Sean P Riley1, Brian Swanson2, Jean-Michel Brismée3, Steven F Sawyer3. 1. Department of Rehabilitation Services and Sports Medicine, Uconn Health, Farmington, CT, USA; Physical Therapy Program, Storrs, CT, USA. 2. Department of Physical Therapy, University of New England, Portland, ME, USA. 3. Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Center for Rehabilitation Research, School of Health Professions, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, USA.
Abstract
Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in the orthopaedic manual therapy (OMT) literature from January 2010 to June 2014 in order to determine if the CONSORT checklist and Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) assessment tools: (1) are reliable; (2) have improved the reporting and decreased the risk of bias in RCTs in the OMT literature; (3) differ based on journal impact factor (JIF); and (4) scores are associated with each other. Background: The CONSORT statement is used to improve the accuracy of reporting within RCTs. The Cochrane RoB tool was designed to assess the risk of bias within RCTs. To date, no evaluation of the quality of reporting and risk of bias in OMT RCTs has been published. Methods: Relevant RCTs were identified by a literature review from January 2010 to June 2014. The identified RCTs were assessed by two individual reviewers utilizing the 2010 CONSORT checklist and the RoB tool. Agreement and a mean composite total score for each tool were attained in order to determine if the CONSORT and RoB tools were reliable and varied by year and impact factor. Results: A total of 72 RCTs in the OMT literature were identified. A number of categories within the CONSORT and RoB tools demonstrated prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) scores of less than 0.20 and from 0.20 to 0.40. The total CONSORT and RoB scores were correlated to each other (r = 0.73; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.82; p < 0.0001). There were no statistically significant differences in CONSORT or RoB scores by year. There was a statistically significant correlation between both CONSORT scores and JIF (r = 0.64, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.76; p < 0.0001), and between RoB scores and JIF (r = 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.60; p < 0.001). There was not a statistically significant correlation between JIF and year of publication. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the CONSORT and RoB have a number of items that are unclear and unreliable, and that the quality of reporting in OMT trials has not improved in recent years. Improvements in reporting are necessary to allow advances in OMT practice. Level of Evidence: 1A.
Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in the orthopaedic manual therapy (OMT) literature from January 2010 to June 2014 in order to determine if the CONSORT checklist and Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) assessment tools: (1) are reliable; (2) have improved the reporting and decreased the risk of bias in RCTs in the OMT literature; (3) differ based on journal impact factor (JIF); and (4) scores are associated with each other. Background: The CONSORT statement is used to improve the accuracy of reporting within RCTs. The Cochrane RoB tool was designed to assess the risk of bias within RCTs. To date, no evaluation of the quality of reporting and risk of bias in OMT RCTs has been published. Methods: Relevant RCTs were identified by a literature review from January 2010 to June 2014. The identified RCTs were assessed by two individual reviewers utilizing the 2010 CONSORT checklist and the RoB tool. Agreement and a mean composite total score for each tool were attained in order to determine if the CONSORT and RoB tools were reliable and varied by year and impact factor. Results: A total of 72 RCTs in the OMT literature were identified. A number of categories within the CONSORT and RoB tools demonstrated prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) scores of less than 0.20 and from 0.20 to 0.40. The total CONSORT and RoB scores were correlated to each other (r = 0.73; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.82; p < 0.0001). There were no statistically significant differences in CONSORT or RoB scores by year. There was a statistically significant correlation between both CONSORT scores and JIF (r = 0.64, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.76; p < 0.0001), and between RoB scores and JIF (r = 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.60; p < 0.001). There was not a statistically significant correlation between JIF and year of publication. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the CONSORT and RoB have a number of items that are unclear and unreliable, and that the quality of reporting in OMT trials has not improved in recent years. Improvements in reporting are necessary to allow advances in OMT practice. Level of Evidence: 1A.
Keywords:
CONSORT; Manual therapy; Randomized clinical trails; Risk of bias
Authors: S Hajibandeh; S Hajibandeh; G A Antoniou; P A Green; M Maden; F Torella Journal: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Date: 2015-08-19 Impact factor: 7.069
Authors: Lisa Hartling; Michele P Hamm; Andrea Milne; Ben Vandermeer; P Lina Santaguida; Mohammed Ansari; Alexander Tsertsvadze; Susanne Hempel; Paul Shekelle; Donna M Dryden Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2012-09-13 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Susan Armijo-Olivo; Maria Ospina; Bruno R da Costa; Matthias Egger; Humam Saltaji; Jorge Fuentes; Christine Ha; Greta G Cummings Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-05-13 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Héctor Gutiérrez-Espinoza; Felipe Araya-Quintanilla; Cristian Olguín-Huerta; Juan Valenzuela-Fuenzalida; Rodrigo Gutiérrez-Monclus; Victoria Moncada-Ramírez Journal: J Man Manip Ther Date: 2021-10-20
Authors: Luiz Felicio Cadete Scola; Anne M Moseley; Lehana Thabane; Matheus Almeida; Lucíola da Cunha Menezes Costa Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-05-22 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Arianne Verhagen; Peter William Stubbs; Poonam Mehta; David Kennedy; Anthony M Nasser; Camila Quel de Oliveira; Joshua W Pate; Ian W Skinner; Alana B McCambridge Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-01-03 Impact factor: 2.692