This study investigated the reliability and concurrent validity of active shoulder elevation in the scapular plane (scaption) using a digital inclinometer and goniometer. Two investigators used a goniometer and digital inclinometer to measure scaption on 30 asymptomatic participants in a blinded repeated measures design. Good reliability was present with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for intrarater reliability of goniometry = 0.87, intrarater digital inclinometry = 0.88, interrater goniometry = 0.92, and interrater digital inclinometry = 0.89. The minimal detectable change (MDC95) for the interrater analysis indicated that a change equal to or greater than 8 degrees for goniometry and 9 degrees for inclinometry is required to be 95% certain that the change is not due to intertrial variability or measurement error. The concurrent validity between goniometry and digital inclinometry was excellent with an ICC value of 0.94 for both raters. The 95% limits of agreement suggest that the difference between these two measurement instruments can be expected to vary by up to ±11 degrees. The results support the interchangeable use of goniometry and digital inclinometer for measuring scaption. Clinicians and researchers should consider the MDC values presented when interpreting change during subsequent measurement sessions.

ObjectiveTo investigate the role of early initiation of rehabilitation on length of stay (LOS) and cost following total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.Data sourcesElectronic databases PubMed, CINAHL, Pedro, Embase, AMED, and the Cochrane Library were searched in July 2016. Five additional trials were identified through reference list scanning.Study selectionEligible studies were published in English language peer-reviewed journals; included participants that had undergone total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty reported clearly defined timing of rehabilitation onset for at least two groups; and reported at least one measure of LOS or cost. Inclusion criteria were applied by 2 independent authors, with disagreements being determined by a third author. Searching identified 1,029 potential articles, of which 17 studies with 26,614 participants met the inclusion criteria.Data extractionData was extracted independently by 2 authors, with disagreements being determined by a third author. Methodological quality of each study was evaluated independently by 2 authors using the Downs and Black checklist. Pooled analyses were analyzed using a random-effects model with inverse variance methods to calculate standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals for LOS.Data synthesisWhen compared with standard care, early initiation of physical therapy demonstrated a decrease in length of stay for the 4 randomized clinical trials (SMD = -1.90; 95% CI -2.76 to -1.05; I2 = 93%) and for the quasi-experimental and 5 prospective studies (SMD = -1.47; 95% CI -1.85 to -1.10; I2 = 88%).ConclusionEarly initiation of rehabilitation following total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is associated with a shorter LOS, a lower overall cost, with no evidence of an increased number of adverse reactions. Additional high quality studies with standardized methodology are needed to further examine the impact of early initiation of physical therapy among patients with joint replacement procedures.

The purpose of this study was to examine the test-retest reliability, minimal detectable change (MDC), and determine normative values of 3 upper extremity (UE) tests of function and power. One hundred eighty participants, men (n = 69) and women (n = 111), were tested on 3 UE strength and power maneuvers in a multicenter study to determine baseline normative values. Forty-six subjects returned for a second day of testing within 5 days of the initial assessment for the reliability component of the investigation. Explosive power was assessed via a seated shot-put test for the dominant and nondominant arms. Relationships between the dominant and nondominant arms were also analyzed. A push-up and modified pull-up were performed to measure the amount of work performed in short (15-second) bursts of activity. The relationship between the push-up and modified pull-up was also determined. Analysis showed test-retest reliability for the modified pull-up, timed push-up, dominant single-arm seated shot-put tests, and nondominant single-arm seated shot-put tests to be intraclass correlation coefficient(3,1) 0.958, 0.989, 0.988, and 0.971, respectively. The MDC for both the push-up and modified pull-up was 2 repetitions. The MDCs for the shot put with the dominant arm and the nondominant arm were 17 and 18 in., respectively. The result of this study indicates that these field tests possess excellent reliability. Normative values have been identified, which require further validation. These tests demonstrate a practical and effective method to measure upper extremity functional power.

Background: Shoulder pain affects up to 67% of the population at some point in their lifetime with subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS) representing a common etiology. Despite a plethora of studies there remains conflicting evidence for appropriate management of SAPS.Purpose: To compare outcomes, for individuals diagnosed with SAPS, performing a 6-week protocol of eccentric training of the shoulder external rotators (ETER) compared to a general exercise (GE) protocol. Study Design: Randomized controlled trialMethods: Forty-eight individuals (mean age 46.8 years +/-17.29) with chronic shoulder pain, and a clinical diagnosis of SAPS were randomized into either an experimental group performing ETER or a control group performing a GE program. The intervention lasted for six weeks, and outcomes were measured after three weeks, six weeks, and again at six months post intervention.

BackgroundLow back pain (LBP) is common and associated healthcare costs are significant. While clinical practice guidelines have been established in an attempt to reduce costs and healthcare utilization, it is unclear if adherence to physical therapy guidelines for those with LBP is efficacious. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess current evidence and evaluate the impact of physical therapy guideline adherence on subsequent healthcare costs and utilization for patients with LBP.MethodsAn electronic search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCO Host), AMED (Ovid), and PEDro. Studies included in this review were published in peer reviewed journals and the primary mode of treatment was administered by a physical therapist. Also, the definition of adherence was clearly defined based on claims data and at least one measure of cost or utilization reported. Quality assessment was evaluated via a modified Downs and Black checklist. Due to the conceptual heterogeneity in variable measurements, data were qualitatively synthesized and stratified by reported utilization and cost measures.ResultsA total of 256 results were identified and after omitting duplicates, 4 articles were retained, which were all retrospective in nature. Quality scores ranged between 19 and 21 points out of a possible 26 on the modified Downs and Black checklist. All identified studies used the same definition of guideline adherence, which focused on billing active codes and minimizing use of passive codes. The results demonstrated trends that, with a few exceptions, suggested those patients with LBP that were treated with an adherent guideline program demonstrated decreased healthcare utilization and an overall healthcare savings.ConclusionPreliminary evidence suggests that adherence to established clinical practice guidelines may assist with decreasing healthcare utilization and costs. Additional research based on prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to provide high quality evidence regarding the impact of guideline adherence among patients with LBP.

No abstract

When referral for physical therapy is warranted for patients with acute LBP, immediate referral and initiation (within 3 days) may lead to lower health care utilization and LBP-related costs.

Objective To investigate the role of thoracic spine manipulation (TSM) on pain and disability in the management of mechanical neck pain (MNP). Data sources Electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL, Pedro, Embase, AMED, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched in January 2018. Study selection Eligible studies were completed RCTs, written in English, had at least 2 groups with one group receiving TSM, had at least one measure of pain or disability, and included patients with MNP of any duration. The search identified 1717 potential articles, with 14 studies meeting inclusion criteria. Study appraisal and synthesis methods Methodological quality was evaluated independently by two authors using the guidelines published by the Cochrane Collaboration. Pooled analyses were analyzed using a random-effects model with inverse variance methods to calculate mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals for pain (VAS 0-100mm, NPRS 0-10pts; 0 = no pain) and disability (NDI and NPQ 0–100%; 0 = no disability). Results Across the included studies, there was increased risk of bias for inadequate provider and participant blinding. The GRADE approach demonstrated an overall level of evidence ranging from very low to moderate. Meta-analysis that compared TSM to thoracic or cervical mobilization revealed a significant effect favoring the TSM group for pain (MD -13.63; 95% CI: -21.79, -5.46) and disability (MD -9.93; 95% CI: -14.38, -5.48). Meta-analysis that compared TSM to standard care revealed a significant effect favoring the TSM group for pain (MD -13.21; 95% CI: -21.87, -4.55) and disability (MD -11.36; 95% CI: -18.93, -3.78) at short-term follow-up, and a significant effect for disability (MD -4.75; 95% CI: -6.54, -2.95) at long-term follow-up. Meta-analysis that compared TSM to cervical spine manipulation revealed a non-significant effect (MD 3.43; 95% CI: -7.26, 14.11) for pain without a distinction between immediate and short-term follow-up. Limitations The greatest limitation in this systematic review was the heterogeneity among the studies making it difficult to assess the true clinical benefit, as well as the overall level of quality of evidence. Conclusions TSM has been shown to be more beneficial than thoracic mobilization, cervical mobilization, and standard care in the short-term, but no better than cervical manipulation or placebo thoracic spine manipulation to improve pain and disability. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42017068287