Background Exercise interventions are often incompletely described in reports of clinical trials, hampering evaluation of results and replication and implementation into practice. Objective The aim of this study was to develop a standardized method for reporting exercise programs in clinical trials: the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT). Design and Methods Using the EQUATOR Network's methodological framework, 137 exercise experts were invited to participate in a Delphi consensus study. A list of 41 items was identified from a meta-epidemiologic study of 73 systematic reviews of exercise. For each item, participants indicated agreement on an 11-point rating scale. Consensus for item inclusion was defined a priori as greater than 70% agreement of respondents rating an item 7 or above. Three sequential rounds of anonymous online questionnaires and a Delphi workshop were used. Results There were 57 (response rate=42%), 54 (response rate=95%), and 49 (response rate=91%) respondents to rounds 1 through 3, respectively, from 11 countries and a range of disciplines. In round 1, 2 items were excluded; 24 items reached consensus for inclusion (8 items accepted in original format), and 16 items were revised in response to participant suggestions. Of 14 items in round 2, 3 were excluded, 11 reached consensus for inclusion (4 items accepted in original format), and 7 were reworded. Sixteen items were included in round 3, and all items reached greater than 70% consensus for inclusion. Limitations The views of included Delphi panelists may differ from those of experts who declined participation and may not fully represent the views of all exercise experts. Conclusions The CERT, a 16-item checklist developed by an international panel of exercise experts, is designed to improve the reporting of exercise programs in all evaluative study designs and contains 7 categories: materials, provider, delivery, location, dosage, tailoring, and compliance. The CERT will encourage transparency, improve trial interpretation and replication, and facilitate implementation of effective exercise interventions into practice.

Test-retest reliability of the COPM was moderate for the item pool but was good for the performance and satisfaction scores. Discriminant validity was confirmed. Many patient-unique problems identified with the COPM were not evaluated by standardized measures.

No abstract

Background and Purpose-Occupational therapy (OT) is an important aspect of stroke rehabilitation. The objective of this study was to determine from the available literature whether OT interventions improve outcome for stroke patients. Methods-An extensive search in MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, AMED, and SCISEARCH was performed. Studies with controlled and uncontrolled designs were included. Seven intervention categories were distinguished and separately analyzed. If a quantitative approach (meta-analysis) of data analysis was not appropriate, a qualitative approach (best-evidence synthesis), based on the type of design, methodological quality, and significant findings of outcome and/or process measures, was performed. Results-Thirty-two studies were included in this review, of which 18 were randomized controlled trials. Ten randomized controlled trials had a high methodological quality. For the comprehensive OT intervention, the pooled standardized mean difference for primary activities of daily living (ADL) (0.46; CI, 0.04 to 0.88), extended ADL (0.32; CI, 0.00 to 0.64), and social participation (0.33; CI, 0.03 to 0.62) favored treatment. For the training of skills intervention, some evidence for improvement in primary ADL was found. Insufficient evidence was found to indicate that the provision of splints is effective in decreasing muscle tone. Conclusions-This review identified small but significant effect sizes for the efficacy of comprehensive OT on primary ADL, extended ADL, and social participation. These results correspond to the outcome of a systematic review of intensified rehabilitation for stroke patients. The amount of evidence with respect to specific interventions, however, is limited. More research is needed to enable evidence-based OT for stroke patients.

Purpose of reviewMyotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) is a severe, progressive genetic disease that affects between 1 in 3,000 and 8,000 individuals globally. No evidence-based guideline exists to inform the care of these patients, and most do not have access to multidisciplinary care centers staffed by experienced professionals, creating a clinical care deficit.Recent findingsThe Myotonic Dystrophy Foundation (MDF) recruited 66 international clinicians experienced in DM1 patient care to develop consensus-based care recommendations. MDF created a 2-step methodology for the project using elements of the Single Text Procedure and the Nominal Group Technique. The process generated a 4-page Quick Reference Guide and a comprehensive, 55-page document that provides clinical care recommendations for 19 discrete body systems and/or care considerations.SummaryThe resulting recommendations are intended to help standardize and elevate care for this patient population and reduce variability in clinical trial and study environments.

No abstract

No abstract

This study examined the test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity of the Fine Motor Scale of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-second edition (PDMS-FM-2). Participants included two groups of 18 children between the ages of 4 and 5 years with and without mild fine motor problems. The PDMS-FM-2 was administered twice to 12 children and rated by two occupational therapists. The PDMS-FM-2 results were compared with scores on the Movement Assessment Battery for Children (M-ABC). In addition, the scores of the children with and without fine motor problems were compared. For the test-retest reliability and the inter-rater reliability, correlation coefficients varied from r = 0.84 to r = 0.99. These results suggest that PDMS-FM-2 has excellent test-retest and inter-rater reliability. Convergent validity with the fine motor section of the M-ABC and discriminant validity have been confirmed. Only 39% of the children in the group with problems in fine motor activities had fine motor problems according to the PDMS-FM-2. This finding seems to indicate that the PDMS-FM-2 may not be sensitive enough for this population.