Low back pain (LBP) is a common and disabling disorder in western society. The management of LBP comprises a range of different intervention strategies including surgery, drug therapy, and non-medical interventions. The objective of the present study is to determine the effectiveness of physical and rehabilitation interventions (i.e. exercise therapy, back school, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), low level laser therapy, education, massage, behavioural treatment, traction, multidisciplinary treatment, lumbar supports, and heat/cold therapy) for chronic LBP. The primary search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PEDro up to 22 December 2008. Existing Cochrane reviews for the individual interventions were screened for studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria. The search strategy outlined by the Cochrane Back Review Groups (CBRG) was followed. The following were included for selection criteria: (1) randomized controlled trials, (2) adult (≥18 years) population with chronic (≥12 weeks) non-specific LBP, and (3) evaluation of at least one of the main clinically relevant outcome measures (pain, functional status, perceived recovery, or return to work). Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data on study characteristics, risk of bias, and outcomes at short, intermediate, and long-term follow-up. The GRADE approach was used to determine the quality of evidence. In total 83 randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria: exercise therapy (n = 37), back school (n = 5), TENS (n = 6), low level laser therapy (n = 3), behavioural treatment (n = 21), patient education (n = 1), traction (n = 1), and multidisciplinary treatment (n = 6). Compared to usual care, exercise therapy improved post-treatment pain intensity and disability, and long-term function. Behavioural treatment was found to be effective in reducing pain intensity at short-term follow-up compared to no treatment/waiting list controls. Finally, multidisciplinary treatment was found to reduce pain intensity and disability at short-term follow-up compared to no treatment/waiting list controls. Overall, the level of evidence was low. Evidence from randomized controlled trials demonstrates that there is low quality evidence for the effectiveness of exercise therapy compared to usual care, there is low evidence for the effectiveness of behavioural therapy compared to no treatment and there is moderate evidence for the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary treatment compared to no treatment and other active treatments at reducing pain at short-term in the treatment of chronic low back pain. Based on the heterogeneity of the populations, interventions, and comparison groups, we conclude that there are insufficient data to draw firm conclusion on the clinical effect of back schools, low-level laser therapy, patient education, massage, traction, superficial heat/cold, and lumbar supports for chronic LBP.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00586-010-1518-3) contai...

Objectives: Clear communication of systematic review findings will help readers and decision makers. We built on previous work to develop an approach that improves the clarity of statements to convey findings and that draws on Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).Study Design and Setting: We conducted workshops including 80 attendants and a survey of 110 producers and users of systematic reviews. We calculated acceptability of statements and revised the wording of those that were unacceptable to !40% of participants.Results: Most participants agreed statements should be based on size of effect and certainty of evidence. Statements for low, moderate and high certainty evidence were acceptable to O60%. Key guidance, for example, includes statements for high, moderate and low certainty for a large effect on intervention x as: x results in a large reduction.; x likely results in a large reduction.; x may result in a large reduction., respectively.Conclusions: Producers and users of systematic reviews found statements to communicate findings combining size and certainty of an effect acceptable. This article provides GRADE guidance and a wording template to formulate statements in systematic reviews and other Declarations of interest: All authors confirm they have no direct financial conflicts of interest.Funding: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Shoulder complaints are common and have an unfavourable outcome in many patients. Only 50% of all new episodes of shoulder disorders end in complete recovery within 6 months. There is no consensus about prognostic indicators that can identify patients at high and low risk of chronicity. By a systematic search of the literature we identified 16 studies focusing on the prognosis of shoulder disorders. The methodological quality of these 16 studies was assessed. Six of these were considered to be of relatively 'high quality'. There was a wide variety among the studies in length of follow-up, study population, evaluated prognostic factors, type of outcome measure and method of analysis. Due to this large heterogeneity, we refrained from statistical pooling. Instead, we used a best-evidence synthesis. There is strong evidence that high pain intensity predicts a poorer outcome in primary care populations and that middle age (45-54) is associated with poor outcome in occupational populations. There is moderate evidence that a long duration of complaints, and high disability score at baseline predict a poorer outcome in primary care. These results need to be interpreted with caution because of the small number of studies on which these conclusions are based, and the large heterogeneity among studies regarding follow-up, outcome measures, and analysis.

No abstract

Clinical questionWhat are the benefits and harms of thyroid hormones for adults with subclinical hypothyroidism (SCH)? This guideline was triggered by a recent systematic review of randomised controlled trials, which could alter practice.Current practiceCurrent guidelines tend to recommend thyroid hormones for adults with thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels >10 mIU/L and for people with lower TSH values who are young, symptomatic, or have specific indications for prescribing.RecommendationThe guideline panel issues a strong recommendation against thyroid hormones in adults with SCH (elevated TSH levels and normal free T4 (thyroxine) levels). It does not apply to women who are trying to become pregnant or patients with TSH >20 mIU/L. It may not apply to patients with severe symptoms or young adults (such as those ≤30 years old).How this guideline was createdA guideline panel including patients, clinicians, and methodologists produced this recommendation in adherence with standards for trustworthy guidelines using the GRADE approach.The evidenceThe systematic review included 21 trials with 2192 participants. For adults with SCH, thyroid hormones consistently demonstrate no clinically relevant benefits for quality of life or thyroid related symptoms, including depressive symptoms, fatigue, and body mass index (moderate to high quality evidence). Thyroid hormones may have little or no effect on cardiovascular events or mortality (low quality evidence), but harms were measured in only one trial with few events at two years’ follow-up.Understanding the recommendationThe panel concluded that almost all adults with SCH would not benefit from treatment with thyroid hormones. Other factors in the strong recommendation include the burden of lifelong management and uncertainty on potential harms. Instead, clinicians should monitor the progression or resolution of the thyroid dysfunction in these adults. Recommendations are made actionable for clinicians and their patients through visual overviews. These provide the relative and absolute benefits and harms of thyroid hormones in multilayered evidence summaries and decision aids available in MAGIC (https://app.magicapp.org/) to support shared decisions and adaptation of this guideline.

The objective of this review was to determine the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions [i.e., non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), muscle relaxants, antidepressants, and opioids] for non-specific chronic low-back pain (LBP). Existing Cochrane reviews for the four interventions were screened for studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Then, the literature searches were updated. Only randomized controlled trials on adults (≥18 years) with chronic (≥12 weeks) non-specific LBP and evaluation of at least one of the main clinically relevant outcome measures (pain, functional status, perceived recovery, or return to work) were included. The GRADE approach was used to determine the quality of evidence. A total of 17 randomized controlled trials was included: NSAIDs (n = 4), antidepressants (n = 5), and opioids (n = 8). No studies were found for muscle relaxants; 14 studies had a low risk of bias. The studies only reported effects on the short term (<3 months). The overall quality of the evidence was low. NSAIDs and opioids seem to lead to a somewhat higher relief in pain on the short term, as compared to placebo, in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain; opioids seem to have a small effect in improving function for a selection of patients who responded with an exacerbation of their symptoms after stopping their medication. However, both types of medication show more adverse effects than placebo. There seems to be no difference in effect between antidepressants and placebo in patients with non-specific chronic LBP.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00586-010-1541-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Currently available data provide low- to moderate-certainty evidence that dietary carbohydrate restriction to a maximum of 40% yields slightly better metabolic control of uncertain clinical importance than reduction in fat to a maximum of 30% in people with T2D. This systematic review is registered at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017052467 as CRD42017052467.

Shoulder complaints are common and have an unfavourable outcome in many patients. Only 50% of all new episodes of shoulder disorders end in complete recovery within 6 months. There is no consensus about prognostic indicators that can identify patients at high and low risk of chronicity. By a systematic search of the literature we identified 16 studies focusing on the prognosis of shoulder disorders. The methodological quality of these 16 studies was assessed. Six of these were considered to be of relatively 'high quality'. There was a wide variety among the studies in length of follow-up, study population, evaluated prognostic factors, type of outcome measure and method of analysis. Due to this large heterogeneity, we refrained from statistical pooling. Instead, we used a best-evidence synthesis. There is strong evidence that high pain intensity predicts a poorer outcome in primary care populations and that middle age (45-54) is associated with poor outcome in occupational populations. There is moderate evidence that a long duration of complaints, and high disability score at baseline predict a poorer outcome in primary care. These results need to be interpreted with caution because of the small number of studies on which these conclusions are based, and the large heterogeneity among studies regarding follow-up, outcome measures, and analysis.