Osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of musculoskeletal pain and disability. According to a study by Lawrence et al, an estimated 27 million Americans were living with OA in 2008. This number will continue to increase as the population of persons older than 65 years grows. Because of the increasing number of persons who have this chronic condition that causes pain and decreases function, the prevalence of this diagnosis in primary care and musculoskeletal clinics likely will increase. The reduction of pain and improvement in function should be goals of providers who treat these patients. Physical therapy (PT) is a commonly used treatment modality for persons with OA. Many treatment modalities are available within the scope of PT, including strength training, manual therapy, aquatic therapy, electrical stimulation, and balance and perturbation training. A review of the most recent and highest-quality literature regarding these modalities found that strength training, aquatic therapy, and balance and perturbation therapy were the most beneficial with respect to reducing pain and improving function. Evidence clearly indicates that electrical stimulation likely has very little impact on these variables, and evidence regarding manual therapy is equivocal. Literature reviewing prognostic indicators for persons with OA who will likely respond to PT reveal that persons with milder disease (ie, unilateral OA, symptoms for less than 1 year, and a 40-m self-paced walking test of less than 25.9 seconds) and those who have pain of 6 or greater on the numerical pain rating scale are likely to have better outcomes with PT, which suggests that earlier referral is preferable. Barriers to the acceptance of PT as a therapeutic treatment for OA include fatalistic patient and provider perspectives, inadequate analgesia, and a fear among some patients and providers that increased activity will lead to progression of their OA.

Previous studies and informal surveys have demonstrated a trend among graduating physiatry residents who desired to practice in an outpatient musculoskeletal (MSK)- or spine-type setting. However, there has been no updated information on the current trend among graduating residents as well as sparse information on gauging if current trainees feel prepared on graduation to treat patients with such disorders. This article describes a prospective survey of graduating chief residents during the 2013-2014 academic year in which 72% of chief residents planned to pursue a fellowship. A total of 54% of those chief residents planned to pursue a pain, sports, or spine fellowship. Seventy-five percent of the responding chief residents reported that most of the residents in their program felt that the current amount of required rotations in MSK, sports, spine, or pain medicine was adequate and 85% felt comfortable practicing in a noninterventional spine or MSK position after graduation without a fellowship. The results of this survey provide an updated perspective on the current trends among graduating residents as well as how residents perceive their MSK curriculum. These results may prove useful when evaluating MSK curriculums and shaping resident education to maximize career goals.

Despite the known value of core stability to athletes and patients with low back pain, there is currently no reliable and practical means for rating core stability in a typical office-based practice. This pilot study provides a starting point for future reliability research on clinical core stability assessments.

No abstract