Article:

Intrinsic and extrinsic factors contributing to running-related lower limb injuries among adolescent runners published in Journal of Sport Sciences. DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2022.2163353

Introduction:

Lower extremity injuries are growing increasingly prevalent in adolescent runners. There is current research available that identifies several risk factors for running related injuries such as increased Q-angle, leg-length discrepancies, the female sex, and being of 11-13 years of age. These factors are difficult or impossible to alter and therefore cannot help inform proper injury prevention training guidelines for adolescent runners. These authors endeavored to determine potentially alterable risk factors for running-related injuries in order to better inform training guidelines for this population.

Methods:

The authors conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of data from a hospital-based injury prevention clinic. They identified adolescent runners who reported running related injuries on their evaluation forms and collected data points regarding specific risk factors. The authors looked at demographic variables, sport participation, history of  injury, training intensity and frequency, intention to lose weight, BMI, Q-angle, leg length discrepancy, lower extremity range of motion, lower extremity strength, lower extremity muscular endurance, average hours of sleep, total hours of running per week, weight training, and consumption of diet soda drinks.They collected data on 130 adolescents athletes and determined which athletes sustained a lower extremity running-related injury. A statistical analysis was performed to understand if a correlation was present between each individual variable and running-related injuries.

Results:

The results showed an intention to lose weight (p=.01) and the female sex (p=.18) as the highest predictors of running-related injuries in adolescent runners, followed by hip abduction strength (p=.17) and reduced hours of weekday sleep (p=.19).

Discussion:

These results can help to inform injury prevention as three of these four variables are alterable. The authors discuss the prevalence of repetitive stress injuries in adolescent runners and how insufficient diet can contribute to poor recovery. Encouraging young athletes to consume a diet that can sustain their level of activity may be an important step towards injury prevention. Reduced hours of sleep additionally could contribute to poor recovery after exercise and is another alterable factor to help adolescents avoid running-related injuries. Finally, hip abduction strength was an expected risk factor for running-related injuries given the hip musculature’s contribution to proper lower extremity kinematics, stability, and shock absorption. This again, is an easily alterable factor for an injury prevention program.

References:

DeJong Lempke AF, Whitney KE, Collins SE, dHemecourt PA, Meehan WP. Intrinsic and extrinsic factors contributing to running-related lower limb injuries among adolescent runners. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2022;40(22):2468-2474. Accessed August 12, 2024. https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=14d4d113-1942-3f62-a0e2-7fc6e8d022a8

Reviewed by Tyler Tice, PT, DPT, OCS, ATC

Article:

Neck Pain:  Revision 2017 Clinical Practice Guidelines Linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health from the Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association

Introduction:

The orthopaedic section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) published these clinical practice guidelines in 2017 to give recommendations to clinicians in the differential diagnosis, assessment and treatment of neck pain. 

              These recommendations are designed to fit into the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF model) that was introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO) to improve clinician’s ability to appropriately treat and communicate with patients by including pathoanatomical, psychosocial and societal factors when assessing a patient’s wants and needs. 

Methods: 

Content experts were appointed by the orthopedic section of the APTA to search the current literature for articles relating to the treatment, assessment and diagnosis of neck pain.  Articles included were taken from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, ProQuest Dissertations and Abstracts, PEDro, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Sources, and Embase with dates ranging from 2007 to 2016. 

              The chosen articles were then categorized based on level of evidence where I represented the highest quality evidence and V represented expert opinion.  After the evidence was reviewed and ranked, the experts developed and ranked recommendations utilizing the information.  A ranked recommendations were based on strong evidence while F ranked recommendations were based on expert opinion.  These recommendations were further categorized into the following content areas; pathoanatomical features/differential diagnosis, Imaging, Examination, Diagnosis/classification, and interventions.  These recommendations are further divided based on the type of neck pain the patient is presenting with; neck pain with mobility deficits, neck pain with movement coordination impairments, neck pain with headaches, and neck pain with radiating pain.    

Results: 

After reviewing the available literature, the authors made the following recommendations: 

              Clinicians should perform assessments on patients to screen for serious pathology and refer to other providers when necessary. 

              Clinicians should use validated self-reported outcome measures to assess and track patient pain, status, and physical/psychological function throughout an episode of care. 

              Clinicians should use easily reproducible activity limitation and participation restriction measures to assess patient function throughout an episode of care.

              Clinicians should use assessments of body impairments to determine if a patient has one of the following; (1)neck pain with mobility deficits (cervical active range of motion), (2)neck pain with headache (cervical active range of motion, the cervical flexion-rotation test, upper cervical segmental mobility testing), (3)neck pain with radiating pain (neurodynamic testing, spurling’s test, distraction test, the Valsalva test), (4)neck pain with movement coordination impairments (cranial cervical flexion and neck flexor endurance test.)

              To effectively classify patients into one of the 4 neck pain designations, clinicians should use cervical motion limitations, thoracic motion limitations, presence of cervicogenic headache, history of trauma and referred or radiating pain into an upper extremity.

Interventions for neck pain with mobility deficits:

              For patients with acute neck pain clinicians should use thoracic manipulation, a program to improve neck ROM, and scapulothoracic and upper extremity strengthening.  Clinicians may provide cervical manipulations and/or mobilization.

              For patients with subacute neck pain clinicians should use neck and shoulder girdle endurance exercises and may provide thoracic and cervical manipulations/mobilizations.

              For patients with chronic neck pain clinicians should employ a multimodal approach including thoracic and cervical manipulations/mobilizations, mixed exercises for the cervical and scapulothoracic regions, dry needling, laser therapy, and intermittent manual or mechanical traction. 

              Clinicians may provide neck, shoulder girdle and trunk endurance exercises and patient education.  Patients should be encouraged to have an active lifestyle and to address psychosocial factors.

Interventions for neck pain with movement coordination impairments

              For patients with acute neck pain clinicians should educated their patients on returning to normal, nonprovocative pre-accident activities as soon as possible, minimize the use of a cervical collar, and perform postural and mobility exercises to decrease pain and increase range of motion.  Patients should be advised that recovery is expected within the first 2-3 months. 

              Clinicians should employ a multimodal approach including manual interventions and exercise programs.  For patients at low risk of developing chronic symptoms, clinicians may provide a single session consisting of education, a detailed exercise program and TENS treatment.  Clinicians should monitor recovery status for signs of chronicity.

              For patients with chronic neck pain clinicians may provide manual interventions, patient education focused on encouragement and exercise programs that utilize concepts from cognitive behavioral therapy. 

Interventions for neck pain with headaches

              For patients with acute neck pain clinicians should provide active mobility exercises as well as C1/C2 self-sustained natural apophyseal glide (SNAG) exercises. 

              For patients with subacute neck pain clinicians should provide cervical manipulation/mobilization as well as SNAG exercises. 

              For patients with chronic neck pain clinicians should provide cervical or cervicothoracic manipulation/mobilization combined with exercises for range of motion, strength and endurance.

Interventions for neck pain with radiating pain

              For patients with acute neck pain clinicians may provide mobilizing and stabilizing exercises, laser treatments, and short-term use of a cervical collar.

              For patients with chronic neck pain clinicians should employ a multimodal approach including mobilization/manipulation, exercise interventions and mechanical intermittent traction.  Clinicians should encourage participation in occupational and exercise activities. 

Discussion and clinical utility: 

This CPG does and excellent job of providing different intervention approaches based on different patient presentations.  Neck pain is variable and sometimes inconsistent, therefore it is important to adjust interventions based on a patient’s current presentation. 

              It is also important to note the emphasis on educating patients to remain active.  Many of the stated interventions involve increasing range of motion in the apophyseal joints of the cervical and thoracic spine.  The challenge is that when in pain, it can be counterintuitive for patients to continue mobilizing those areas.  Encouraging an active lifestyle is a good way of ensuring that benefits introduced during a therapy session continue to have carry over into a patient’s day to day life.

References

Neck Pain: Revision 2017 Peter R. Blanpied, Anita R. Gross, James M. Elliott, Laurie Lee Devaney, Derek Clewley, David M. Walton, Cheryl Sparks, and Eric K. Robertson Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy 2017 47:7, A1-A83

Reviewed by Maggie McPherson, SPT

Article:

An Evidence-Based Clinical Commentary for Treating Patients with Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome or a Hypermobility Spectrum Disorder published in Orthopaedic Physical Therapy Practice

Dr. Joseph Signorino, DPT, DSc, Dr. Samuel Bikkers, DPT, and Dr. Kate Divine, DPT put together this clinical commentary to guide physical therapy treatment of individuals with Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) or Hypermobility Spectrum Disorder (HSD). They worked to combine evidence-based interventions with their own clinical expertise and clinical reasoning to provide coherent guidelines. The main principles of their commentary included options for monitoring and addressing common symptoms and deficits seen in individuals with EDS and HSD, the importance of education and empathy, the incorporation of the pelvic floor, and some helpful insights into the role of manual therapy for individuals with EDS or HSD.

Some of the common barriers to efficient and pain free movement patterns for individuals with EDS or HSD are identified by the authors as pain, fear of movement, fatigue, and decreased proprioception. Advised interventions to modulate pain perception and decrease fear of movement included education and empathy, graded exposure, progressive resistive exercise (PRE) beginning with gentle isometrics, and aerobic exercise between 40-75% VO2max or at a Borg RPE rating of 13. Aerobic exercise and PRE with isometrics were also recommended as interventions to address fatigue. The authors underlined that since fatigue and pain are common side effects of both resistive and aerobic exercise, clinicians should ensure they are properly dosing exercise interventions, and may need to considerably scale down their resistance depending on how the individual presents. Hence, these authors recommend graded exposure: a gradual progression from isometrics, to multi angle isometrics, to isotonics with gradual progression to resisted movements in multiple planes according to the functional needs of the individual. Additionally, the authors note it is important to be aware of vascular presentations of EDS that need to be seriously considered when dosing any sort of exercise.

Another intervention the authors addressed was manual therapy. While traditionally manual therapy is seen as a means to improve joint mobility and flexibility, which is typically not the goal for the individual with EDS or HSD, the authors identify other potential benefits. They highlight commonly cited effects of manual therapy including changes in pain perception and modulation of the autonomic nervous system which could be beneficial to address pain and kinesiophobia. Regarding proprioception deficits, the authors mention taping, compression garments,  and motor control interventions as potential options for treatment.

Pelvic floor dysfunction is another common symptom that these individuals experience. The authors discussed interventions such as scheduled voiding, urgency strategies, education, and pelvic floor strengthening to mitigate organ prolapse. Here the authors also took time to talk about the importance of education and empathy. They found that individuals with EDS consistently report feeling that their health care providers do not have a good understanding of their condition and do not empathize with their symptoms. Each individual with EDS has a unique presentation, but a solid understanding of the nature of syndrome can help guide clinicians to appropriate treatment strategies.

Clinical Bottom Line:

These authors emphasize a personalized approach, carefully considering graded exposure and pain modulation to address kinesiophobia, pain and fatigability, using a variety of interventions that include gradual progressive resisted exercise starting from isometrics, aerobic exercise, manual therapy, taping, education, and empathy. Additionally, they highlighted the need for pelvic floor interventions as prolapse and incontinence can be concerns for individuals with EDS and HSD.

References:

Signorino JA, Bikkers SJ, Divine K. An Evidenced-Based Clinical Commentary for Treating Patients with Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome or a Hypermobility Spectrum Disorder. Orthopaedic Physical Therapy Practice. 2023;35(3):28-36. Accessed July 16, 2024. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=164775891&site=eds-live