-
International Orthopaedics Feb 2022Systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of manual therapy in improving carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) symptoms, physical function, and nerve... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM OF THE STUDY
Systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of manual therapy in improving carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) symptoms, physical function, and nerve conduction studies.
METHOD
MEDLINE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, TRIP database, and PEDro databases were searched from the inception to September 2021. PICO search strategy was used to identify randomized controlled trials applying manual therapy on patients with CTS. Eligible studies and data extraction were conducted independently by two reviewers. Methodology quality and risk of bias were assessed by PEDro scale. Outcomes assessed were pain intensity, physical function, and nerve conduction studies.
RESULTS
Eighty-one potential studies were identified and six studies involving 401 patients were finally included. Pain intensity immediately after treatment showed a pooled standard mean difference (SMD) of - 2.13 with 95% confidence interval (CI) (- 2.39, - 1.86). Physical function with Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire (BCTS-Q) showed a pooled SMD of - 1.67 with 95% CI (- 1.92, - 1.43) on symptoms severity, and a SMD of - 0.89 with 95% CI (- 1.08, - 0.70) on functional status. Nerve conduction studies showed a SMD of - 0.19 with 95% CI (- 0.40, - 0.02) on motor conduction and a SMD of - 1.15 with 95% CI (- 1.36, - 0.93) on sensory conduction.
CONCLUSIONS
This study highlights the effectiveness of manual therapy techniques based on soft tissue and neurodynamic mobilizations, in isolation, on pain, physical function, and nerve conduction studies in patients with CTS.
Topics: Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; Humans; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Neural Conduction; Pain; Pain Measurement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34862562
DOI: 10.1007/s00264-021-05272-2 -
World Journal of Orthopedics Jan 2015Spinal cord injury (SCI) is the injury of the spinal cord from the foramen magnum to the cauda equina which occurs as a result of compulsion, incision or contusion. The... (Review)
Review
Spinal cord injury (SCI) is the injury of the spinal cord from the foramen magnum to the cauda equina which occurs as a result of compulsion, incision or contusion. The most common causes of SCI in the world are traffic accidents, gunshot injuries, knife injuries, falls and sports injuries. There is a strong relationship between functional status and whether the injury is complete or not complete, as well as the level of the injury. The results of SCI bring not only damage to independence and physical function, but also include many complications from the injury. Neurogenic bladder and bowel, urinary tract infections, pressure ulcers, orthostatic hypotension, fractures, deep vein thrombosis, spasticity, autonomic dysreflexia, pulmonary and cardiovascular problems, and depressive disorders are frequent complications after SCI. SCI leads to serious disability in the patient resulting in the loss of work, which brings psychosocial and economic problems. The treatment and rehabilitation period is long, expensive and exhausting in SCI. Whether complete or incomplete, SCI rehabilitation is a long process that requires patience and motivation of the patient and relatives. Early rehabilitation is important to prevent joint contractures and the loss of muscle strength, conservation of bone density, and to ensure normal functioning of the respiratory and digestive system. An interdisciplinary approach is essential in rehabilitation in SCI, as in the other types of rehabilitation. The team is led by a physiatrist and consists of the patients' family, physiotherapist, occupational therapist, dietician, psychologist, speech therapist, social worker and other consultant specialists as necessary.
PubMed: 25621206
DOI: 10.5312/wjo.v6.i1.8 -
The Journal of Head Trauma... 2019To characterize the indications, timing, barriers, and perceived value of rehabilitation currently provided for individuals with moderate or severe traumatic brain...
OBJECTIVE
To characterize the indications, timing, barriers, and perceived value of rehabilitation currently provided for individuals with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) based on the perspectives of providers who work in the ICU setting.
PARTICIPANTS
Members (n = 66) of the Neurocritical Care Society and the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine.
DESIGN
An anonymous electronic survey of the timing of rehabilitation for patients with TBI in the ICU.
MAIN MEASURES
Questions asked about type and timing of rehabilitation in the ICU, extent of family involvement, participation of physiatrists in patient care, and barriers to early rehabilitation.
RESULTS
Sixty-six respondents who reported caring for patients with TBI in the ICU completed the survey; 98% recommended rehabilitative care while patients were in the ICU. Common reasons to wait for the initiation of physical therapy and occupational therapy were normalization of intracranial pressure (86% and 89%) and hemodynamic stability (66% and 69%).
CONCLUSIONS
The majority of providers caring for patients with TBI in the ICU support rehabilitation efforts, typically after a patient is extubated, intracranial pressure has normalized, and the patient is hemodynamically stable. Our findings describe current practice; future studies can be designed to determine optimal timing, intensity, and patient selection for early rehabilitation.
Topics: Brain Injuries, Traumatic; Clinical Decision-Making; Hemodynamics; Hospitalization; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Intracranial Pressure; Occupational Therapy; Patient Care Team; Physical Therapy Modalities; Speech Therapy; Surveys and Questionnaires; Time-to-Treatment
PubMed: 30829824
DOI: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000477 -
JAMA Network Open Jan 2019Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is the most common reason for spine surgery in older US adults. There is an evidence gap about nonsurgical LSS treatment options. (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is the most common reason for spine surgery in older US adults. There is an evidence gap about nonsurgical LSS treatment options.
OBJECTIVE
To explore the comparative clinical effectiveness of 3 nonsurgical interventions for patients with LSS.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
Three-arm randomized clinical trial of 3 years' duration (November 2013 to June 2016). Analysis began in August 2016. All interventions were delivered during 6 weeks with follow-up at 2 months and 6 months at an outpatient research clinic. Patients older than 60 years with LSS were recruited from the general public. Eligibility required anatomical evidence of central canal and/or lateral recess stenosis (magnetic resonance imaging/computed tomography) and clinical symptoms associated with LSS (neurogenic claudication; less symptoms with flexion). Analysis was intention to treat.
INTERVENTIONS
Medical care, group exercise, and manual therapy/individualized exercise. Medical care consisted of medications and/or epidural injections provided by a physiatrist. Group exercise classes were supervised by fitness instructors in senior community centers. Manual therapy/individualized exercise consisted of spinal mobilization, stretches, and strength training provided by chiropractors and physical therapists.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Primary outcomes were between-group differences at 2 months in self-reported symptoms and physical function measured by the Swiss Spinal Stenosis questionnaire (score range, 12-55) and a measure of walking capacity using the self-paced walking test (meters walked for 0 to 30 minutes).
RESULTS
A total of 259 participants (mean [SD] age, 72.4 [7.8] years; 137 women [52.9%]) were allocated to medical care (88 [34.0%]), group exercise (84 [32.4%]), or manual therapy/individualized exercise (87 [33.6%]). Adjusted between-group analyses at 2 months showed manual therapy/individualized exercise had greater improvement of symptoms and physical function compared with medical care (-2.0; 95% CI, -3.6 to -0.4) or group exercise (-2.4; 95% CI, -4.1 to -0.8). Manual therapy/individualized exercise had a greater proportion of responders (≥30% improvement) in symptoms and physical function (20%) and walking capacity (65.3%) at 2 months compared with medical care (7.6% and 48.7%, respectively) or group exercise (3.0% and 46.2%, respectively). At 6 months, there were no between-group differences in mean outcome scores or responder rates.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
A combination of manual therapy/individualized exercise provides greater short-term improvement in symptoms and physical function and walking capacity than medical care or group exercises, although all 3 interventions were associated with improvements in long-term walking capacity.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01943435.
Topics: Aged; Ambulatory Care Facilities; Conservative Treatment; Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Injections, Epidural; Lumbar Vertebrae; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Male; Medication Therapy Management; Middle Aged; Musculoskeletal Manipulations; Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care; Spinal Stenosis; Tomography, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 30646197
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.6828 -
European Journal of Physical and... Dec 2017
Topics: Female; Humans; Italy; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms; Male; Physiatrists; Physician's Role; Prognosis; Risk Assessment; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Bladder, Neurogenic; Urinary Catheterization; Urodynamics
PubMed: 29099163
DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.17.05063-8 -
American Journal of Physical Medicine &... Sep 2017This study aimed to assess the effects of single and multiple massage treatments on pressure-pain threshold (PPT) at myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) in people with... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to assess the effects of single and multiple massage treatments on pressure-pain threshold (PPT) at myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) in people with myofascial pain syndrome expressed as tension-type headache.
DESIGN
Individuals (n = 62) with episodic or chronic tension-type headache were randomized to receive 12 twice-weekly 45-min massage or sham ultrasound sessions or wait-list control. Massage focused on trigger point release (ischemic compression) of MTrPs in the bilateral upper trapezius and suboccipital muscles. PPT was measured at MTrPs with a pressure algometer pre and post the first and final (12th) treatments.
RESULTS
PPT increased across the study timeframe in all four muscle sites tested for massage, but not sham ultrasound or wait-list groups (P < 0.0001 for suboccipital; P < 0.004 for upper trapezius). Post hoc analysis within the massage group showed (1) an initial, immediate increase in PPT (all P values < 0.05), (2) a cumulative and sustained increase in PPT over baseline (all P values < 0.05), and (3) an additional immediate increase in PPT at the final (12th) massage treatment (all P values < 0.05, except upper trapezius left, P = 0.17).
CONCLUSIONS
Single and multiple massage applications increase PPT at MTrPs. The pain threshold of MTrPs have a great capacity to increase; even after multiple massage treatments additional gain in PPT was observed.
TO CLAIM CME CREDITS
Complete the self-assessment activity and evaluation online at http://www.physiatry.org/JournalCME CME OBJECTIVES: Upon completion of this article, the reader should be able to: (1) Understand the contribution of myofascial trigger points to myofascial pain; (2) Describe an effective treatment for decreasing tenderness of a myofascial trigger point; and (3) Discuss the relative values of single vs. multiple massage sessions on increasing pressure-pain thresholds at myofascial trigger points.
LEVEL
Advanced ACCREDITATION: The Association of Academic Physiatrists is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.The Association of Academic Physiatrists designates this Journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 0.5 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Isometric Contraction; Male; Massage; Muscle, Skeletal; Myofascial Pain Syndromes; Occipital Lobe; Pain Measurement; Pain Threshold; Pressure; Single-Blind Method; Superficial Back Muscles; Tension-Type Headache; Treatment Outcome; Trigger Points; Waiting Lists; Young Adult
PubMed: 28248690
DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000728