Exercise therapy reporting in clinical trials for chronic neck pain: A systematic review. (20th May 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Grandeo, Jason; Favaro, Laura; Rhon, Daniel I.; Young, Jodi L.
• Is Part Of: Musculoskeletal care. Volume 20:Number 4(2022)
• Page Start: 796
• Page End: 811
• Publication Date: 2022-05-20
• Subjects: exercise therapy -- intervention checklist -- neck pain; Musculoskeletal system -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Rheumatology -- Periodicals; 616.7005
• DOI: 10.1002/msc.1644
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1478-2189

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the reproducibility of exercise therapy used in clinical trials for chronic neck pain (CNP) based on reported items from the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) and the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) checklists. Methods: Two researchers systematically searched, screened, and selected trials that assessed exercise therapy for CNP between 2000 and 2021 from PubMed, CINAHL, and Ovid Medline. Included studies were published in English, and study participants experienced neck pain for longer than 3 months. Thoroughness of reporting of exercise therapy was assessed using the TIDierR and CERT checklists. Methodological quality of each study was screened with the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Data analysis was performed for descriptive and correlational statistics. Results: Sixty‐three clinical trials using exercise therapy for treatment of CNP met the inclusion criteria. No study reported all TIDieR or CERT items. The mean number of items reported was 5.44 (SD 2.40, range of 1–11) on the TIDieR, and 8.27 (SD 4.14, range of 0‐17) for the CERT. Risk of bias was high for 30 studies (47.6%), somewhat concerning for 20 studies (31.7%), and low for 13 studies (21.7%). Higher risk of bias was associated with a lower number of TIDieR and CERT items reported. Discussion & Conclusion: The majority of exercise therapy trials for CNP lack proper reporting, limiting reproducibility of the interventions in real world clinical practice and follow‐on research. After checklists were published, reporting did not improve.