Detailed guides to painful problems, treatments & more

Is clinical sport medicine science improving?

PainSci » bibliography » Grant et al 2014
updated
Tags: scientific medicine, fun, good news

Eight articles on PainSci cite Grant 2014: 1. The Complete Guide to IT Band Syndrome2. The Complete Guide to Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome3. Complete Guide to Plantar Fasciitis4. Shin Splints Treatment, The Complete Guide5. A Historical Perspective On Aches ‘n’ Pains6. Pseudo-Quackery in Physical Therapy7. Complete Guide to Frozen Shoulder8. Science versus Experience in Musculoskeletal Medicine

PainSci commentary on Grant 2014: ?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 wherever possible.

Things may be getting better: “The emphasis on increasing levels of evidence to guide treatment decisions for sports medicine patients may be taking effect.” Fantastic news, if true! On the other hand, maybe I should be careful what I wish for, since my entire career is based on making some sense out of the hopeless mess that is sports and musculoskeletal medicine …

~ Paul Ingraham

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.

BACKGROUND: There has been an increased emphasis on improving the level of evidence used as the basis for clinical treatment decisions. Several journals now require a statement of the level of evidence as a basic gauge of the study's strength.

PURPOSE: To review the levels of evidence in published articles in the clinical sports medicine literature and to determine if there has been an improvement in the levels of evidence published over the past 15 years.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review.

METHODS: All articles from the years 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2010 in The American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM), Arthroscopy, and sports medicine-related articles from The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American (JBJS-A) were analyzed. Articles were categorized by type and ranked for level of evidence according to guidelines from the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Excluded were animal, cadaveric, and basic science articles; editorials; surveys; special topics; letters to the editor; and correspondence. Statistical analysis was performed with chi-square.

RESULTS: A total of 1580 articles over the 4 periods met the inclusion criteria. The percentage of level 1 and 2 studies increased from 6.8% to 12.6%, 22.9%, and 23.5%, respectively (P < .0001), while level 4 and 5 studies decreased from 78.9% to 72.4%, 63.9%, and 53.0% (P < .0001). JBJS-A had a significant increase in level 1 and 2 studies (4.1%, 5.1%, 28.2%, 27.8%; P < .0001), as did AJSM (9.4%, 17.1%, 36.1%, 30.1%; P < .0001). Arthroscopy showed no significant change over time. Diagnostic, therapeutic, and prognostic studies all showed significant increases in level 1 and 2 studies over time (P < .05).

CONCLUSION: There has been a statistically significant increase in the percentage of level 1 and 2 studies published in the sports medicine literature over the past 15 years, particularly in JBJS-A and AJSM. The largest increase was seen in diagnostic studies, while therapeutic and prognostic studies demonstrated modest improvement. The emphasis on increasing levels of evidence to guide treatment decisions for sports medicine patients may be taking effect.

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: