Does inter-vertebral range of motion increase after spinal manipulation? A prospective cohort study.

Background: Spinal manipulation for nonspecific neck pain is thought to work in part by improving inter-vertebral range of motion (IV-RoM), but it is difficult to measure this or determine whether it is related to clinical outcomes. Objectives: This study undertook to determine whether cervical spine flexion and extension IV-RoM increases after a course of spinal manipulation, to explore relationships between any IV-RoM increases and clinical outcomes and to compare palpation with objective measurement in the detection of hypo-mobile segments. Method: Thirty patients with nonspecific neck pain and 30 healthy controls matched for age and gender received quantitative fluoroscopy (QF) screenings to measure flexion and extension IV-RoM (C1-C6) at baseline and 4-week follow-up between September 2012-13. Patients received up to 12 neck manipulations and completed NRS, NDI and Euroqol 5D-5L at baseline, plus PGIC and satisfaction questionnaires at follow-up. IV-RoM accuracy, repeatability and hypo-mobility cut-offs were determined. Minimal detectable changes (MDC) over 4 weeks were calculated from controls. Patients and control IV-RoMs were compared at baseline as well as changes in patients over 4 weeks. Correlations between outcomes and the number of manipulations received and the agreement (Kappa) between palpated and QF-detected of hypo-mobile segments were calculated. Results: QF had high accuracy (worst RMS error 0.5o) and repeatability (highest SEM 1.1o, lowest ICC 0.90) for IV-RoM measurement. Hypo-mobility cut offs ranged from 0.8o to 3.5o. No outcome was significantly correlated with increased IV-RoM above MDC and there was no significant difference between the number of hypo-mobile segments in patients and controls at baseline or significant increases in IV-RoMs in patients. However, there was a modest and significant correlation between the number of manipulations received and the number of levels and directions whose IV-RoM increased beyond MDC (Rho=0.39, p=0.043). There was also no agreement between palpation and QF in identifying hypo-mobile segments (Kappa 0.04-0.06). Conclusions: This study found no differences in cervical sagittal IV-RoM between patients with non-specific neck pain and matched controls. There was a modest dose-response relationship between the number of manipulations given and number of levels increasing IV-RoM - providing evidence that neck manipulation has a mechanical effect at segmental levels. However, patient-reported outcomes were not related to this

The headache under-response to treatment (HURT) questionnaire, an outcome measure to guide follow-up in primary care: development, psychometric evaluation and assessment of utility

Background: Headache disorders are both common and burdensome but, given the many people affected, provision of health care to all is challenging. Structured headache services based in primary care are the most efficient, equitable and cost-effective solution but place responsibility for managing most patients on health-care providers with limited training in headache care. The development of practical management aids for primary care is therefore a purpose of the Global Campaign against Headache. This manuscript presents an outcome measure, the Headache Under-Response to Treatment (HURT) questionnaire, describing its purpose, development, psychometric evaluation and assessment for clinical utility. The objective was a simple-to-use instrument that would both assess outcome and provide guidance to improving outcome, having utility across the range of headache disorders, across clinical settings and across countries and cultures. Methods: After literature review, an expert consensus group drawn from all six world regions formulated HURT through item development and item reduction using item-response theory. Using the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study’s general-population respondent panel, two mailed surveys assessed the psychometric properties of HURT, comparing it with other instruments as external validators. Reliability was assessed in patients in two culturally-contrasting clinical settings: headache specialist centres in Europe (n = 159) and primary-care centres in Saudi Arabia (n = 40). Clinical utility was assessed in similar settings (Europe n = 201; Saudi Arabia n = 342). Results: The final instrument, an 8-item self-administered questionnaire, addressed headache frequency, disability, medication use and effect, patients’ perceptions of headache “control” and their understanding of their diagnoses. Psychometric evaluation revealed a two-factor model (headache frequency, disability and medication use; and medication efficacy and headache control), with scale properties apparently stable across disorders and correlating well and in the expected directions with external validators. The literature review found few instruments linking assessment to clinical advice or suggested actions: HURT appeared to fill this gap. In European specialist care, it showed utility as an outcome measure across headache disorders. In Saudi Arabian primary care, HURT (translated into Arabic) was reliable and responsive to clinical change. Conclusions: With demonstrated validity and clinical utility across disorders, cultures and settings, HURT is available for clinical and research purposes

Design Patterns for Augmented Reality Learning Games

Augmented Reality (AR) is expected to receive a major uptake with the recent availability of high quality wearable AR devices such as Microsoft’s Hololens. However, the design of interaction with AR applications and games is still a field of experimentation and upcoming innovations in sensor technology provide new ways. With this paper, we aim to provide a step towards the structured use of design patterns for sensor-based AR games, which can also inform general application development in the field of AR

Mesotherapy: From Historical Notes to Scientific Evidence and Future Prospects

Intradermal therapy, known as mesotherapy, is a technique used to inject a drug into the surface layer of the skin. In particular, it involves the use of a short needle to deposit the drug in the dermis. The intradermal microdeposit modulates the drug's kinetics, slowing absorption and prolonging the local mechanism of action. It is successfully applied in the treatment of some forms of localized pain syndromes and other local clinical conditions. It could be suggested when a systemic drug-sparing effect is useful, when other therapies have failed (or cannot be used), and when it can synergize with other pharmacological or nonpharmacological therapies. Despite the lack of randomized clinical trials in some fields of application, a general consensus is also reached in nonpharmacological mechanism of action, the technique execution modalities, the scientific rationale to apply it in some indications, and the usefulness of the informed consent. The Italian Mesotherapy Society proposes this position paper to apply intradermal therapy based on scientific evidence and no longer on personal bias

Team players against headache: multidisciplinary treatment of primary headaches and medication overuse headache

Multidisciplinary approaches are gaining acceptance in headache treatment. However, there is a lack of scientific data about the efficacy of various strategies and their combinations offered by physiotherapists, physicians, psychologists and headache nurses. Therefore, an international platform for more intense collaboration between these professions and between headache centers is needed. Our aims were to establish closer collaboration and an interchange of knowledge between headache care providers and different disciplines. A scientific session focusing on multidisciplinary headache management was organised at The European Headache and Migraine Trust International Congress (EHMTIC) 2010 in Nice. A summary of the contributions and the discussion is presented. It was concluded that effective multidisciplinary headache treatment can reduce headache frequency and burden of disease, as well as the risk for medication overuse headache. The significant value of physiotherapy, education in headache schools, and implementation of strategies of cognitive behavioural therapy was highlighted and the way paved for future studies and international collaboration

Chronic migraine plus medication overuse headache: two entities or not?

Chronic migraine (CM) represents migraine natural evolution from its episodic form. It is realized through a chronicization phase that may require months or years and varies from patient to patient. The transition to more frequent attacks pattern is influenced by lifestyle, life events, comorbid conditions and personal genetic terrain, and it often leads to acute drugs overuse. Medication overuse headache (MOH) may complicate every type of headache and all the drugs employed for headache treatment can cause MOH. The first step in the management of CM complicated by medication overuse must be the withdrawal of the overused drugs and a detoxification treatment. The goal is not only to detoxify the patient and stop the chronic headache but also to improve responsiveness to acute or prophylactic drugs. Different methods have been suggested: gradual or abrupt withdrawal; home treatment, hospitalization, or a day-hospital setting; re-prophylaxes performed immediately or at the end of the wash-out period. Up to now, only topiramate and local injection of onabotulinumtoxinA have shown efficacy as therapeutic agents for re-prophylaxis after detoxification in patients with CM with and without medication overuse. Although the two treatments showed similar efficacy, onabotulinumtoxinA is associated with a better adverse events profile. Recently, the Phase III Research Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy (PREEMPT) clinical program proved that patients with CM, even those with MOH, are the ones most likely to benefit from onabotulinumtoxinA treatment. Furthermore, it provided an injection paradigm that can be used as a guide for a correct administration of onabotulinumtoxinA

Overview of diagnosis and management of paediatric headache. Part I: diagnosis

Headache is the most common somatic complaint in children and adolescents. The evaluation should include detailed history of children and adolescents completed by detailed general and neurological examinations. Moreover, the possible role of psychological factors, life events and excessively stressful lifestyle in influencing recurrent headache need to be checked. The choice of laboratory tests rests on the differential diagnosis suggested by the history, the character and temporal pattern of the headache, and the physical and neurological examinations. Subjects who have any signs or symptoms of focal/progressive neurological disturbances should be investigated by neuroimaging techniques. The electroencephalogram and other neurophysiological examinations are of limited value in the routine evaluation of headaches. In a primary headache disorder, headache itself is the illness and headache is not attributed to any other disorder (e.g. migraine, tension-type headache, cluster headache and other trigeminal autonomic cephalgias). In secondary headache disorders, headache is the symptom of identifiable structural, metabolic or other abnormality. Red flags include the first or worst headache ever in the life, recent headache onset, increasing severity or frequency, occipital location, awakening from sleep because of headache, headache occurring exclusively in the morning associated with severe vomiting and headache associated with straining. Thus, the differential diagnosis between primary and secondary headaches rests mainly on clinical criteria. A thorough evaluation of headache in children and adolescents is necessary to make the correct diagnosis and initiate treatment, bearing in mind that children with headache are more likely to experience psychosocial adversity and to grow up with an excess of both headache and other physical and psychiatric symptoms and this creates an important healthcare problem for their future life

Placebo and other psychological interactions in headache treatment

We present a theory according which a headache treatment acts through a specific biological effect (when it exists), a placebo effect linked to both expectancy and repetition of its administration (conditioning), and a non-specific psychological effect. The respective part of these components varies with the treatments and the clinical situations. During antiquity, suggestions and beliefs were the mainstays of headache treatment. The word placebo appeared at the beginning of the eighteenth century. Controversies about its effect came from an excessive interpretation due to methodological bias, inadequate consideration of the variation of the measure (regression to the mean) and of the natural course of the disease. Several powerful studies on placebo effect showed that the nature of the treatment, the associated announce, the patients’ expectancy, and the repetition of the procedures are of paramount importance. The placebo expectancy is associated with an activation of pre-frontal, anterior cingular, accumbens, and periacqueducal grey opioidergic neurons possibly triggered by the dopaminergic meso-limbic system. In randomized control trials, several arms design could theoretically give information concerning the respective part of the different component of the outcome and control the natural course of the disease. However, for migraine and tension type headache attacks treatment, no three arm (verum, placebo, and natural course) trial is available in the literature. Indirect evidence of a placebo effect in migraine attack treatment, comes from the high amplitude of the improvement observed in the placebo arms (28% of the patients). This figure is lower (6%) when using the harder criterium of pain free at 2 h. But these data disregard the effect of the natural course. For prophylactic treatment with oral medication, the trials performed in the last decades report an improvement in 21% of the patients in the placebo arms. However, in these studies the duration of administration was limited, the control of attacks uncertain as well as the evolution of the co-morbid psycho-pathology. Considering the reviews and meta-analysis of complex prophylactic procedures, it must be concluded that their effect is mostly linked to a placebo and non-specific psychological effects. Acupuncture may have a slight specific effect on tension type headache, but not on migraine. Manual therapy studies do not exhibit difference between manipulation, mobilization, and controls; touch has no proven specific effect. A comprehensive efficacy review of biofeedback studies concludes to a small specific effect on tension type headache but not on migraine. A review of behavioral treatment conclude to an interesting mean improvement but did not demonstrated a specific effect with the exception of a four arm study including a pseudo meditation control group. Expectation-linked placebo, conditioning, and non-specific psychological effects vary according clinical situations and psychological context; likely low in RCT, high after anempathic medical contact, and at its maximum with a desired charismatic healer. The announcements of doctors strongly influence the beliefs of patients, and in consequence their pain and anxiety sensibilities; this modulates the amplitude of the placebo and the non-specific psychological effects and is therefore a major determinant of the therapeutic success. Furthermore, any repetitive contact, even through a placebo, may interfere positively with the psychopathological co-morbidity. One has to keep in mind that the non-specific psychological interactions play a major role in the improvement of the majority of the headache sufferers

Frequency of left ventricular hypertrophy in non-valvular atrial fibrillation

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is significantly related to adverse clinical outcomes in patients at high risk of cardiovascular events. In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), data on LVH, that is, prevalence and determinants, are inconsistent mainly because of different definitions and heterogeneity of study populations. We determined echocardiographic-based LVH prevalence and clinical factors independently associated with its development in a prospective cohort of patients with non-valvular (NV) AF. From the "Atrial Fibrillation Registry for Ankle-brachial Index Prevalence Assessment: Collaborative Italian Study" (ARAPACIS) population, 1,184 patients with NVAF (mean age 72 \ub1 11 years; 56% men) with complete data to define LVH were selected. ARAPACIS is a multicenter, observational, prospective, longitudinal on-going study designed to estimate prevalence of peripheral artery disease in patients with NVAF. We found a high prevalence of LVH (52%) in patients with NVAF. Compared to those without LVH, patients with AF with LVH were older and had a higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, and previous myocardial infarction (MI). A higher prevalence of ankle-brachial index 640.90 was seen in patients with LVH (22 vs 17%, p = 0.0392). Patients with LVH were at significantly higher thromboembolic risk, with CHA2DS2-VASc 652 seen in 93% of LVH and in 73% of patients without LVH (p <0.05). Women with LVH had a higher prevalence of concentric hypertrophy than men (46% vs 29%, p = 0.0003). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that female gender (odds ratio [OR] 2.80, p <0.0001), age (OR 1.03 per year, p <0.001), hypertension (OR 2.30, p <0.001), diabetes (OR 1.62, p = 0.004), and previous MI (OR 1.96, p = 0.001) were independently associated with LVH. In conclusion, patients with NVAF have a high prevalence of LVH, which is related to female gender, older age, hypertension, and previous MI. These patients are at high thromboembolic risk and deserve a holistic approach to cardiovascular prevention