| 1. |
- Ardern, Clare L, et al.
(författare)
-
Implementing the 27 PRISMA 2020 Statement items for systematic reviews in the sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation and sports science fields : The PERSiST (implementing Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science) guidance
- 2022
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - : BMJ. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 56:4, s. 175-195
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Poor reporting of medical and healthcare systematic reviews is a problem from which the sports and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and sports science fields are not immune. Transparent, accurate and comprehensive systematic review reporting helps researchers replicate methods, readers understand what was done and why, and clinicians and policy-makers implement results in practice. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and its accompanying Explanation and Elaboration document provide general reporting examples for systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. However, implementation guidance for sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and sports science does not exist. The Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science (PERSiST) guidance attempts to address this problem. Nineteen content experts collaborated with three methods experts to identify examples of exemplary reporting in systematic reviews in sport and exercise medicine (including physical activity), musculoskeletal rehabilitation (including physiotherapy), and sports science, for each of the PRISMA 2020 Statement items. PERSiST aims to help: (1) systematic reviewers improve the transparency and reporting of systematic reviews and (2) journal editors and peer reviewers make informed decisions about systematic review reporting quality.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bateman, Marcus, et al.
(författare)
-
Development of a core outcome set for lateral elbow tendinopathy (COS-LET) using best available evidence and an international consensus process
- 2022
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 56:12, s. 657-666
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: To develop a core outcome set for lateral elbow tendinopathy (COS-LET) and to provide guidance for outcome evaluation in future studies.METHODS: We implemented a multi-stage mixed-methods design combining two systematic reviews, domain mapping of outcome measurement instruments to the core domains of tendinopathy, psychometric analysis of instruments, two patient focus groups and a Delphi study incorporating two surveys and an international consensus meeting. Following the OMERACT guidelines, we used a 70% threshold for consensus.RESULTS: 38 clinicians/researchers and 9 patients participated. 60 instruments were assessed for inclusion. The only instrument that was recommended for the COS-LET was Patient Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) for the disability domain. Interim recommendations were made to use: the PRTEE function subscale for the function domain; PRTEE pain subscale items 1, 4 and 5 for the pain over a specified time domain; pain-free grip strength for the physical function capacity domain; a Numerical Rating Scale measuring pain on gripping for the pain on activity/loading domain; and time off work for the participation in life activities domain. No recommendations could be made for the quality-of-life, patient rating of condition and psychological factors domains.CONCLUSIONS: The COS-LET comprises the PRTEE for the disability domain. Interim-use recommendations included PRTEE subscales, time off work, pain-free grip strength and a Numerical Rating Scale measuring pain on gripping. Further work is required to validate these interim measures and develop suitable measures to capture the other domains.
|
|
| 3. |
- Costa, Nathalia, et al.
(författare)
-
A Definition of "Flare" in Low Back Pain: A Multiphase Process Involving Perspectives of Individuals With Low Back Pain and Expert Consensus
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Journal of Pain. - : CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE. - 1526-5900 .- 1528-8447. ; 20:11, s. 1267-1275
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Low back pain (LBP) varies over time. Consumers, clinicians, and researchers use various terms to describe LBP fluctuations, such as episodes, recurrences and flares. Although "flare" is use commonly, there is no consensus on how it is defined. This study aimed to obtain consensus for a LBP flare definition using a mixed-method approach. Step 1 involved the derivation of a preliminary candidate flare definition based on thematic analysis of views of 130 consumers in consultation with an expert consumer writer. In step 2, a workshop was conducted to incorporate perspectives of 19 LBP experts into the preliminary flare definition, which resulted in 2 alternative LBP flare definitions. Step 3 refined the definition using a 2-round Delphi consensus with 50 experts in musculoskeletal conditions. The definition favored by experts was further tested with 16 individuals with LBP in step 4, using the definition in three scenarios. This multiphase study produced a definition of LBP flare that distinguishes it from other LBP fluctuations, represents consumers views, involves expert consensus, and is understandable by consumers in clinical and research contexts: "A flare-up is a worsening of your condition that lasts from hours to weeks that is difficult to tolerate and generally impacts your usual activities and/or emotions." Perspective: A multiphase process, incorporating consumers views and expert consensus, produced a definition of LBP flare that distinguishes it from other LBP fluctuations. (C) 2019 by the American Pain Society
|
|
| 4. |
- Duong, Vicky, et al.
(författare)
-
Exploring translational gaps between basic scientists, clinical researchers, clinicians, and consumers : Proceedings and recommendations arising from the 2020 mine the gap online workshop
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Osteoarthritis and Cartilage Open. - : Elsevier BV. - 2665-9131. ; 3:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To provide a summary of the translational gaps in musculoskeletal research as identified in the Mine the Gap workshop and propose possible solutions. Methods: The Mine the Gap online workshop was hosted on October 14th and 15th, 2020. Five international panels, each comprised of a clinician, clinical researcher and basic scientist, presented gaps and proposed solutions for the themes of biomechanics, pain, biological measurements, phenotypes and imaging. This was followed by an interactive panel discussion with consumer insights. Results: A number of translational gaps and proposed solutions across each of the five themes were identified. A consumer panel provided constructive feedback highlighting the need for improved resources, communication and shared decision making, and treatment individualisation. Conclusion: This brief report provides a greater understanding of the diverse work and gaps relevant to fundamental/discovery scientists, clinical researchers and clinicians working across the musculoskeletal field. The numerous translational gaps highlight the need to improve communication and collaboration across the musculoskeletal field.
|
|
| 5. |
- Grävare Silbernagel, Karin, et al.
(författare)
-
ICON 2020 - International Scientific Tendinopathy Symposium Consensus : A Systematic Review of Outcome Measures Reported in Clinical Trials of Achilles Tendinopathy
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Sports Medicine. - : Springer Nature. - 0112-1642 .- 1179-2035. ; 52, s. 613-641
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Nine core domains for tendinopathy have been identified. For Achilles tendinopathy there is large variation in outcome measures used, and how these fit into the core domains has not been investigated.Objective: To identify all available outcome measures outcome measures used to assess the clinical phenotype of Achilles tendinopathy in prospective studies and to map the outcomes measures into predefined health-related core domains.Design: Systematic review.Data Sources: Embase, MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, SPORTDiscus and Google Scholar.Eligibility Criteria for Selecting Studies: Clinical diagnosis of Achilles tendinopathy, sample size ≥ ten participants, age ≥ 16 years, and the study design was a randomized or non-randomized clinical trial, observational cohort, single-arm intervention, or case series.Results: 9376 studies were initially screened and 307 studies were finally included, totaling 13,248 participants. There were 233 (177 core domain) different outcome measures identified across all domains. For each core domain outcome measures were identified, with a range between 8 and 35 unique outcome measures utilized for each domain. The proportion of studies that included outcomes for predefined core domains ranged from 4% for the psychological factors domain to 72% for the disability domain.Conclusion: 233 unique outcome measures for Achilles tendinopathy were identified. Most frequently, outcome measures were used within the disability domain. Outcome measures assessing psychological factors were scarcely used. The next step in developing a core outcome set for Achilles tendinopathy is to engage patients, clinicians and researchers to reach consensus on key outcomes measures.Prospero Registration: CRD42020156763.
|
|
| 6. |
- Rio, Ebonie Kendra, et al.
(författare)
-
ICON PART-T 2019-International Scientific Tendinopathy Symposium Consensus : recommended standards for reporting participant characteristics in tendinopathy research (PART-T)
- 2020
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - : BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 54:11, s. 627-630
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We aimed to establish consensus for reporting recommendations relating to participant characteristics in tendon research. A scoping literature review of tendinopathy studies (Achilles, patellar, hamstring, gluteal and elbow) was followed by an online survey and face-to-face consensus meeting with expert healthcare professionals (HCPs) at the International Scientific Tendon Symposium, Groningen 2018. We reviewed 263 papers to form statements for consensus and invited 30 HCPs from different disciplines and geographical locations; 28 completed the survey and 15 attended the meeting. There was consensus that the following data should be reported for cases and controls: sex, age, standing height, body mass, history of tendinopathy, whether imaging was used to confirm pathology, loading tests, pain location, symptom duration and severity, level of disability, comorbidities, physical activity level, recruitment source and strategies, and medication use history. Standardised reporting of participant characteristics aims to benefit patients and clinicians by guiding researchers in the conduct of their studies. We provide free resources to facilitate researchers adopting our recommendations.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Scott, Alex, et al.
(författare)
-
Sports and exercise-related tendinopathies : a review of selected topical issues by participants of the second International Scientific Tendinopathy Symposium (ISTS) Vancouver 2012
- 2013
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - London, England : BMJ Publishing Group. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 47:9, s. 536-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In September 2010, the first International Scientific Tendinopathy Symposium (ISTS) was held in Umea, Sweden, to establish a forum for original scientific and clinical insights in this growing field of clinical research and practice. The second ISTS was organised by the same group and held in Vancouver, Canada, in September 2012. This symposium was preceded by a round-table meeting in which the participants engaged in focused discussions, resulting in the following overview of tendinopathy clinical and research issues. This paper is a narrative review and summary developed during and after the second ISTS. The document is designed to highlight some key issues raised at ISTS 2012, and to integrate them into a shared conceptual framework. It should be considered an update and a signposting document rather than a comprehensive review. The document is developed for use by physiotherapists, physicians, athletic trainers, massage therapists and other health professionals as well as team coaches and strength/conditioning managers involved in care of sportspeople or workers with tendinopathy.
|
|
| 9. |
- Vicenzino, Bill, et al.
(författare)
-
ICON 2019-International Scientific Tendinopathy Symposium Consensus : There are nine core health-related domains for tendinopathy (CORE DOMAINS): Delphi study of healthcare professionals and patients
- 2020
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - : BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 54:8, s. 444-451
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundThe absence of any agreed-upon tendon health-related domains hampers advances in clinical tendinopathy research. This void means that researchers report a very wide range of outcome measures inconsistently. As a result, substantial synthesis/meta-analysis of tendon research findings is almost futile despite researchers publishing busily. We aimed to determine options for, and then define, core health-related domains for tendinopathy.MethodsWe conducted a Delphi study of healthcare professionals (HCP) and patients in a three-stage process. In stage 1, we extracted candidate domains from clinical trial reports and developed an online survey. Survey items took the form: 'The 'candidate domain' is important enough to be included as a core health-related domain of tendinopathy'; response options were: agree, disagree, or unsure. In stage 2, we administered the online survey and reported the findings. Stage 3 consisted of discussions of the findings of the survey at the ICON (International Scientific Tendinopathy Symposium Consensus) meeting. We set 70% participant agreement as the level required for a domain to be considered 'core'; similarly, 70% agreement was required for a domain to be relegated to 'not core' (see Results next).ResultsTwenty-eight HCP (92% of whom had >10 years of tendinopathy experience, 71% consulted >10 cases per month) and 32 patients completed the online survey. Fifteen HCP and two patients attended the consensus meeting. Of an original set of 24 candidate domains, the ICON group deemed nine domains to be core. These were: (1) patient rating of condition, (2) participation in life activities (day to day, work, sport), (3) pain on activity/loading, (4) function, (5) psychological factors, (6) physical function capacity, (7) disability, (8) quality of life and (9) pain over a specified time. Two of these (2, 6) were an amalgamation of five candidate domains. We agreed that seven other candidate domains were not core domains: range of motion, pain on clinician applied test, clinical examination, palpation, drop out, sensory modality pain and pain without other specification. We were undecided on the other five candidate domains of physical activity, structure, medication use, adverse effects and economic impact.ConclusionNine core domains for tendon research should guide reporting of outcomes in clinical trials. Further research should determine the best outcome measures for each specific tendinopathy (ie, core outcome sets).
|
|
