinting probably does not improve hand function in the short term and may not improve hand function in the long term. In the short term, the mean BCTQ Functional Status Scale (FSS) (1 to 5, higher is worse; MCID 0.7 points) was 0.24 points better (95% CI 0.44 better to 0.03 better; 6 studies, 306 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) with splinting compared with no active treatment. In the long term, the mean BCTQ FSS was 0.25 points better (95% CI 0.68 better to 0.18 worse; 1 study, 34 participants; low-certainty evidence) with splinting compared with no active treatment. Night-time splinting may result in a higher rate of overall improvement in the short term (risk ratio (RR) 3.86, 95% CI 2.29 to 6.51; 1 study, 80 participants; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 2, 95% CI 2 to 2; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if splinting decreases referral to surgery, RR 0.47 (95% CI 0.14 to 1.58; 3 studies, 243 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Low-certainty evidence from one study suggests that splinting may have a higher rate of adverse events, which were transient, but the 95% CIs included no effect. Seven of 40 participants (18%) reported adverse effects in the splinting group and 0 of 40 participants (0%) in the no active treatment group (RR 15.0, 95% CI 0.89 to 254.13; 1 study, 80 participants). There was low- to moderate-certainty evidence for the other comparisons: splinting may not provide additional benefits in symptoms or hand function when given together with corticosteroid injection (moderate-certainty evidence) or with rehabilitation (low-certainty evidence); nor when compared with corticosteroid (injection or oral; low certainty), exercises (low certainty), kinesiology taping (low certainty), rigid taping (low certainty), platelet-rich plasma (moderate certainty), or extracorporeal shock wave treatment (moderate certainty). Splinting for 12 weeks may not be better than six weeks, but six months of splinting may be better than six weeks of splinting in improving symptoms and function (low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to conclude whether splinting benefits people with CTS. Limited evidence does not exclude small improvements in CTS symptoms and hand function, but they may not be clinically important, and the clinical relevance of small differences with splinting is unclear. Low-certainty evidence suggests that people may have a greater chance of experiencing overall improvement with night-time splints than no treatment. As splinting is a relatively inexpensive intervention with no plausible long-term harms, small effects could justify its use, particularly when patients are not interested in having surgery or injections. It is unclear if a splint is optimally worn full time or at night-time only and whether long-term use is better than short-term use, but low-certainty evidence suggests that the benefits may manifest in the long term.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Middle Aged; Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Hand; Occupational Therapy; Quality of Life; Upper Extremity
PubMed: 36848651
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010003.pub2 -
International Journal of Environmental... Feb 2021(1) Background: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common peripheral neuropathy in the upper extremity. Conservative treatment has been effective for mild and... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common peripheral neuropathy in the upper extremity. Conservative treatment has been effective for mild and moderate idiopathic CTS. However, severe CTS and systemic conditions were an exclusion criterion from the studies. The aim of this study is to review the effectiveness of conservative treatment in patients with CTS regardless of the level of severity and the presence or not of systemic diseases in the last ten years. (2) Methods: Randomized controlled clinical trials that compared the effect of conservative treatment on the Boston questionnaire and pain were selected. PubMed, PEDro, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were used. PRISMA statement checklist was performed. (3) Results: 876 studies were recorded, 29 were selected. Pharmacology, Electrotherapy and Manual Therapy had benefits for CTS. Electrotherapy and manual therapy could be effective for severe CTS patients with a systemic condition in the short term, but there was a low percentage of these patients included in the studies. (4) Conclusion: Some pharmacological treatments, manual therapy and electrotherapy have shown benefits for handling CTS, although the most effective combination of techniques is unknown. It would be necessary to include patients with systemic conditions in the selection criteria for future studies.
Topics: Boston; Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Conservative Treatment; Humans; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Pain; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33671060
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18052365 -
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology,... Oct 2022The diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for anterior cruciate ligament injury has been reported in previous systematic reviews. Numerous studies in these reviews... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for anterior cruciate ligament tears are comparable but the Lachman test has been previously overestimated: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
The diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for anterior cruciate ligament injury has been reported in previous systematic reviews. Numerous studies in these reviews include subjects with additional knee ligament injury, which could affect the sensitivity of the tests. Meta-analyses have also been performed using methods that do not account for the non-independence of sensitivity and specificity, potentially overestimating diagnostic accuracy. The aim of this study was to report the diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for anterior cruciate ligament tears (partial and complete) without concomitant knee ligament injury.
METHODS
A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Meta-analyses included studies reporting the specificity and/or sensitivity of tests with or without concomitant meniscal injury. Where possible, pooled diagnostic estimates were calculated with bivariate random-effects modelling to determine the most accurate effect sizes. Diagnostic accuracy values are presented for the anterior drawer, Lachman, Lever sign and pivot shift tests overall and in acute or post-acute presentations.
RESULTS
Pooled estimates using a bivariate model for overall sensitivity and specificity respectively were as follows: anterior drawer test 83% [95% CI, 77-88] and 85% [95% CI, 64-95]; Lachman test 81% [95% CI, 73-87] and 85% [95% CI, 73-92]; pivot shift test 55% [95% CI, 47-62] and 94% [95% CI, 88-97]; Lever sign test 83% [95% CI, 68-92] and 91% [95% CI, 83-95]. For specific presentations, the sensitivity and specificity of the Lachman test, respectively, were: complete tears 68% [95% CI, 54-79] and 79% [95% CI, 51-93]; post-acute injuries 70% [95% CI, 57-80] and 77% [95% CI, 53-91].
CONCLUSIONS
The pivot shift and Lever sign were the best tests overall for ruling in or ruling out an anterior cruciate ligament tear, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of the Lachman test, particularly in post-acute presentations and for complete tears, is lower than previously reported. Further research is required to establish more accurate estimates for the Lachman test in acute presentations and partial ligament tears using bivariate analysis.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
III.
Topics: Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Humans; Knee Injuries; Meniscus; Physical Examination; Rupture
PubMed: 35150292
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-022-06898-4 -
Sports Health 2023The risk factors for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear for athletes participating in pivoting sports includes young age and female sex. A previous meta-analysis has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
The risk factors for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear for athletes participating in pivoting sports includes young age and female sex. A previous meta-analysis has reported a reinjury rate of 15% after ACL reconstruction (ACLR) for athletes across all sports. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first systematic review and meta-analysis of available literature reporting outcomes after ACLR in soccer players.
OBJECTIVE
To review and aggregate soccer-specific outcomes data after ACLR found in current literature to help guide a more tailored discussion regarding expectations and prognosis for soccer players seeking operative management of ACL injuries.
DATA SOURCES
A comprehensive search of publications was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and SPORTDiscus databases.
STUDY SELECTION
Inclusion criteria consisted of original studies, level of evidence 1 to 4, studies reporting clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after primary ACLR in soccer players at all follow-up length.
STUDY DESIGN
The primary outcomes of interest were graft failure/reoperation rates, ACL injury in contralateral knee, return to soccer time, and PROs.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level 4.
DATA EXTRACTION
Search of literature yielded 32 studies for inclusion that involved 3112 soccer players after ACLR.
RESULTS
The overall graft failure/reoperation rate ranged between 3.0% and 24.8% (mean follow-up range, 2.3-10 years) and the combined ACL graft failure and contralateral ACL injury rate after initial ACLR was 1.0% to 16.7% (mean follow-up range, 3-10 years); a subgroup analysis for female and male players revealed a secondary ACL injury incidence rate of 27%, 95% CI (22%, 32%) and 10%, 95% CI (6%, 15%), respectively. Soccer players were able to return to play between 6.1 and 11.1 months and the majority of PROs showed favorable scores at medium-term follow-up.
CONCLUSION
Soccer players experience high ACL injury rates after primary ACLR and demonstrated similar reinjury rates as found in previous literature of athletes who participate in high-demand pivoting sports.
Topics: Humans; Male; Female; Soccer; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Reinjuries; Knee Joint; Return to Sport
PubMed: 36988238
DOI: 10.1177/19417381231160167 -
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) Dec 2022To improve the understanding of the psychological impacts of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, a systematic review synthesizing the evidence on knee... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To improve the understanding of the psychological impacts of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, a systematic review synthesizing the evidence on knee self-efficacy, fear avoidance beliefs and kinesiophobia following ACL injury is needed.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review was to investigate knee self-efficacy, fear avoidance beliefs and kinesiophobia following ACL injury, and compare these outcomes following management with rehabilitation alone, early and delayed ACL reconstruction (ACLR).
METHODS
Seven databases were searched from inception to April 14, 2022. Articles were included if they assessed Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK), Knee Self-Efficacy Scale (KSES), or Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ). Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using domain-based RoB tools (ROBINS-1, RoB 2, RoBANS), and GRADE-assessed certainty of evidence. Random-effects meta-analyses pooled outcomes, stratified by time post-injury (pre-operative, 3-6 months, 7-12 months, > 1-2 years, > 2-5 years, > 5 years).
RESULTS
Seventy-three studies (70% high RoB) were included (study outcomes: TSK: 55; KSES: 22; FABQ: 5). Meta-analysis demonstrated worse kinesiophobia and self-efficacy pre-operatively (pooled mean [95% CI], TSK-11: 23.8 [22.2-25.3]; KSES: 5.0 [4.4-5.5]) compared with 3-6 months following ACLR (TSK-11: 19.6 [18.7-20.6]; KSES: 19.6 [18.6-20.6]). Meta-analysis suggests similar kinesiophobia > 3-6 months following early ACLR (19.8 [4.9]) versus delayed ACLR (17.2 [5.0]). Only one study assessed outcomes comparing ACLR with rehabilitation only.
CONCLUSIONS
Knee self-efficacy and kinesiophobia improved from pre-ACLR to 3-6 months following ACLR, with similar outcomes after 6 months. Since the overall evidence was weak, there is a need for high-quality observational and intervention studies focusing on psychological outcomes following ACL injury.
Topics: Humans; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Self Efficacy; Knee Joint; Fear; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
PubMed: 35963980
DOI: 10.1007/s40279-022-01739-3 -
PharmacoEconomics Feb 2021Considering the heavy economic burden of osteoporotic fractures, the limits of healthcare resources, and the recent availability of new anti-osteoporosis drugs, there is...
BACKGROUND
Considering the heavy economic burden of osteoporotic fractures, the limits of healthcare resources, and the recent availability of new anti-osteoporosis drugs, there is continuing interest in economic evaluation studies of osteoporosis management strategies.
OBJECTIVES
This study aims to (1) systematically review recent economic evaluations of drugs for osteoporosis and (2) to apply an osteoporosis-specific guideline to critically appraise them.
METHODS
A literature search was undertaken using PubMed, EMBASE, National Health Service Economic Evaluation database, and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry to identify original articles containing economic evaluations of anti-osteoporosis drugs, published between 1 July, 2013 and 31 December, 2019. A recent European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases-International Osteoporosis Foundation (ESCEO-IOF) guideline for the conduct and reporting of economic evaluations in osteoporosis was used to assess the quality of included articles.
RESULTS
The database search retrieved 3860 records, of which 27 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. These studies were conducted in 15 countries; 12 active drugs were assessed, including various traditional pharmacological treatments such as bisphosphonates, raloxifene, strontium ranelate, denosumab, and teriparatide, and new agents such as abaloparatide, romosozumab, and gastro-resistant risedronate. Eight out of 12 studies that compared traditional oral bisphosphonates to other active interventions (denosumab, zoledronic acid, gastro-resistant risedronate, and teriparatide) suggested that the other active agents were generally cost-effective or dominant. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of sequential therapy has recently been assessed and indications are that it can lead to extra health benefits (larger gains in quality-adjusted life-year). The key drivers of cost effectiveness included baseline fracture risk, drug effect on the risk of fractures, drug cost, and medication adherence/persistence. The current average score for quality assessment was 17 out of 25 (range 2-15); room for improvement was observed for most studies, which could potentially be explained by the fact that most studies were published prior to the osteoporosis-specific guideline. Greater adherence to guideline recommendations was expected for future studies. The quality of reporting was also suboptimal, especially with regard to treatment side effects, treatment effect after discontinuation, and medication adherence.
CONCLUSIONS
This updated review provides an overview of recently published cost-effectiveness analyses. In comparison with a previous review, recent economic evaluations of anti-osteoporosis drugs were conducted in more countries and included more active drugs and sequential therapy as interventions/comparators. The updated economic evidence could help decision makers prioritize health interventions and the unmet/unreported quality issues indicated by the osteoporosis-specific guideline could be useful in improving the transparency, quality, and comparability of future economic evaluations in osteoporosis.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Humans; Osteoporosis; Osteoporotic Fractures; Pharmaceutical Preparations; State Medicine
PubMed: 33026634
DOI: 10.1007/s40273-020-00965-9