PainSci summary of Carlesso 2011?This page is one of thousands in the PainScience.com bibliography. It is not a general article: it is focused on a single scientific paper, and it may provide only just enough context for the summary to make sense. Links to other papers and more general information are provided at the bottom of the page, as often as possible. ★★★☆☆3-star ratings are for typical studies with no more (or less) than the usual common problems. Ratings are a highly subjective opinion, and subject to revision at any time. If you think this paper has been incorrectly rated, please let me know.
In 2010 Carlesso et al reported that “harms have either been neglected or poorly defined in much of the available studies on the efficacy of orthopaedic physical therapy” and the patient perspective on adverse reactions is generally neglected, making formal study difficult. How do patients define a bad reaction to therapy? By ruling out other explanations — if there’s no other obvious cause, they chalk it up to a side effect. “An overarching theme identified multiple factors that influence how the adverse event is perceived.” In other words, it’s complicated!
original abstract†Abstracts here may not perfectly match originals, for a variety of technical and practical reasons. Some abstacts are truncated for my purposes here, if they are particularly long-winded and unhelpful. I occasionally add clarifying notes. And I make some minor corrections.
Rare, serious, and common, benign adverse events (AE) are associated with MT techniques. A proposed standard for defining AE in manual therapy (MT) practise has been published but it did not include the patient perspective. Research comparing clinician and patient reporting of AE demonstrates that several differences exist; for example, the reporting of objective versus subjective events. The objective of this study was to describe how patients define AE associated with MT techniques. A descriptive qualitative design was employed. Semi-structured interviews were used with a purposive sample of patients (n = 13) receiving MT, from physiotherapy, chiropractic and osteopathic practises in Ontario, Canada. The interview guide was informed by existing evidence and consultation with content and methodological experts. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed by two independent team members using thematic content analysis. A key finding was that patients defined mild, moderate and major AE by pain/symptom severity, functional impact, duration and by ruling out of alternative causes. An overarching theme identified multiple factors that influence how the AE is perceived. These concepts differ from the previously proposed framework for defining AE that did not include the patient perspective. Future processes to create standard definitions or measures should include the patient viewpoint to provide a broader, client-centred foundation.
- “Adverse events associated with the use of cervical manipulation and mobilization for the treatment of neck pain in adults: A systematic review,” Lisa C Carlesso, Anita R Gross, P Lina Santaguida, Stephen Burnie, Sandra Voth, and Jackie Sadi, Manual Therapy, 2010.
- “Standardization of adverse event terminology and reporting in orthopaedic physical therapy: application to the cervical spine,” Lisa C Carlesso, Joy C Macdermid, and Lina P Santaguida, Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 2010.
- “Defining adverse events in manual therapy: an exploratory qualitative analysis of the patient perspective,” Lisa C Carlesso, John Cairney, Lisa Dolovich, and Jennifer Hoogenes, Manual Therapy, 2011.
- “A survey of patient's perceptions of what is "adverse" in manual physiotherapy and predicting who is likely to say so,” Lisa C Carlesso, Joy C MacDermid, P Lina Santaguida, and Lehana Thabane, J Clin Epidemiol, 2013.
- “Adverse events and manual therapy: a systematic review,” Dawn Carnes, Thomas S Mars, Brenda Mullinger, Robert Froud, and Martin Underwood, Manual Therapy, 2010.
One article on PainScience.com cites Carlesso 2011 as a source:
- PS Does Spinal Manipulation Work? — Spinal manipulation, adjustment, and popping of the spinal joints and the subluxation theory of disease, back pain and neck pain
This page is part of the PainScience BIBLIOGRAPHY, which contains plain language summaries of thousands of scientific papers & others sources. It’s like a highly specialized blog. A few highlights:
- Effectiveness of customised foot orthoses for Achilles tendinopathy: a randomised controlled trial. Munteanu 2015 Br J Sports Med.
- A Bayesian model-averaged meta-analysis of the power pose effect with informed and default priors: the case of felt power. Gronau 2017 Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology.
- The neck and headaches. Bogduk 2014 Neurol Clin.
- Agreement of self-reported items and clinically assessed nerve root involvement (or sciatica) in a primary care setting. Konstantinou 2012 Eur Spine J.
- Effect of NSAIDs on Recovery From Acute Skeletal Muscle Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Morelli 2017 Am J Sports Med.