RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Evidence shows that lack of physical activity and sedentary time are associated with higher prevalence of low back pain (LBP). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between replacing sedentary time and light physical activity with a higher physical activity level with the prevalence of LBP. METHODS: Two hundred and sixty-six individuals from a city in southeastern Brazil were recruited to this cross-sectional study. Sedentary behavior and physical activity level were evaluated using an ActiGraph GT3X tri-axial accelerometer during 7 days. The prevalence of LBP was assessed using the Nordic questionnaire. Isotemporal substitution using logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the association between replacing an activity with another in the prevalence of LBP. RESULTS: Replacing time spent in sedentary behavior with moderate physical activity slightly reduced the prevalence of LBP (odds ratio [OR]= 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95, 0.98). In addition, replacing time spent in light physical activity with moderate physical activity also slightly reduced the prevalence of LBP (OR= 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95, 0.98). There was no association for replacing sedentary time and light or moderate physical activity with vigorous physical activity on the prevalence of LBP. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest a small protective effect for LBP when replacing time in sedentary activities or light physical activity with moderate physical activity.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Low-value care is the use of substitutive/ineffective/harmful strategies based on available evidence, and it is considered one of the main contributors to the burden related to low back pain in health care systems. The use of routine imaging for patients with low back pain is the main example of inappropriate care. Therefore, understanding the perceptions of medical doctors and patients from Brazil about this practice may help propose strategies to reduce imaging rates. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the perceptions of medical doctors and patients about imaging for the diagnosis of nonspecific low back pain. DESIGN: A qualitative study using the framework analysis method. SETTINGS: Primary and secondary care. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen patients with low back pain and 15 doctors participated in this study. DATA COLLECTION: Sociodemographic data were collected from all participants, and the interviews were performed using a set of questions created based on the literature. MAIN RESULTS: Patients and doctors believe that the main reason for ordering imaging tests is to identify the source of pain, and imaging could be useful for tracking disease progression over time or if there is a lack of improvement after treatment. Patients' expectations and pressures play a role in the decision to order imaging tests, but clinicians believe that education is the preferred strategy to reduce imaging rates. CONCLUSION: Identifying the source of pain, tracking the disease progression, and patients' expectations and pressures were the main drivers of imaging requests for low back pain. Educational strategies were suggested to reduce the use of routine imaging.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Clinical care indicators for low back pain can be used to monitor healthcare practices and consequently be used to evaluate success of strategies to improve care quality. The aim of this study was to identify the clinical care indicators that have been used to measure appropriateness of health care for patients with low back pain. We conducted a systematic search of five electronic databases and Google to identify clinical care indicators that have been used to measure any aspect of care for people with low back pain. Care indicators were narratively described according to their type (i.e. structure, process, or outcomes) and categorized by their purpose (e.g. to measure aspects related to assessment, imaging requests, treatment/prevention, and outcomes). A total of 3562 and 2180 records were retrieved from electronic databases and Google searches, respectively. We identified 280 indicators related to low back pain care from 40 documents and publications. Most quality indicators were process indicators (n = 213, 76%), followed by structure (n = 41, 15%) and outcome indicators (n = 26, 9%). The most common indicators were related to imaging requests (n = 41, 15%), referral to healthcare providers (n = 30, 11%), and shared decision-making (n = 21, 7%). Our review identified a range of clinical care indicators that have been used to measure the quality of health care for people with low back pain. Our findings will support a Delphi study to reach international consensus on what would be the most important and feasible indicators for a minimum dataset to be collected globally.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The objective of this study is to compare and contrast the quality statements and quality indicators across clinical care standards for low back pain. Searches were performed in Medline, guideline databases, and Google searches to identify clinical care standards for the management of low back pain targeting a multidisciplinary audience. Two independent reviewers reviewed the search results and extracted relevant information from the clinical care standards. We compared the quality statements and indicators of the clinical care standards to identify the consistent messages and the discrepancies between them. Three national clinical care standards from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom were included. They provided from 6 to 8 quality statements and from 12 to 18 quality indicators. The three standards provide consistent recommendations in the quality statements related to imaging, and patient education/advice and self-management. In addition, the Canadian and Australian standards also provide consistent recommendations regarding comprehensive assessment, psychological support, and review and patient referral. However, the three clinical care standards differ in the statements related to psychological assessment, opioid analgesics, non-opioid analgesics, and non-pharmacological therapies. The three national clinical care standards provide consistent recommendations on imaging and patient education/advice, self-management of the condition, and two standards (Canadian and Australian) agree on recommendations regarding comprehensive assessment, psychological support, and review and patient referral. The standards differ in the quality statements related to psychological assessment, opioid prescription, non-opioid analgesics, and non-pharmacological therapies.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: People who live longer often live with multimorbidity. Nevertheless, whether the presence of multimorbidity affects pain and disability in older adults with chronic low back pain (LBP) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether multimorbidity predicts pain intensity and disability at 6- and 12-month follow-ups in older adults with chronic LBP. METHODS: This was a prospective, longitudinal study with 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Participants with chronic LBP (age ≥ 60 years) were recruited and interviewed at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Self-reported measures included the number of comorbidities, assessed through the Self-Administered Comorbidity Questionnaire, pain intensity, assessed with the 11-point Numerical Rating Scale, and disability, assessed with the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. Data were analyzed using univariate and multivariate regression models. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: A total of 220 participants were included. The number of comorbidities predicted pain intensity at 6-month (ß= 0.31 [95% CI: 0.12 to 0.50]) and 12-month (ß= 0.29 [95% CI: 0.08 to 0.50]) follow-ups. The number of comorbidities predicted disability at 6-month (ß= 0.55 [95% CI: 0.20 to 0.90]) and 12-month (ß= 0.40 [95% CI: 0.03 to 0.77]) follow-ups. CONCLUSION: The number of comorbidities at baseline predicted pain and disability at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups in older adults with chronic LBP. These results highlight the role of comorbidities as a predictive factor of pain and disability in patients with chronic LBP, emphasizing the need for timely and continuous interventions in older adults with multimorbidity to mitigate LBP-related pain and disability.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Sedentary behavior has been associated with musculoskeletal pain in school teachers. However, our hypothesis is that physical activity practice could mitigate this association. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship of musculoskeletal pain with high screen-based sedentary behavior among public school teachers and whether physical activity could mitigate this relationship. METHOD: A sample of 246 teachers from 13 public schools were assessed (45.0 ± 10.4 years, 76.0% of women). Musculoskeletal pain was assessed using the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire, screen-based sedentary behavior was measured considering the sum of screen time in television, computer, and smartphone/tablet, and physical activity using the Baecke habitual physical activity questionnaire. Binary logistic regression was used to verify the associations between high screen-based sedentary behavior and musculoskeletal pain in school teachers (Model 1-unadjusted; Model 2-adjusted by age, sex, and socioeconomic status; Model 3-variables of Model 2 + adjusted by physical activity). RESULTS: High screen-based sedentary behavior was associated with pain in neck (odds ratio = 2.09; 95%confidence interval = 1.08-4.04), upper back (odds ratio = 2.21; 95%confidence interval = 1.07-4.56), and low back (odds ratio = 1.91; 95%confidence interval = 1.00-3.65). However, after inserting the variables, including physical activity, these associations were mitigated. CONCLUSIONS: High screen-based sedentary behavior was associated with musculoskeletal pain in public school teachers. However, this relationship was mitigated after the inclusion of confounding variables, including physical activity.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: High prevalence of back pain has been observed in adolescents. Sedentary behavior (SB) is considered a risk factor for musculoskeletal pain. The association between back pain and SB in the pediatric/adolescent population is not well established. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between SB and low back and neck pain in adolescents according to sex. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study with children and adolescents aged 10-17 years, randomly recruited from public and private schools in Presidente Prudente, Brazil. All students enrolled in the selected schools were eligible to participate. SB was evaluated by adding the number of hours of use of screen devices, such as television, computer, video game, and smartphone/tablet. To assess neck and low back pain, the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire was used. Physical activity and socioeconomic status were assessed by the Baecke Questionnaire and the Brazilian Criteria for Economic Classification (ABEP), respectively. Odds ratio (OR) from Binary Logistic Regression in the unadjusted and adjusted model (physical activity, abdominal obesity, and socioeconomic status) showed the relationship between musculoskeletal pain and SB. RESULTS: A total of 1011 adolescents (557 girls) with a mean ± standard deviation age of 13.2±2.4 years were included. Moderate (OR = 1.80; 95%CI: 1.00, 3.23) and high (OR = 1.91; 95%CI: 1.02, 3.53) SB were associated with neck pain in girls. In boys, moderate SB (OR = 2.75; 95%CI: 1.31, 5.78) were associated with neck pain. Moderate (OR = 2.73; 95%CI: 1.45, 5.02) and high (OR = 2.49; 95%CI: 1.30, 4.76) SB were associated with low back pain only in girls. CONCLUSION: Moderate and high SB were associated with neck pain in girls and boys, while moderate and high SB were associated with low back pain only in girls.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the sedentary behaviour contributes to the development of new episodes of low back pain in adults. METHODS: Searches were performed in five electronic databases from their inception to March 2022. Prospective cohort studies with people without low back pain at baseline investigating the effect of sedentary behaviour on the development of new episodes of low back pain at follow-up were considered eligible. Two independent authors screened, extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. An adapted version of the Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Meta-analyses were performed using random effect models to obtain a pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the overall certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: Ten studies were included in this review, with a total sample ranging from 107 to 57,504 participants and mean age ranging from 21.7 to 53.6 years. Most studies (n = 9) assessed sedentary behaviour using self-reported methods, including validated questionnaires or single questions, except for one study that used video recording. The overall risk of bias of the included studies was low. Pooled analysis showed that people classified as sedentary or spending more time in sedentary activities were not likely to develop a new episode of low back pain (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98-1.04, I2  = 9%, n = 9 studies, moderate evidence). CONCLUSION: Sedentary behaviour probably does not contribute to the development of new episodes of low back pain in an adult population. SIGNIFICANCE: Sedentary behaviour does not appear to increase the chances of developing a new episode of low back pain. This might imply that health lifestyle contributors seem to be more related to the amount and type of physical activity, but not the amount of sedentary time. However, studies evaluating the relationship of the sedentary and physical activity with the development of a new episode of low back pain are still needed.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Physical activity plays an important role in the prognosis of chronic low back pain (LBP); however, whether physical activity predicts pain intensity and disability remains unknown. This study investigated whether objective and subjective physical activity measures predict pain intensity and disability levels 6 months later in patients with chronic LBP. METHODS: Patients with chronic LBP seeking care at 2 outpatient physiotherapy clinics were recruited. At baseline assessment, we collected anthropometric/sociodemographic data, duration of symptoms, pain intensity, disability, and physical activity (accelerometer and questionnaire). After 6 months, we reassessed pain and disability. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to investigate the association of physical activity measures with pain and disability at follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 179 patients with chronic LBP were included. High occupational physical activity at baseline predicted disability at 6-month follow-up (B = 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.21 to 2.21) after controlling for age and baseline disability, meaning that for every 1-point increase in occupational physical activity, disability increased on average by 1.22 point. The remaining physical activity measures showed no association with pain intensity or disability at follow-up. CONCLUSION: Higher perceived levels of occupational physical activity predicted higher disability levels at 6-month follow-up in patients with chronic LBP.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the association of sleep quality with reported screen-based sedentary time and reported physical activity, among overweight adolescents. METHODS: Adolescents aged 10 to 17 years enrolled in public and private schools were included. Data collection was carried out during the school semesters of 2014-2015 and participants who did not participate in all evaluations were excluded. Sleep quality and physical activity were assessed by validated questionnaires. Screen-based sedentary time was assessed by self-reported mean daily hours spent on television, computer, smartphone/tablet, and videogames. Body mass index was objectively measured and adolescents were classified into normal weight and overweight according to cutoff points for age and sex. Multiple linear regression models adjusted by covariates (age, sex, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status) were used to analyze the relationship between variables. RESULTS: A total of 1008 adolescents were assessed, with a mean age of 13.2 ± 2.4 years and a mean body mass index of 20.4 ± 4.3 kg/m2. Overweight was observed in 28.0% of sample, while 53.0% reported non-white ethnicity. Self-reported screen-based sedentary time was significantly related to poor sleep quality in adolescents (ß = 0.116, p = 0.005), remaining significant only in those who were normal weight (ß = 0.101, p = 0.007) in sensitivity analysis. Self-reported physical activity showed no relationship with sleep quality in both normal weight and overweight adolescents. CONCLUSION: Self-reported screen-based sedentary time was associated with poor sleep quality in adolescents, mainly among those with normal weight. The time spent on screen-based sedentary activities can impair sleep quality even in normal weight adolescents.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: There is a common belief that patients presenting to emergency departments have more severe pain levels and functional limitations than those who are seen in general practice. The aim of this systematic review was to compare pain and disability levels of patients with acute low back pain presenting to general practice vs those presenting to emergency departments. METHODS: Electronic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL from database inception to February 2019. Observational studies including patients with acute non-specific low back pain presenting to emergency departments and/or general practice were eligible. Pain and/or disability scores expressed on a 0-100 scale were the primary outcomes. Risk of bias was evaluated with a validated tool for observational studies, and the overall quality of evidence was assessed with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Meta-analysis with random effects and meta-regression were used to test for differences between the two settings. RESULTS: We included 12 records reporting results for 10 unique studies with a total of 6,999 participants from general practice (n = 6) and emergency departments (n = 4). There was low-quality evidence (downgraded for indirectness and inconsistency) that patients presenting to emergency departments had higher pain scores than those in general practice, with a mean difference of 17.3 points (95% confidence interval: 8.8 to 25.9 on a 0-100 scale). Similarly, there was low-quality evidence (downgraded for indirectness and inconsistency) that patients presenting to emergency departments had higher disability scores than those in general practice (mean difference: 21.7; 95% confidence interval: 4.6 to 38.7 on a 0-100 scale). CONCLUSION: Patients with acute non-specific low back pain presenting to emergency departments may report higher levels of pain and disability than those seen in general practice.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To investigate what format for providing patient information (i.e. written summary, infographic or video animation) is most effective for promoting correct beliefs about imaging and inevitable consequences of low back pain (LBP). DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING/PATIENTS: One hundred and fifty-nine patients with non-specific LBP were recruited from outpatient physiotherapy clinics. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomised to receive patient information in one of three formats: video animation, infographic or written summary. Patients were allowed to read or watch the materials for up to 20 min. MEASUREMENTS: Outcome were assessed before and immediately after the intervention. The primary outcome was the Back Beliefs Questionnaire. The secondary outcome was beliefs about imaging for LBP assessed by two questions. RESULTS: All 159 patients completed the study. Our findings revealed no difference between groups for the Back Beliefs Questionnaire. Correct beliefs about imaging were more likely with the infographic than the video animation (Question 1- Odds Ratio [OR] = 3.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7, 8.7; Question 2- OR = 6.8, 95%CI: 2.7, 17.2) and more likely with the written summary than the video animation (Question 1- OR = 3.3, 95%CI: 1.5, 7.4; Question 2- OR = 3.7, 95%CI: 1.6, 8.5). No difference between infographic and written summary formats were reported for the questions assessing LBP imaging beliefs. CONCLUSION: The three materials were equally effective in improving patient's general beliefs about LBP care. However, the traditional written summary or infographic formats were more effective than the video animation format for improving beliefs about imaging for LBP.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Most low back pain trials have limited applicability to the emergency department (ED) because they provide treatment and measure outcomes after discharge from the ED. We investigated the efficacy and safety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions delivered in the ED to patients with non-specific low back pain and/or sciatica on patient-relevant outcomes measured during the emergency visit. METHODS: Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL from inception to week 1 February 2020. We included all randomised controlled trials investigating adult patients (≥18 years) with non-specific low back pain and/or sciatica presenting to ED. The primary outcome of interest was pain intensity. Two reviewers independently screened the full texts, extracted the data and assessed risk of bias of each trial using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. The overall quality of evidence, or certainty, provided by a set of trials evaluating the same treatment was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, which considers imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness and bias in the evidence. RESULTS: Fifteen trials (1802 participants) were included with 12 of 15 at low risk of bias (ie, PEDro score >6). Based on results from individual trials and moderate quality evidence, ketoprofen gel was more effective than placebo for non-specific low back pain at 30 min (mean difference (MD) -15.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) -21.0 to -9.0). For those with sciatica (moderate quality evidence), intravenous paracetamol (acetaminophen) (MD -15.7, 95% CI -19.8 to -11.6) and intravenous morphine (MD -11.4, 95% CI -21.6 to -1.2) were both superior to placebo at 30 min. Based on moderate quality of evidence, corticosteroids showed no benefits against placebo at emergency discharge for non-specific low back pain (MD 9.0, 95% CI -0.71 to 18.7) or sciatica (MD -6.8, 95% CI -24.2 to 10.6). There were conflicting results from trials comparing different pharmacological options (moderate quality evidence) or investigating non-pharmacological treatments (low quality evidence). CONCLUSION: Ketoprofen gel for non-specific low back pain and intravenous paracetamol or morphine for sciatica were superior to placebo, whereas corticosteroids were ineffective for both conditions. There was conflicting evidence for comparisons of different pharmacological options and those involving non-pharmacological treatments. Additional trials measuring important patient-related outcomes to EDs are needed.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The Sedentary Behavior Questionnaire (SBQ) is a brief and easy instrument to measure time spent on sedentary activities; however, no study has investigated the reliability and validity of this questionnaire in people with chronic low back pain (LBP). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, construct validity, and interpretability of the SBQ against data derived from an accelerometer in patients with nonspecific chronic LBP. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Outpatient physiotherapy clinic. PATIENTS: Seventy-five patients aged between 18 and 60 years (mean age, 42 years old) with nonspecific chronic LBP were recruited for this study. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. METHODS: The Cronbach's α was calculated to investigate the internal consistency of the SBQ and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to investigate the reliability of the SBQ between two administrations separated by a 1-week interval. Measurement error was assessed calculating the SEM and minimal detectable change (MDC). Spearman correlation (r) was calculated to investigate the construct validity using hypothesis testing. Interpretability was investigated using ceiling and floor effects. RESULTS: The Cronbach's α of the SBQ total score was 0.92, indicating homogeneity among the items of the instrument. The reliability of the SBQ was excellent (ICC > 0.75), without any evidence of ceiling and floor effects. Regarding measurement error, the total score of the SBQ showed an SEM and MDC of 109.8 minutes per day and 304.4 minutes per day, respectively. However, there were no correlations of the SBQ domains or the total score with the accelerometer-measured sedentary time (r < 0.25). CONCLUSION: The SBQ is a reliable tool for quantifying time spent in sedentary activities of patients with chronic LBP. The SBQ showed poor construct validity compared to the accelerometer-measured sedentary time, which indicates that patients may underestimate their time spent in sedentary activities.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic with meta-analysis OBJECTIVES.: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of epidural corticosteroid injections compared with placebo injection in reducing leg pain and disability in patients with sciatica. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Conservative treatments, including pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments, are typically the first treatment options for sciatica but the evidence to support their use is limited. The overall quality of evidence found by previous systematic reviews varies between moderate and high, which suggests that future trials may change the conclusions. New placebo-controlled randomized trials have been published recently which highlights the importance of an updated systematic review. METHODS: The searches were performed without language restrictions in the following databases from 2012 to 25 September 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and trial registers. We included placebo-controlled randomized trials investigating epidural corticosteroid injections in patients with sciatica. The primary outcomes were leg pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcomes were adverse events, overall pain, and back pain intensity. We grouped similar trials according to outcome measures and their respective follow-up time points. Short-term follow-up (>2 weeks but ≤3 months) was considered the primary follow-up time point due to the expected mechanism of action of epidural corticosteroid injection. Weighted mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. We assessed the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach and conducted the analyses using random effects. RESULTS: We included 25 clinical trials (from 29 publications) providing data for a total of 2470 participants with sciatica, an increase of six trials when compared to the previous review. Epidural corticosteroid injections were probably more effective than placebo in reducing short-term leg pain (MD -4.93, 95% CI -8.77 to -1.09 on a 0-100 scale), short-term disability (MD -4.18, 95% CI: -6.04 to -2.17 on a 0-100 scale) and may be slightly more effective in reducing short-term overall pain (MD -9.35, 95% CI -14.05 to -4.65 on a 0-100 scale). There were mostly minor adverse events (i.e., without hospitalization) after epidural corticosteroid injections and placebo injections without difference between groups (RR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.91-1.42). The quality of evidence was at best moderate mostly due to problems with trial design and inconsistency. CONCLUSION: A review of 25 placebo-controlled trials provides moderate-quality evidence that epidural corticosteroid injections are effective, although the effects are small and short-term. There is uncertainty on safety due to very low-quality evidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Teachers perform repetitive movements all day, which can cause pain in body regions. This article analyzes the association of pain with sleep quality in this population. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to analyze the relationship of musculoskeletal pain and sleep quality in teachers from public schools. METHODS: The sample consisted of 242 teachers, selected in a random process. Musculoskeletal pain and sleep quality were evaluated by using a questionnaire. The association between sleep quality and musculoskeletal pain was evaluated using the chi-square test. The magnitude of the associations was verified by Binary Logistic Regression, adjusted by sex, age, BMI, and socioeconomic status. RESULTS: Teachers with poor sleep quality presented higher body mass index (BMI) values when compared to teachers with good sleep quality (27.9 vs 26.0, p = 0.012). Teachers with poor sleep quality were approximately twice as likely to report thoracic pain (OR = 2.16[95% CI = 1.12-4.16]), wrist pain (OR = 3.28[95% CI = 1.18-9.07]), low back pain (OR = 3.09[95% CI = 1.29-7.41]), and ankle/foot pain (OR = 2.83[95% CI = 1.32-6.08]). CONCLUSIONS: Teachers with poor sleep quality were approximately twice as likely to present pain in several body parts. Our findings revealed that poor sleep quality was significantly associated with musculoskeletal pain in Brazilian teachers of public schools, regardless of confounding factors.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Meta-analyses have shown that isometric handgrip training reduces blood pressure in normotensive and hypertensive subjects. However, the effects on cardiac autonomic modulation are still controversial. Thus, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyse the effects of isometric handgrip training on cardiac autonomic modulation in normotensive and hypertensive subjects. For this, Medline, Cinhal, Embase, Spordiscus and PEdro were searched for relevant studies published until December 2018. Randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of isometric handgrip training on heart rate variability parameters were considered eligible. Parameters were obtained in time (standard deviation of all the RR intervals-SDNN, root mean square of successive differences between the normal adjacent RR intervals-RMSSD and the percentage of adjacent intervals with more than 50 ms-PNN50) and frequency domain (low frequency-LF, high frequency-HF and sympathovagal balance-LF/HF). Mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated using an inverse variance method with a random effects model. Seven trials were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, totalling 86 participants. No significant effect was observed in heart rate variability parameters after isometric handgrip training (4 trials to SDNN: MD = -1.44 ms and 95% CI = -8.02, 5.14 ms; RMSSD: MD = -1.48 ms and 95% CI = -9.41, 6.45 ms; PNN50: MD = 0.85% and 95% CI = -1.10, 2.81%; 7 trials to LF: -0.17 n.u. and 95% CI = -6.32, 5.98 n.u.; HF: MD = 0.17 n.u. and 95% CI = -5.97, 6.30 n.u.; and LF/HF: MD = 0.13 and 95% CI = -0.34, 0.59). In conclusion, current literature indicates that isometric handgrip training does not improve heart rate variability.

Asunto(s)