Skills, attitudes and uptake of evidence-based practice: a cross-sectional study of chiropractors in the Swedish Chiropractic Association.

BackgroundEvidence-based practice (EBP) is integral to the delivery of high-quality health care. Chiropractic has been a licensed health profession in Sweden since 1989, but little is known of the uptake of EBP in this professional group. This study explored the self-reported skills, attitudes and uptake of EBP, and the enablers and barriers of EBP uptake, among licensed chiropractors in Sweden.MethodsLicensed chiropractors (n = 172) of the Swedish Chiropractic Association (Legitimerade Kiropraktorers Riksorganisation) were invited to participate in an anonymous online questionnaire, using the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude and Utilisation Survey (EBASE) in February 2019.ResultsFifty-six (33%) chiropractors completed the survey. Participants were predominantly male, aged 30-49 years, held a Master's degree, and had received their highest qualification and practiced chiropractic for over a decade. Chiropractors rated their EBP skill-level mostly in the moderate to moderate-high range. The majority of chiropractors reported positive attitudes towards EBP, with most agreeing or strongly agreeing that EBP is necessary in the practice of chiropractic, and that EBP assists in making decisions about patient care. Chiropractors reported an average level of engagement in EBP activities. All participants indicated professional literature and research findings were useful in their day-to-day chiropractic practice. The main perceived enabler of EBP uptake was internet access in the workplace, whereas the main barrier to EBP uptake was lack of clinical evidence in chiropractic.ConclusionsParticipating chiropractors of the Swedish Chiropractic Association were generally favourable of EBP, though only reported modest levels of EBP-related skills and engagement in EBP activities. Our findings suggest future studies investigating interventions focussed on improving chiropractors' skills and uptake of EBP are warranted

Prevalence of neck pain in subjects with metabolic syndrome - a cross-sectional population-based study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is increasingly common. Obesity has been suggested to associate with neck pain but prevalence of neck pain in subjects with MetS has not been studied. Aim of this study was to analyse the association between MetS and neck pain.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study population consisted of 1294 middle-aged subjects in Pieksämäki, Finland. A total of 399 males and 500 females participated (69%). The mean age of both males and females was 46 years. Clinical and biochemical measurements were taken. The participants filled out a standard questionnaire. Psychological distress was assessed with the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). Neck pain was defined as neck pain perceived daily. MetS was defined using National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) criteria. Statistical comparisons between the groups were performed using a bootstrap-type t-test or Chi-Square test. Risk ratios of having neck pain were calculated using generalised linear models with age, smoking, alcohol use, exercise and GHQ-12 score as covariates.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The prevalence of MetS was 33% in males and 29% in females. Neck pain was present in 11% (N = 42) of males and 19% (N = 93) of females (P < 0.001). The prevalence of neck pain was 7.9% (95% CI, 4.9% to 12%) among male subjects without MetS and 16% (95% CI, 10% to 23%) among those with MetS. The respective proportions among females were 16% (95% CI, 12% to 20%) and 25% (95% CI, 18% to 33%). The multivariate analysis showed an increased risk of neck pain in males with MetS (RR 2.1, 95% CI, 1.2 to 3.7, P = 0.010) and in females with MetS (RR 1.5, 95% CI, 1.0 to 2.1, P = 0.040).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>MetS was associated with neck pain. This association was stronger in males, but the prevalence of neck pain was higher in females. Prospective studies should explore the potential causal association between neck pain and MetS and the potential common background factors of neck pain and MetS.</p

The long-term effects of naprapathic manual therapy on back and neck pain - Results from a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Back and neck pain are very common, disabling and recurrent disorders in the general population and the knowledge of long-term effect of treatments are sparse. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term effects (up to one year) of naprapathic manual therapy and evidence-based advice on staying active regarding non-specific back and/or neck pain. Naprapathy, a health profession mainly practiced in Sweden, Finland, Norway and in the USA, is characterized by a combination of manual musculoskeletal manipulations, aiming to decrease pain and disability in the neuromusculoskeletal system.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Subjects with non-specific pain/disability in the back and/or neck lasting for at least two weeks (n = 409), recruited at public companies in Sweden, were included in this pragmatic randomized controlled trial. The two interventions compared were naprapathic manual therapy such as spinal manipulation/mobilization, massage and stretching, (<it>Index Group</it>), and advice to stay active and on how to cope with pain, provided by a physician (C<it>ontrol Group</it>). Pain intensity, disability and health status were measured by questionnaires.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>89% completed the 26-week follow-up and 85% the 52-week follow-up. A higher proportion in the Index Group had a clinically important decrease in pain (risk difference (RD) = 21%, <it>95% CI: 10-30</it>) and disability (RD = 11%, <it>95% CI: 4-22</it>) at 26-week, as well as at 52-week follow-ups (pain: RD = 17%, <it>95% CI: 7-27 </it>and disability: RD = 17%, <it>95% CI: 5-28</it>). The differences between the groups in pain and disability considered over one year were statistically significant favoring naprapathy (p ≤ 0.005). There were also significant differences in improvement in bodily pain and social function (subscales of SF-36 health status) favoring the Index Group.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Combined manual therapy, like naprapathy, is effective in the short and in the long term, and might be considered for patients with non-specific back and/or neck pain.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN56954776.</p

The effect of spinal manipulative therapy on pain relief and function in patients with chronic low back pain: an individual participant data meta-analysis

Background: A 2019 review concluded that spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) results in similar benefit compared to other interventions for chronic low back pain (LBP). Compared to traditional aggregate analyses individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses allows for a more precise estimate of the treatment effect. Purpose: To assess the effect of SMT on pain and function for chronic LBP in a IPD meta-analysis. Data sources: Electronic databases from 2000 until April 2016, and reference lists of eligible trials and related reviews. Study selection: Randomized controlled trials (RCT) examining the effect of SMT in adults with chronic LBP compared to any comparator. Data extraction and data synthesis: We contacted authors from eligible trials. Two review authors independently conducted the study selection and risk of bias. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence. A one-stage mixed model analysis was conducted. Negative point estimates of the mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) favors SMT. Results: Of the 42 RCTs fulfilling the inclusion criteria, we obtained IPD from 21 (n = 4223). Most trials (s = 12, n = 2249) compared SMT to recommended interventions. There is moderate quality evidence that SMT vs recommended interventions resulted in similar outcomes on pain (MD −3.0, 95%CI: −6.9 to 0.9, 10 trials, 1922 participants) and functional status at one month (SMD: −0.2, 95% CI −0.4 to 0.0, 10 trials, 1939 participants). Effects at other follow-up measurements were similar. Results for other comparisons (SMT vs non-recommended interventions; SMT as adjuvant therapy; mobilization vs manipulation) showed similar findings. SMT vs sham SMT analysis was not performed, because we only had data from one study. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these findings. Limitations: Only 50% of the eligible trials were included. Conclusions: Sufficient evidence suggest that SMT provides similar outcomes to recommended interventions, for pain relief and improvement of functional status. SMT would appear to be a good option for the treatment of chronic LBP. Systematic Review Registration Number PROSPERO CRD4201502571

Life values as predictors of pain, disability and sick leave among Swedish registered nurses: a longitudinal study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Prospective studies on high-risk populations, such as subgroups of health care staff, are limited, especially prospective studies among staff not on sick-leave. This paper is a report of a longitudinal study conducted to describe and compare the importance and consistency of life domains among registered nurses (RNs) working in a Swedish hospital and evaluate a model based on the consistency of valued life domains for prediction of pain, disability and sick leave.</p> <p>Method</p> <p>Importance and consistency ratings of life values, in 9 domains, were collected during 2003 and 2006 from 196 RNs using the Valued Living Questionnaire (VLQ). Logistic regression analyses were used for prediction of pain, disability and sick leave at the three-year follow-up. The predictors family relations, marriage couples/intimate relations, parenting, friends/social life, work, education, leisure time, psychological well-being, and physical self-care were used at baseline.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>RNs rated life values regarding parenting as most important and with the highest consistency both at baseline and at follow-up. No significant differences were found between RNs' ratings of importance and consistency over the three-year period, except for friends/social relations that revealed a significant decrease in importance at follow-up. The explanatory models for pain, disability and sick leave significantly predicted pain and disability at follow-up. The odds of having pain were significantly increased by one consistency rating (psychological well-being), while the odds were significantly decreased by physical self-care. In the model predicting disability, consistency in psychological well-being and education significantly increased the odds of being disabled, while consistency in physical self-care significantly decreased the odds.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The results suggest that there might be a link between intra-individual factors reflecting different aspects of appraised life values and musculoskeletal pain (MSP).</p

Predictors of stable return-to-work in non-acute, non-specific spinal pain: low total prior sick-listing, high self prediction and young age. A two-year prospective cohort study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Non-specific spinal pain (NSP), comprising back and/or neck pain, is one of the leading disorders in long-term sick-listing. During 2000-2004, 125 Swedish primary-care patients with non-acute NSP, full-time sick-listed 6 weeks-2 years, were included in a randomized controlled trial to compare a cognitive-behavioural programme with traditional primary care. This prospective cohort study is a re-assessment of the data from the randomized trial with the 2 treatment groups considered as a single cohort. The aim was to investigate which baseline variables predict a stable return-to-work during a 2-year period after baseline: objective variables from function tests, socioeconomic, subjective and/or treatment variables. Stable return-to-work was a return-to-work lasting for at least 1 month from the start of follow-up.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p><it>Stable return-to-work </it>was the outcome variable, the above-mentioned factors were the predictive variables in multiple-logistic regression models, one per follow-up at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after baseline. The factors from univariate analyzes with a <it>p</it>-value of at most .10 were included. The non-significant variables were excluded stepwise to yield models comprising only significant factors (<it>p </it>< .05). As the comparatively few cases made it risky to associate certain predictors with certain time-points, we finally considered the predictors which were represented in at least 3 follow-ups. They are presented with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Three variables qualified, all of them represented in 3 follow-ups: <it>Low total prior sick-listing </it>(including all diagnoses) was the strongest predictor in 2 follow-ups, 18 and 24 months, OR 4.8 [1.9-12.3] and 3.8 [1.6-8.7] respectively, <it>High self prediction </it>(the patients' own belief in return-to-work) was the strongest at 12 months, OR 5.2 [1.5-17.5] and <it>Young age </it>(max 44 years) the second strongest at 18 months, OR 3.5 [1.3-9.1].</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In primary-care patients with non-acute NSP, the strong predictors of stable return-to-work were 2 socioeconomic variables, <it>Low total prior sick-listing </it>and <it>Young age</it>, and 1 subjective variable, <it>High self-prediction</it>. Objective variables from function tests and treatment variables were non-predictors. Except for <it>Young age</it>, the predictors have previously been insufficiently studied, and so our study should widen knowledge within clinical practice.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Trial registration number for the original trial NCT00488735.</p

Are respiratory disorders risk factors for troublesome neck/shoulder pain? : A study of a general population cohort in Sweden

PURPOSE: The etiology of neck/shoulder pain is complex. Our purpose was to investigate if respiratory disorders are risk factors for troublesome neck/shoulder pain in people with no or occasional neck/shoulder pain. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was based on the Stockholm Public Health Cohorts (SPHC) 2006/2010 and the SPHC 2010/2014. We included adults who at baseline reported no or occasional neck/shoulder pain in the last six months, from the two subsamples (SPHC 06/10 n = 15 155: and SPHC 2010/14 n = 25 273). Exposures were self-reported asthma at baseline in SPHC 06/10 and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) at baseline in SPHC 10/14. The outcome was having experienced at least one period of troublesome neck/shoulder pain which restricted work capacity or hindered daily activities to some or to a high degree during the past six months, asked for four years later. Binomial regression analyses were used to calculate risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Adjusted results indicate that those reporting to suffer from asthma at baseline had a higher risk of troublesome neck/shoulder pain at follow-up four years later (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.10-2.01) as did those reporting to suffer from COPD (RR 2.12 95%CI 1.54-2.93). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that those with no or occasional neck/shoulder pain and reporting to suffer from asthma or COPD increase the risk for troublesome neck/shoulder pain over time. This highlights the importance of taking a multi-morbidity perspective into consideration in health care. Future longitudinal studies are needed to confirm our findings