Vigorous regular leisure-time physical activity is associated with a clinically important improvement in back pain – a secondary analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background Neck and back pain are musculoskeletal conditions with serious individual and societal consequences. Current evidence about the prognostic value for neck and back pain is limited and conflicting. This prospective cohort study aimed to assess the association between leisure-time physical activity (LPA) and improvement of neck and/or back pain in a working population receiving manual therapy or general care in one of two randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods Analyses of data from two RCTs evaluating the effect of manual therapies for neck and/or back pain was conducted. Participants (n = 1 464) answered questionnaires about frequency and effort level of LPA at baseline. LPA on moderate or vigorous levels was compared to no or low/irregular moderate and vigorous levels. Pain intensity was assessed with numerical scales at baseline and 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. The outcome was minimal clinically important improvement in pain intensity, defined as ≥2 points improvement in mean pain intensity at follow-up. Crude- and adjusted risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated with Poisson regression analysis and stratified by pain location. Results Participants with neck and/or back pain performing vigorous LPA showed a minimal clinically important improvement after 12 months compared to the control group; RR 1.35 (95% CI; 1.06-1.73). No effect was observed at 3 or 6 months. Moderate LPA did not improve pain intensity in any follow-up. Stratified analyses revealed that the effect of vigorous LPA at 12 months in back pain was RR 1.83 (95% CI; 1.26-2.66) and neck pain RR 1.06 (95% CI; 0.75-1.49). Conclusions Persons with neck and/or back pain receiving manual therapy or general evidence-based care have greater chance of improvement after 12 months if they prior to treatment frequently practice vigorous LPA. When analyzed separately, the effect was only present for back pain. Trial registration Registration in Current Controlled Trials (ISRCTN), Stockholm Manual Intervention Trial (MINT), ISRCTN92249294 BJORN-trial, ISRCTN56954776

Minimal Clinically Important Improvement of Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Objective.To estimate minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) of RAPID-3 (Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods.RAPID-3 was computed before and after treatment escalation in a prospective study of adults with active RA. Patient judgment of improvement was used as the standard for a receiver-operating characteristic curve, from which MCII was estimated.Results.Mean RAPID-3 improved from 16.3 to 11.1 between visits. MCII was −3.8 based on simultaneously optimized sensitivity and specificity, −3.5 using the 0.80 specificity criterion, and −4.1 using the Youden index.Conclusion.RAPID-3 improvement of 3.8/30 units appears clinically meaningful.

Treating Severe Knee Osteoarthritis with Combination of Intra-Osseous and Intra-Articular Infiltrations of Platelet-Rich Plasma: An Observational Study

Objective Assessing the therapeutic effects of a combination of intra-articular and intra-osseous infiltrations of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) to treat severe knee osteoarthritis (KOA) using intra-articular injections of PRP as the control group. Design In this observational study, 60 patients suffering from severe KOA were treated with intra-articular infiltrations of PRP (IA group) or with a combination of intra-osseous and intra-articular infiltrations of PRP (IO group). Both groups were matched for sex, age, body mass index, and radiographic severity (III and IV degree according to Ahlbäck scale). Clinical outcome was evaluated at 2, 6, and 12 months, using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaires. Results At 2, 6 and 12 months after treatment, IO group had a significant improvement in all KOOS and WOMAC subscales ( P < 0.05). On the contrary, patients of the IA group did not improve in any of the scores. Sixteen out of 30 IO group patients showed minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) whereas 8 out of 30 IA group patients showed this response at 6 months (26.7%; 95% CI −0.4 to 49.9; P = 0.037). At 12 months, 14 patients of IO group and 5 patients of the IA group showed MCII (30%; 95% CI 4.3 to 51.9; P = 0.013). No differences between groups were observed at 2 months. Conclusions PRP intra-articular injections in severe KOA were not effective and did not provide any benefit. Combination of intra-articular and intra-osseous infiltrations of PRP was not clinically superior at 2 months, but it showed superior clinical outcomes at 6 and 12 months when compared with intra-articular injections of PRP.

Changes in Quality of Life in Parkinson's Disease: How Large Must They Be to Be Relevant?

Background: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is the smallest change in an outcome, which a patient identifies as meaningful. Although the 2 most frequently applied Parkinson's disease (PD) “quality of life” questionnaires (the PDQ-39 and PDQ-8) provide encouragingly similar results, their MCID thresholds appear to be vastly different. Our aim was to calculate the MCID estimates for both PDQ-39 and PDQ-8 Summary Indices (PDQ-39-SI and PDQ-8-SI) by the utilization of both anchor- and distribution-based techniques. Methods: Nine hundred eighty-five paired investigations of 365 patients were included. Three different techniques were used simultaneously to calculate the MCID values. Results: First, we replicated the previously published results demonstrating how both PDQ-39-SI and PDQ-8-SI provide similar values and respond in a similar way to changes. Subsequently, we calculated the MCID thresholds. The most optimal estimates for MCID thresholds for PDQ-39-SI were -4.72 and +4.22 for detecting minimal clinically important improvement and worsening. For PDQ-8-SI, these estimates were -5.94 and +4.91 points for detecting minimal clinically important improvement and worsening respectively. Conclusions: Our study is the first one that directly compared the MCID estimates for both PDQ-39-SI and PDQ-8-SI on a large pool of patients including all disease severity stages. These MICD estimates varied across PD severity.