Physical activity and education about physical activity for chronic musculoskeletal pain in children and adolescents

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:. To evaluate the effectiveness of physical activity or education about physical activity, or both, compared to active medical care, waiting list, or usual care in children and adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), via Cochrane Infrastructure funding to the Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Review Group (PaPaS)

Back pain, mental health and substance use are associated in adolescents.

BACKGROUND: During adolescence, prevalence of pain and health risk factors such as smoking, alcohol use and poor mental health all rise sharply. The aim of this study was to describe the relationship between back pain and health risk factors in adolescents. METHODS: Cross-sectional data from the Healthy Schools Healthy Futures study, and the Australian Child Wellbeing Project was used, mean age: 14-15 years. Children were stratified according to back pain frequency. Within each strata, the proportion of children that reported drinking alcohol or smoking or that experienced feelings of anxiety or depression was reported. Test-for-trend analyses assessed whether increasing frequency of pain was associated with health risk factors. RESULTS: Data was collected from ~2500 and 3900 children. Larger proportions of children smoked or drank alcohol within each strata of increasing pain frequency. The trend with anxiety and depression was less clear, although there was a marked difference between the children that reported no pain, and pain more frequently. CONCLUSION: Two large, independent samples show adolescents that experience back pain more frequently are also more likely to smoke, drink alcohol and report feelings of anxiety and depression. Pain appears to be part of the picture of general health risk in adolescents

Treatment Efficacy, Clinical Utility, and Cost-Effectiveness of Multidisciplinary Biopsychosocial Rehabilitation Treatments for Persistent Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review

Study Design: Systematic review. Objectives: To review the current literature on the treatment efficacy, clinical utility, and cost-effectiveness of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation (MBR) for patients suffering from persistent (nonspecific) lower back pain (LBP) in relation to pain intensity, disability, health-related quality of life, and work ability/sick leave. Methods: We carried out a systematic search of Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed Central, EMBASE, and PsycINFO for English- and German-language literature published between January 2010 and July 2017. Study selection consisted of exclusion and inclusion phases. After screening for duplication, studies were excluded on the basis of criteria covering study design, number of participants, language of publication, and provision of information about the intervention. All the remaining articles dealing with the efficacy, utility, or cost-effectiveness of intensive (more than 25 hours per week) MBR encompassing at least 3 health domains and cognitive behavioral therapy–based psychological education were included. Results: The search retrieved 1199 publications of which 1116 were duplicates or met the exclusion criteria. Seventy of the remaining 83 articles did not meet the inclusion criteria; thus 13 studies were reviewed. All studies reporting changes in pain intensity or disability over 12 months after MBR reported moderate effect sizes and/or p-values for both outcomes. The effects on health-related quality of life were mixed, but MBR substantially reduced costs. Overall MBR produced an enduring improvement in work ability despite controversy and variable results. Conclusions: MBR is an effective treatment for nonspecific LBP, but there is room for improvement in cost-effectiveness and impact on sick leave, where the evidence was less compelling

The Effectiveness of conservative management for acute Whiplash Associated Disorder (WAD) II : a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

To evaluate the effectiveness of conservative management (except drug therapy) for acute Whiplash Associated Disorder (WAD) II.Systematic review and meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) using a pre-defined protocol. Two independent reviewers searched information sources, decided eligibility of studies, and assessed risk of bias (RoB) of included trials. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by the other. A third reviewer mediated any disagreements throughout. Qualitative trial and RoB data were summarised descriptively. Quantitative syntheses were conducted across trials for comparable interventions, outcome measures and assessment points. Meta-analyses compared effect sizes with random effects, using STATA version 12.PEDro, Medline, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library with manual searching in key journals, reference lists, British National Bibliography for Report Literature, Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information & Exchange, and National Technical Information Service were searched from inception to 15th April 2015. Active researchers in the field were contacted to determine relevant studies.RCTs evaluating acute (10 days) interventions, there were no statistically significant differences in all outcome measures between interventions at any time.Conservative and active interventions may be useful for pain reduction in patients with acute WADII. Additionally, cervical horizontal mobility could be improved by conservative intervention. The employment of a behavioural intervention (e.g. act-as-usual, education and self-care including regularly exercise) could have benefits for pain reduction and improvement in cervical movement in the coronal and horizontal planes. The evidence was evaluated as low/very low level according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system

Accuracy of the Canadian C-spine rule and NEXUS to screen for clinically important cervical spine injury in patients following blunt trauma: a systematic review

Background: There is uncertainty about the optimal approach to screen for clinically important cervical spine (C-spine) injury following blunt trauma. We conducted a systematic review to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the Canadian C-spine rule and the National Emergency X-Radiography Utilization Study (NEXUS) criteria, 2 rules that are available to assist emergency physicians to assess the need for cervical spine imaging. Methods: We identified studies by an electronic search of CINAHL, Embase and MEDLINE. We included articles that reported on a cohort of patients who experienced blunt trauma and for whom clinically important cervical spine injury detectable by diagnostic imaging was the differential diagnosis; evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the Canadian C-spine rule or NEXUS or both; and used an adequate reference standard. We assessed the methodologic quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Acc Results: We included 15 studies of modest methodologic quality. For the Canadian C-spine rule, sensitivity ranged from 0.90 to 1.00 and specificity ranged from 0.01 to 0.77. For NEXUS, sensitivity ranged from 0.83 to 1.00 and specificity ranged from 0.02 to 0.46. One study directly compared the accuracy of these 2 rules using the same cohort and found that the Canadian C-spine rule had better accuracy. For both rules, a negative test was more informative for reducing the probability of a clinica Interpretation: Based on studies with modest methodologic quality and only one direct comparison, we found that the Canadian C-spine rule appears to have better diagnostic accuracy than the NEXUS criteria. Future studies need to follow rigorous methodologic procedures to ensure that the findings are as free of bias as possible