| 1. |
- 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.
|
|
| 2. |
- 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.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- 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).
|
|
