28 research outputs found

    Nonexercise Interventions for Prevention of Musculoskeletal Injuries in Armed Forces: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

    Get PDF
    Context: This study evaluates the effect of nonexercise interventions on the reduction of risk for musculoskeletal injuries in armed forces. Evidence acquisition: A database search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, SPORTdiscus, Greylit, Open Grey, the WHO trial registry, and the reference lists of included articles up to July 2019. RCTs and cluster RCTs evaluating nonexercise interventions for the prevention of musculoskeletal injuries in armed forces compared with any other intervention(s) or no intervention were eligible for inclusion. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were done by 2 authors independently, followed by meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development,

    Unscheduled return visits to a Dutch inner-city emergency department

    Get PDF
    Background Unscheduled return visits to the emergency department (ED) may reflect shortcomings in care. This study characterized ED return visits with respect to incidence, risk factors, reasons and post-ED disposition. We hypothesized that risk factors for unscheduled return and reasons for returning would differ from previous studies, due to differences in health care systems. Methods All unscheduled return visits occurring within 1 week and related to the initial ED visit were selected. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to determine independent factors associated with unscheduled return, using patient information available at the initial visit. Reasons for returning unscheduled were categorized into illness-, patient- or physician-related. Post-ED disposition was compared between patients with unscheduled return visits and the patients who did not return. Results Five percent (n = 2,492) of total ED visits (n = 49,341) were unscheduled return visits. Patients with an urgent triage level, patients presenting during the night shift, with a wound or local infection, abdominal pain or urinary problems were more likely to return unscheduled. Reasons to revisit unscheduled were mostly illness-related (49%) or patient-related (41%). Admission rates for returning patients (16%) were the same as for the patients who did not return (17%). Conclusions Apart from abdominal complaints, risk factors for unscheduled return differ from previous studies. Short-term follow-up at the outpatient clinic or general practitioner for patients with urgent triage levels and suffering from wounds or local infections, abdominal pain or urinary problem might prevent unscheduled return

    MANIPULATIVE THERAPY AND CLINICAL PREDICTION CRITERIA IN TREATMENT OF ACUTE NONSPECIFIC LOW BACK PAIN

    No full text
    Manipulative therapy as part of a multidimensional approach may be more effective than standard physical therapy in treating Acute Nonspecific Low Back Pain. 64 participants, 29 women and 35 men, with Acute Nonspecific Low Back Pain and a mean age of 40 yr. (SD = 9.6) were randomly assigned to two groups: an experimental group (manipulative therapy plus, physical therapy) and a control group (only physical therapy). A multicentre, nonblinded, randomised clinical trial was conducted. Pain relief was the main performance criteria measured together with secondary criteria which included functional status and mobility of the lower back. Fritz, Childs, and Flynn's clinical prediction rule-a duration of symptoms less than 16 days, no pain distal of the knee-was used to analyse the results.. In combination with an age > 35 years, results showed a statistical significant effect for disability, but no statistically Significant benefit of additional manipulative therapy over physical therapy found for pain and mobility within 4 treatments. Controlled for the applied clinical prediction rule, there were statistically significant interaction effects with low effect size for disability and sex, but no significant effects were found for pain of mobility

    Spinal mechanical load: A predictor of persistent low back pain? A prospective cohort study

    Get PDF
    Prospective inception cohort. To assess the prognostic value of spinal mechanical load, assessed with the 24-hour schedule (24HS), in subjects with acute non-specific low back pain (ALBP) and to examine the influence of spinal mechanical load on the course of ALBP. In view of the characteristics of the natural course of ALBP, this should be viewed as a persistent condition in many patients rather that a benign self-limiting disease. Therefore, secondary prevention could be beneficial. Spinal mechanical load is a risk factor for ALBP and possibly a (modifiable) prognostic factor for persistent (i.e. recurrent and/or chronic) LBP. One hundred patients from primary care with ALBP were eligible for inclusion. At 6 months, 88 subjects completed the follow-up. For the follow-up assessment a research assistant, unaware of our interest in the prognostic factors, contacted the subjects by telephone. Questionnaires were completed focusing on changes in demographic data and on the course and current status of ALBP. Persistent LBP occurred in 60% subjects. After multivariate regression analysis smoking (harmful) and advanced age (protective) were associated with persistent LBP. Differences in 24HS scores at baseline and follow-up were univariate-related to persistent LBP. Spinal mechanical load, quantified with the 24HS, is not a prognostic factor for persistent LBP. Modification of spinal mechanical load in terms of 24HS scores could be beneficial for secondary prevention in patients with acute LBP

    Brief multimodal psychosomatic therapy in patients with medically unexplained symptoms: feasibility and treatment effects

    No full text
    Patients repeatedly presenting with medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) to their GPs, suffer from their symptoms. Experts in the field suggest a multicomponent approach for these patients. Brief multimodal psychosomatic therapy (BMPT) is such an intervention. To test the systematic identification of eligible patients, acceptability of BMPT and potential treatment effects of BMPT. The participants in this randomized pilot trial, patients consulting their GPs more than once with MUS, were randomized to intervention [usual care (UC) and additional BMPT] or control condition (UC alone).We monitored the number of patients identified and recruited, trial recruitment and retention. Potential treatment effects were measured with perceived symptom severity [Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)]; patients' self-rated symptoms of distress, depression, anxiety and somatization [Four-Dimensional Symptom Questionnaire (4DSQ)]; symptoms of hyperventilation [Nijmegen Hyperventilation List (NHL)]; physical and mental health status and quality of life [Short-Form Health Survey-36 items (SF-36)]; and level of functioning (measure of general functioning). Follow-up was 1 year. A total of 42 patients could be included in the trial. Four patients withdrew after randomization and two patients were lost to follow-up, resulting in 36 patients (86%). During the 12-month follow-up after BMPT, there was an improvement in perceived symptom severity [adjusted mean difference -2.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.6 to -0.3], in somatization (adjusted mean difference -4.4, 95% CI -7.5 to -1.4) and in symptoms of hyperventilation (adjusted mean difference -5.7, 95% CI -10.5 to -0.8). This randomized pilot study shows that a larger trial studying the effectiveness of BMPT in patients with MUS in primary care is feasible and usefu

    Walkouts from the emergency department: characteristics, reasons and medical care needs

    No full text
    The aim of this study was to assess the walkout rate and to identify influencing patient and visit characteristics on walkout. Furthermore, we assessed the reasons for leaving and medical care needs after leaving. In a 4-month population-based cohort study, the characteristics and influencing factors of walkout from two emergency departments in the Netherlands were studied. Afterwards, a follow-up telephone interview was conducted to assess the reasons for leaving and medical care needed. A total of 169 out of 23 780 (0.7%) registered patients left without treatment, of whom 62% left after triage. Of the triaged walkouts, 26% had urgent or highly urgent medical complaints and target times to treatment had elapsed for 54% of the triaged walkouts. Independent predictors of leaving without treatment included being self-referred, arriving during the evening or night or during crowded conditions, and relatively lower urgency triage allocation. Ninety (53%) walkouts were contacted afterwards by phone. Long waiting time (61%) was the most-cited prime reason for leaving. Medical problems had resolved spontaneously in 19 of the 90 (21%) walkouts, and 47 (52%) walkouts reported having sought medical care elsewhere. For 24 of the 90 (27%) walkouts with persisting complaints, medical care was advised during the follow-up telephone call. The average observed daily walkout rate was 1.4 patients over the 4-month period. In general, walkouts are self-referrals with lower urgent complaints, arriving during the evening or night shift or during crowded conditions. Most walkouts leave because of perceived long waiting time
    corecore