Objectives As a step towards the comprehensive evaluation of movement in patients with low back pain, the aim of this study is to design a marker set (three rigid segment spine, pelvic and lower limb model) and evaluate the reliability and minimal detectable change (MDC) of this marker set in healthy adults during gait and sit to stand (STS) tasks using three dimensional motion capture. Results The ‘Imperial Spine’ marker set was used to assess relative peak angles during gait and STS tasks using the minimum recommended sample size (n = 10) for reliability studies with minimum Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) of 0.70, optimum ICC 0.90 and 9 trials replicated per subject per task. Intra- and inter-tester reliability between an experienced and inexperienced user was examined. ICC, mean, standard error (SEM), Bland Altman 95% limits of agreement (LOA) and MDC were computed. ICC values demonstrated excellent intra- and inter-tester reliability in both tasks, particularly in the sagittal plane (majority ICCs > 0.80). SEM measurements were lower in gait (0.8–5.5°) than STS tasks (1°-12.6°) as were MDC values. LOA demonstrated good agreement. The ‘Imperial Spine’ marker set is reliable for use in healthy adults during functional tasks. Future evaluation in patients is required.

Physiotherapy plays a fundamental role in managing adults with the joint hypermobility syndrome/Ehlers-Danlos syndrome hypermobility type (JHS/EDS-HT). However, it is a challenge for both the patient and the physiotherapist as the condition is poorly understood and treatment for JHS/EDS-HT is currently undefined. Insight into current practice is, therefore, necessary in order to establish baseline knowledge in this area and in the long term to improve the standard of patient care. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate current physiotherapists' knowledge of JHS/EDS-HT and to gain insight into current physiotherapy practice with emphasis on assessment, management, and treatment efficacy. Three hundred twenty-five Flemish physiotherapists participated in the study by filling out electronically a modified version of the "Hypermobility and Hypermobility Syndrome Questionnaire" (HHQ), which covered theoretical constructs such as general knowledge, assessment, management, and learning in relation to generalized joint hypermobility and JHS/EDS-HT. The results show that physiotherapists report a low level of confidence with regard to assessment and management of JHS/EDS-HT. Knowledge of hypermobility and JHS/EDS-HT is weak, especially regarding the features associated with JHS/EDS-HT. Many treatment approaches are used by physiotherapists with the majority showing preference for education, reassurance, muscle strengthening, proprioceptive and core stability training. Almost all approaches were perceived as being clinically effective by the physiotherapists, highlighting a lack of consensus. In conclusion, this study in Flemish physiotherapists confirms that JHS/EDS-HT is under-recognized, not well known and deemed difficult to treat. Further education is required and sought by the physiotherapists surveyed, and future research is needed.

No abstract

Background Healthcare professionals outside of medicine (HCPs), including nurses, midwives and allied health professionals, are increasingly involved in research for patient benefit. Their challenge is to negotiate inter-professional or professionally isolated contexts. The aims of this study were to evaluate the ‘Healthcare Professionals in Research’ (HPiR) Facebook group (a self-directed and confidential peer support group for doctoral and postdoctoral HCPs) including engagement, the experiences of doctoral and postdoctoral HPiR members and to identify future career challenges using an on-line survey. Methods The HPiR Facebook group was launched in May 2019. Five HCP Community managers (CMs) were trained in on-line platform curation, moderation and screening. An on-line survey was designed to capture data from HPiR members. A purposive sampling approach was applied. Respondents were required to be doctoral and postdoctoral HCPs and a registered member of the HPiR group. Respondents represented a range of healthcare professions, 79 % of whom had over ten years clinical experience. Membership growth and engagement was analysed. Descriptive statistics were used to present numerical data. Qualitative data were analysed thematically. Results 96 members were admitted to the group within the first month. All members were actively engaged with group content. 34/96 doctoral and postdoctoral HCPs completed the survey. Most members joined for networking (88 %) and peer support (82 %) purposes. Analysis of text responses showed difficulties in balancing a clinical academic career and highlighted the consequences of undefined clinical academic roles and pathways. Conclusions Doctoral and postdoctoral HCPs value the opportunities that HPiR provides for peer support and connection with fellow HCPs. HPiR has the potential to strengthen research capacity, support research skill development and drive change within the clinical academic community. Clinical academic roles and pathways need to be standardised. The creation of opportunities beyond doctoral studies is a priority.