Current management of pregnancy-related low back pain: a national cross-sectional survey of UK physiotherapists.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy-related low back pain (LBP) is very common. Evidence from a systematic review supports the use of exercise and acupuncture, although little is known about the care received by women with pregnancy-related back pain in the UK. OBJECTIVE: To describe current acupuncture and standard care management of pregnancy-related LBP by UK physiotherapists. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of physiotherapists with experience of treating women with pregnancy-related LBP from three professional networks of the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. METHODS: In total, 1093 physiotherapists were mailed a questionnaire. The questionnaire captured respondents' demographic and practice setting information, and experience of managing women with pregnancy-related back pain, and investigated the reported management of pregnancy-related LBP using a patient case vignette of a specific, 'typical' case. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 58% (629/1093). Four hundred and ninety-nine physiotherapists had experience of treating women with pregnancy-related LBP and were included in the analysis. Most respondents worked wholly or partly in the UK National Health Service (78%). Most respondents reported that they treat patients with pregnancy-related LBP in three to four one-to-one treatment sessions over 3 to 6 weeks. The results show that a range of management strategies are employed for pregnancy-related LBP, and multimodal management is common. The most common reported treatment was home exercises (94%), and 24% of physiotherapists reported that they would use acupuncture with the patient described in the vignette. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first robust data on the management of pregnancy-related LBP by UK physiotherapists. Multimodal management is common, although exercise is the most frequently used treatment for pregnancy-related LBP. Acupuncture is used less often for this patient group

Mixed methods in evaluating acupuncture and standard care for pregnant women with back pain: ease back

No abstrac

Recommendations for exercise adherence measures in musculoskeletal settings : a systematic review and consensus meeting (protocol)

Background: Exercise programmes are frequently advocated for the management of musculoskeletal disorders; however, adherence is an important pre-requisite for their success. The assessment of exercise adherence requires the use of relevant and appropriate measures, but guidance for appropriate assessment does not exist. This research will identify and evaluate the quality and acceptability of all measures used to assess exercise adherence within a musculoskeletal setting, seeking to reach consensus for the most relevant and appropriate measures for application in research and/or clinical practice settings. Methods/design: There are two key stages to the proposed research. First, a systematic review of the quality and acceptability of measures used to assess exercise adherence in musculoskeletal disorders; second, a consensus meeting. The systematic review will be conducted in two phases and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to ensure a robust methodology. Phase one will identify all measures that have been used to assess exercise adherence in a musculoskeletal setting. Phase two will seek to identify published and unpublished evidence of the measurement and practical properties of identified measures. Study quality will be assessed against the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines. A shortlist of best quality measures will be produced for consideration during stage two: a meeting of relevant stakeholders in the United Kingdom during which consensus on the most relevant and appropriate measures of exercise adherence for application in research and/or clinical practice settings will be sought. Discussion: This study will benefit clinicians who seek to evaluate patients’ levels of exercise adherence and those intending to undertake research, service evaluation, or audit relating to exercise adherence in the musculoskeletal field. The findings will impact upon new research studies which aim to understand the factors that predict adherence with exercise and which test different adherence-enhancing interventions. PROSPERO reference: CRD4201300621

Effectiveness of a telehealth physiotherapist-delivered intensive dietary weight loss program combined with exercise in people with knee osteoarthritis and overweight or obesity: study protocol for the POWER randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is associated with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Weight loss, alongside exercise, is a recommended treatment for individuals with knee OA and overweight/obesity. However, many patients cannot access weight loss specialists such as dietitians. Innovative care models expanding roles of other clinicians may increase access to weight loss support for people with knee OA. Physiotherapists may be well placed to deliver such support. This two-group parallel, superiority randomized controlled trial aims to compare a physiotherapist-delivered diet and exercise program to an exercise program alone, over 6 months. The primary hypothesis is that the physiotherapist-delivered diet plus exercise program will lead to greater weight loss than the exercise program. METHODS: 88 participants with painful knee OA and body mass index (BMI) > 27 kg/m2 will be recruited from the community. Following baseline assessment, participants will be randomised to either exercise alone or diet plus exercise groups. Participants in the exercise group will have 6 consultations (20-30 min) via videoconference with a physiotherapist over 6 months for a strengthening exercise program, physical activity plan and educational/exercise resources. Participants in the diet plus exercise group will have 6 consultations (50-75 min) via videoconference with a physiotherapist prescribing a ketogenic very low-calorie diet with meal replacements and educational resources to support weight loss and healthy eating, plus the intervention of the exercise only group. Outcomes are measured at baseline and 6 months. The primary outcome is percentage change in body weight measured by a blinded assessor. Secondary outcomes include self-reported knee pain, physical function, global change in knee problems, quality of life, physical activity levels, and internalised weight stigma, as well as BMI, waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, physical performance measures and quadriceps strength, measured by a blinded assessor. Additional measures include adherence, adverse events, fidelity and process measures. DISCUSSION: This trial will determine whether a physiotherapist-delivered diet plus exercise program is more effective for weight loss than an exercise only program. Findings will inform the development and implementation of innovative health service models addressing weight management and exercise for patients with knee OA and overweight/obesity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NIH US National Library of Medicine, Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04733053 (Feb 1 2021)

Cost-utility analysis of interventions to improve effectiveness of exercise therapy for adults with knee osteoarthritis: The BEEP trial

© The Author(s) 2018. Objectives. Evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of enhancing physical therapy exercise programmes in order to improve outcomes for patients with knee OA remains unclear. This study investigates the cost-effectiveness of two enhanced physical therapy interventions compared with usual physical therapy care (UC) for adults with knee OA. Methods. A trial-based cost-utility analysis of individually tailored exercise (ITE) or targeted exercise adherence (TEA) compared with UC was undertaken over a period of 18 months. Patient-level costs were obtained, and effectiveness was measured in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), allowing the calculation of cost per QALY gained from a base-case UK health-care perspective. Results. The UC group was associated with lower National Health Service (NHS) costs [ITE-UC: £273.30, 95% CI: £-62.10 to £562.60; TEA-UC: £141.80, 95% CI: £-135.60 to £408.10)] and slightly higher QALY gains (ITE-UC: -0.015, 95% CI: -0.057 to 0.026; TEA-UC: -0.003, 95% CI: -0.045 to 0.038). In the base case, UC was the most likely cost-effective option (probability < 40% of ITE or TEA cost-effective at £20 000/QALY). Differences in total costs were attributable to intervention costs, number of visits to NHS consultants and knee surgery, which were higher in both ITE and TEA groups. Conclusion. This is the first economic evaluation comparing usual physical therapy care vs enhanced exercise interventions for knee OA that involves greater exercise individualization, supervision and progression or that focuses on exercise and physical activity adherence over the longer term. Our findings show that UC is likely to be the most cost-effective option.This paper presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research (grant number: RP-PG-0407-10386) and the Arthritis Research UK Centre in Primary Care grant (grant number: 18139). Time from E.L.H. was supported, in part, by the NIHR Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care West Midlands and time from M.A.H. was supported, in part, by the NIHR School for Primary Care Research. N.E.F. was supported through an NIHR Research Professorship (NIHR-RP-011-015). N.E.F. and E.M.H. are NIHR Senior Investigators. The NIHR Clinical Research Network West Midlands (previously PCRN West Midlands North) and North Staffordshire Primary Care Research Consortium provided additional funding for GP and physical therapy Research Facilitators to support engagement of NHS providers in the BEEP trial; NIHR PCRN West Midlands North funded NHS service support costs for the delivery of the trial