BackgroundAetiology of births involving very low birthweight (VLBW) and extremely low birthweight (ELBW) infants is heterogeneous and preventive strategies remain elusive. Socioenvironmental measures implemented as Ireland’s response to the SARS-CoV-2 virus (COVID-19) pandemic represented a national lockdown, and have possibly influenced the health and well-being of pregnant women and unborn infants.MethodsRegional trends of VLBW and ELBW infants in one designated health area of Ireland over two decades were analysed. Poisson regression and rate ratio analyses with 95% CI were conducted. Regional data covering most of the lockdown period of 2020 were compared with historical regional and national data and forecasted national figures for 2020.ResultsPoisson regression analysis found that the regional historical VLBW rate per 1000 live births for January to April, 2001–2019 was 8.18 (95% CI 7.21 to 9.29). During January to April 2020, an unusually low VLBW rate of just 2.17 per 1000 live births was observed, reflecting a rate ratio of 3.77 (95% CI 1.21 to 11.75), p=0.022, representing a 73% reduction of VLBW during the first 4 months of 2020 compared with same period for the preceding two decades. There were no ELBW infants admitted to the regional neonatal intensive care unit. National Irish VLBW rate for 2020 is forecasted to be reduced to approximate 400 per 60 000 births compared with the historical 500–600 range.ConclusionAn unprecedented reduction in regional births of VLBW and ELBW infants was observed in Ireland coinciding with the COVID-19 lockdown. Potential determinants of this unique temporal trend possibly reside in the summative socioenvironmental impact of the COVID-19 lockdown. Our findings, if mirrored in other regions that have adopted a lockdown, demonstrate the potential to evaluate these implicated behavioural and socioenvironmental modifiers to positively influence VLBW and ELBW rates globally.

Identification of at-risk athletes using screening tools such as US may allow preventative programmes to be implemented. However, it is clear that other factors beyond tissue structure are involved in the development of lower limb tendinopathy.

BackgroundOne-size-fits-all interventions reduce chronic low back pain (CLBP) a small amount. An individualised intervention called cognitive functional therapy (CFT) was superior for CLBP compared with manual therapy and exercise in one randomised controlled trial (RCT). However, systematic reviews show group interventions are as effective as one-to-one interventions for musculoskeletal pain. This RCT investigated whether a physiotherapist-delivered individualised intervention (CFT) was more effective than physiotherapist-delivered group-based exercise and education for individuals with CLBP.Methods206 adults with CLBP were randomised to either CFT (n=106) or group-based exercise and education (n=100). The length of the CFT intervention varied according to the clinical progression of participants (mean=5 treatments). The group intervention consisted of up to 6 classes (mean=4 classes) over 6–8 weeks. Primary outcomes were disability and pain intensity in the past week at 6 months and 12months postrandomisation. Analysis was by intention-to-treat using linear mixed models.ResultsCFT reduced disability more than the group intervention at 6 months (mean difference, 8.65; 95% CI 3.66 to 13.64; p=0.001), and at 12 months (mean difference, 7.02; 95% CI 2.24 to 11.80; p=0.004). There were no between-group differences observed in pain intensity at 6 months (mean difference, 0.76; 95% CI -0.02 to 1.54; p=0.056) or 12 months (mean difference, 0.65; 95% CI -0.20 to 1.50; p=0.134).ConclusionCFT reduced disability, but not pain, at 6 and 12 months compared with the group-based exercise and education intervention. Future research should examine whether the greater reduction in disability achieved by CFT renders worthwhile differences for health systems and patients.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT02145728).

Despite its growing popularity, scant research exists concerning musculoskeletal pain and injury in Irish dancing (ID). This study aimed to record the biopsychosocial characteristics of elite adult Irish dancers and to investigate potential relationships between these characteristics and musculoskeletal pain and injury. One hundred and four professional Irish dancers, elite competitive Irish dancers, and dancers in full time education studying ID completed a questionnaire providing data on dance and activity levels, physical and psychological health, and pain and injury history. Of these subjects, 84 underwent 1. a physical screening of lower limb flexibility, which involved balance and endurance; 2. a number of functional tests; and 3. anthropometric, biomechanical, and anatomical assessments. Subjects were divided into "significantly injured (SI)" and "not significantly injured (NSI)" categories based on the severity and impact of self-reported pain and injury. Thirty-three (31.7%) subjects were classified as SI and 71 (68.3%) as NSI. The factors significantly associated with being SI were female sex (p = 0.036), higher number of subjective general health (p = 0.001) and psychological (p = 0.036) complaints, low mood (p = 0.01), heightened catastrophizing (p = 0.047), and failure always to complete a warm-up (p = 0.006). A self-reported injury rate of 76.9% over the previous 5 years was reported. The mean number of injuries sustained to all body parts over the previous 5 years was 1.49, with a mean of 126.1 days lost annually to injury. Foot and ankle injuries were most prevalent. It was concluded that there is a significant level of musculoskeletal pain and injury in elite adult ID. A complex combination of biopsychosocial factors appears to be associated with pain and injury.

No abstract