Rehabilitation Journals Research Articles

Introduction to mini-review.

It is my distinct pleasure to announce the beginning of a mini-review section of the Journal of Geriatric Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation. Under the careful and expert leadership of our editor, Stephen Kates, we have been able to expand the journal to include this very necessary contribution to the literature. In this ever-expanding age of electronic access and immediate dissemination of information, often the topics most basic to our field lack adequate review in a short format. In this ever-expanding age of electronic access and information sharing, often the topics most basic to our field lack adequate review. Mini-reviews summarize the most salient concepts related to a topic while reporting the most relevant and current findings. Their short format allows easy digestion of those topics in the literature so that more practitioners can benefit from them. In the field of geriatric orthopedics and rehabilitation, the need is ever greater for the mini-review format, as it allows for expansion of our literature to include topics that specifically deal with geriatric orthopedics and rehabilitation. We are planning topics spanning from geriatric trauma to spinal degenerative and traumatic conditions as well as topics discussing research methodology and bias. We hope to allow this section of our journal to rise to the level of importance and contribution established by the other sections, and we encourage your feedback to help us refine our contributions to this end. We also invite contributions along the lines of the instructions for authors to the journal review section, and we thank you for your continued readership and support.

Controlling for Placebo Effects in Clinical Trials of Craniosacral Therapy: Blinding Success and Credibility of a New Sham-Control Protocol

The Journal of Alternative and Complementary MedicineVol. 20, No. 5 Research MethodologyControlling for Placebo Effects in Clinical Trials of Craniosacral Therapy: Blinding Success and Credibility of a New Sham-Control ProtocolHeidemarie Haller, Thomas Ostermann, Romy Lauche, Holger Cramer, and Gustav J. DobosHeidemarie HallerSearch for more papers by this author, Thomas OstermannSearch for more papers by this author, Romy LaucheSearch for more papers by this author, Holger CramerSearch for more papers by this author, and Gustav J. DobosSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:7 May 2014https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2014.5349.abstractAboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB Permissions & CitationsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail View article"Controlling for Placebo Effects in Clinical Trials of Craniosacral Therapy: Blinding Success and Credibility of a New Sham-Control Protocol." The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 20(5), p. A130FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byBlinding in Rehabilitation Research7 January 2020 | American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Vol. 99, No. 3 Volume 20Issue 5May 2014 InformationCopyright 2014, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.To cite this article:Heidemarie Haller, Thomas Ostermann, Romy Lauche, Holger Cramer, and Gustav J. Dobos.Controlling for Placebo Effects in Clinical Trials of Craniosacral Therapy: Blinding Success and Credibility of a New Sham-Control Protocol.The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine.May 2014.A130-A130.http://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2014.5349.abstractPublished in Volume: 20 Issue 5: May 7, 2014PDF download

Mandatory use of checklists for reporting guidelines.

THE March issue of the Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation includes an Editorial explaining why that journal, joined by 29 others in rehabilitation and disability, will be mandating the use of reporting guidelines for manuscripts submitted for publication. While the editors of the Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation (JHTR) agree with the desired outcome of this policy—ensuring quality research on disability and rehabilitation—we have chosen not to make checklists mandatory for manuscript submission. This decision was not made lightly and was only arrived at after consulting our Editorial Board. Our decision hinged around 2 primary concerns. First, we do not believe that the guidelines developed for each type of study design reflect the specificity that has made the CONSORT guidelines for randomized clinical trials so useful. Mandating the use of guidelines creates the expectation that all criteria have been met. However, when those criteria are not adequately specific, the goal of increasing quality gets diluted by the desire to simply check off an item. Second, we believe that there are research reports that are useful for the field but do not meet the standards implied by the guidelines. As an example, scoping reviews of how a field has addressed an emerging issue serves a purpose when a systematic review meeting PRISMA standards would be premature. At this juncture, JHTR will continue to rely on the evaluation of our peer reviewers to ensure both the quality and utility of the research published. While JHTR will not make checklists mandatory at this time, the discussions surrounding this decision have suggested several ways in which we believe we can continue to educate the authors and reviewers of manuscripts submitted for publication on principles and procedures of research design. In our Instructions for Authors, we will suggest that authors consult the appropriate guidelines for the research design used, with links to the EQUATOR Network Web site. We will be sharing a summary of the resources available on the EQUATOR Network Web site with our Editorial Board and all guest reviewers. Upon submission of a manuscript, authors will have the option of uploading the appropriate checklist with their manuscript. We expect that these steps will promote education of authors and reviewers and serve to improve the quality of disability and rehabilitation research, a goal JHTR will continue to monitor carefully. We applaud the intentions of our fellow editors and share their desire to see high-quality research in disability and rehabilitation. We also applaud JHTR's authors who have given us the privilege of publishing high-quality articles that advance the journal's vision of knowledge informing care. —John D. Corrigan, PhD Editor-in-Chief

Popularization of exercise rehabilitation in the information age.

As we get closer to the middle of this year, it is natural to question what lies ahead in the year 2015. Recently, the literature in the Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation (JER) has focused on the future of exercise rehabilitation based on three potential scenarios arising from the ongoing information revolution that marginalizes some communities and creates new opportunities for others. The first scenario is that of rehabilitation ruled by the “general public,” where exercise is largely administered based on recommendations by consumer agglomerations. The second possibility is that of rehabilitation in which strong associations use large amounts of data obtained from the popularly used exercises to fortify their data. In the third scenario, the central associations are fundamentally weak, with markets — and the society that dominates them — providing almost all exercises or activities for the disabled and children and for recreational and psychological rehabilitation. Each of these scenarios is an extrapolation of a current trend. While all of them could be beneficial in some respects, they also have features, which if left scientifically and medically unchecked, could lead to disappointing outcomes. The Association of Korean Exercise Rehabilitation should, at this time, be implementing policies aimed at guiding trends like generalization, increasing the amount of available data, and grouping people into narrow branches often based on their relationship to the region. The goal should be to take advantage of these trends’ potential benefits, while ensuring that they do not undermine other critical aspects of exercise rehabilitation. For example, although exercise has the potential to create new treatment and preventative opportunities for potential patients, it cannot help cure actual diseases. Likewise, while the use of large amounts of general public data has a substantial problem-solving potential, important questions regarding the ownership, control, interpretation, and regulation of the use of this data or information still remain. Finally, while the most efficient way to allocate exercise rehabilitation resources in most cases is to do so based on individual choices within each region, regional branches do not develop sufficient remedial exercise programs. Indeed, there are some exercise methods that the private and regional sectors are simply unable to provide. Obviously, all of this calls for an extensive investigation. Exploring potential future scenarios, as done by the JER, is an important step in the right direction.

Every interaction counts: The ‘Bridges’ approach to stroke self-management

International Journal of Therapy and RehabilitationVol. 21, No. 4 OpinionEvery interaction counts: The ‘Bridges’ approach to stroke self-managementFiona Jones, Lucinda BrimicombeFiona JonesSearch for more papers by this author, Lucinda BrimicombeSearch for more papers by this authorFiona Jones; Lucinda BrimicombePublished Online:26 May 2014https://doi.org/10.12968/ijtr.2014.21.4.158AboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail View article References Ayerbe L, Ayis S, Rudd AG, Heuschmann PU, Wolfe CD (2011) Natural History, Predictors, and Associations of Depression 5 Years After Stroke: The South London Stroke Register. Stroke 42(7): 1907–11 Crossref, Google ScholarCoulter A, Collins A (2011) Making Shared Decision Making a Reality: No decision about me, without me. The Kings Fund. London Google Scholarde Silva D (2011) Helping people help themselves: A review of the evidence considering whether it is worthwhile to support self-management. The Health Foundation, London www.health.org.uk/media_manager/public/75/publications_pdfs/Helping%20people%20help%20themselves.pdf (accessed 21 March 2014) Google ScholarJones F, Benson L, Jones C, Waters C, Hammond J, Bailey N (2012) Evaluation of a shared approach to interprofessional learning about stroke self-management. J Interprof Care 26(6): 514–6 Crossref, Google ScholarJones F, Bailey N (2013) How can we train stroke practitioners about self-management? Description and evaluation of a pathway wide training programme. Eur J Person Centered Healthcare 1(1): 246–54 Crossref, Google ScholarKennedy A1, Rogers A, Bower P (2007) Bower, Support for self care for patients with chronic disease. BMJ 335(7627): 968–70 Crossref, Google ScholarMcKenna S, Jones F, Glenfield P, Lennon S (2013) Bridges self-management programme for people with stroke in the community: feasibility randomised controlled trial. Int J Stroke doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijs.12195 (Epub) Google ScholarNaylor C, Imison C, Addicott R, Buck D, Goodwin N, Harrison T et al. (2013) Transforming our health care system: Ten priorities for commissioners. Kings Fund, London Google ScholarNewman S, Steed L, Mulligan K (2008) Chronic Physical Illness: Self-management and Behavioural Interventions. Open University Press, Maidenhead Google Scholar FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byExploring challenges at 6 months after stroke: what is important to patients for self-management?Sandy J Rutherford, Clare Hocking, Alice Theadom, Kathryn M McPherson6 November 2018 | International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, Vol. 25, No. 11How is rehabilitation with and without an integrated self-management approach perceived by UK community-dwelling stroke survivors? A qualitative process evaluation to explore implementation and contextual variations3 April 2017 | BMJ Open, Vol. 7, No. 4 2 April 2014Volume 21Issue 4ISSN (online): 1759-779X Metrics History Published online 26 May 2014 Published in print 2 April 2014 Information© MA Healthcare LimitedPDF download

Elevating the Quality of Disability and Rehabilitation Research: Mandatory Use of the Reporting Guidelines

With the remarkable growth of disability- and rehabilitation-related research in the last decade, it is imperative that we support the highest quality research possible. With cuts in research funding, rehabilitation research is now under a microscope like never before, and it is critical that we put our best foot forward. To ensure the quality of the disability and rehabilitation research that is published, the 28 rehabilitation journals simultaneously publishing this editorial (see Acknowledgments) have agreed to take a more aggressive stance on the use of reporting guidelines.* Research reports must contain sufficient information to allow readers to understand how a study was designed and conducted, including variable definitions, instruments and other measures, and analytical techniques.1 For review articles, systematic or narrative, readers should be informed of the rationale and details behind the literature search strategy. Too often articles fail to include their standard for inclusion and their criteria for evaluating quality of the studies.2 As noted by Doug Altman, co-originator of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement and head of the Centre for Statistics in Medicine at Oxford University: “Good reporting is not an optional extra: it is an essential component of good research. We all share this obligation and responsibility.”3 Reporting guidelines are documents that assist authors in reporting research methods and findings. They are typically presented as checklists or flow diagrams that lay out the core reporting criteria required to give a clear account of a study's methods and results. The intent is not just that authors complete a specific reporting …

Useful Resources for Authors and Reviewers

In this month's issue of JOSPT, we are publishing a joint editorial on mandatory use of reporting guidelines. The content of the editorial has been endorsed by the editors of 28 rehabilitation journals, with the goal to improve reporting of disability and rehabilitation research. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2014;44(4):227. doi:10.2519/jospt.2014.0106

Elevating the Quality of Disability and Rehabilitation Research

With the remarkable growth of disability- and rehabilitation- related research in the past decade, it is imperative that we support the highest-quality research possible. With cuts in research funding, rehabilitation research is now under a microscope like never before, and it is critical that we put our best foot forward. To ensure the quality of the disability and rehabilitation research that is published, the 28 rehabilitation journals simultaneously publishing this editorial (see Acknowledgements) have agreed to take a more aggressive stance on the use of reporting guidelines.* Research reports must contain sufficient information to allow readers to understand how a study was designed and conducted, including variable definitions, instruments and other measures, and analytical techniques.1 For review articles, whether systematic or narrative, readers should be informed of the rationale and details behind the literature search strategy. Too often, articles fail to include their standard for inclusion and their criteria for evaluating study quality.2 As noted by Doug Altman, co-originator of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement and head of the Centre for Statistics in Medicine at Oxford University, “Good reporting is not an optional extra: it is an essential component of good research.”3

Elevating the Quality of Disability and Rehabilitation Research

With the remarkable growth of disability- and rehabilitation- related research in the past decade, it is imperative that we support the highest-quality research possible. With cuts in research funding, rehabilitation research is now under a microscope like never before, and it is critical that we put our best foot forward. To ensure the quality of the disability and rehabilitation research that is published, the 28 rehabilitation journals simultaneously publishing this editorial (see Acknowledgements) have agreed to take a more aggressive stance on the use of reporting guidelines.* Research reports must contain sufficient information to allow readers to understand how a study was designed and conducted, including variable definitions, instruments and other measures, and analytical techniques.1 For review articles, whether systematic or narrative, readers should be informed of the rationale and details behind the literature search strategy. Too often, articles fail to include their standard for inclusion and their criteria for evaluating study quality.2 As noted by Doug Altman, co-originator of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement and head of the Centre for Statistics in Medicine at Oxford University, “Good reporting is not an optional extra: it is an essential component of good research.”3

Elevating the Quality of Disability and Rehabilitation Research: Mandatory Use of the Reporting Guidelines

To ensure the quality of the disability and rehabilitation research that is published, the 28 rehabilitation journals simultaneously publishing this editorial have agreed to take a more aggressive stance on the use of reporting guidelines. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2014;44(4):228–230. doi:10.2519/jospt.2014.0107

Practical strategies for writing for publication: It's not just about time

International Journal of Therapy and RehabilitationVol. 21, No. 2 OpinionPractical strategies for writing for publication: It's not just about timeRowena MurrayRowena MurraySearch for more papers by this authorRowena MurrayPublished Online:22 May 2014https://doi.org/10.12968/ijtr.2014.21.2.58AboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail View article References Murray R (2013a) Writing for Academic Journals. 3rd edition. Open University Press-McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead Google ScholarMurray R (2013b) Writing for an academic journal: 10 tips. The Guardian, London www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2013/sep/06/academic-journal-writing-top-tips (accessed 2 January 2014) Google ScholarMurray R, Newton M (2008) Facilitating writing for publication. Physiotherapy 94(1): 29–34 Crossref, Google ScholarRickard CM, Williams G, Ray-Barruel G, Armit L, Perry CJ, Luke H, Duffy Pet al. (2011) Towards improved organisational support for nurses working in research roles in the clinical setting: a mixed method investigation. Coll J Royal Coll Nurs Australia 18(4): 165–76 Crossref, Google ScholarThow M, Graham K, Choi L (2013) The Healthy Heart Book. Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL Google Scholar FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byCan academic writing retreats function as wellbeing interventions?9 April 2020 | Journal of Further and Higher Education, Vol. 45, No. 2Mentoring Clinical Nurses to Write for PublicationAJN, American Journal of Nursing, Vol. 116, No. 5The value of writing groups and the barriers to writing: A response2 June 2014 | International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, Vol. 21, No. 6 1 February 2014Volume 21Issue 2ISSN (online): 1759-779X Metrics History Published online 22 May 2014 Published in print 1 February 2014 Information© MA Healthcare LimitedPDF download

The Clinical Success of Zirconia-Based Crowns: A Systematic Review

This review aimed to evaluate the documented clinical success of zirconia based crowns in clinical trials. Electronic databases were searched for original studies reporting on the clinical performance of tooth- or implant-supported zirconia-based crowns, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct. The electronic search was complemented by manual searches of the bibliographies of all retrieved full-text articles and reviews as well as a hand search of the following journals: International Journal of Prosthodontics, Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, and Clinical Oral Implants Research. The search yielded 3,216 titles. Based on preestablished criteria, 42 full-text articles were obtained. While 16 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, only 3 randomized controlled trials were reported. Seven studies reported on tooth-supported and 4 on implant-supported crowns, and 5 studies reported on both types of support. Ten studies on tooth-supported and 7 on implant supported crowns provided sufficient material for statistical analysis. Life table analysis revealed cumulative 5-year survival rates of 95.9% for tooth-supported and 97.1% for implant-supported crowns. For implant-supported crowns, the most common reasons for failure were technical (veneering material fractures). For tooth-supported crowns, technical (veneering material fractures, loss of retention) and biologic (endodontic/ periodontic) reasons for failure were equally common. The most common complications for implant-supported crowns were veneering material fractures and bleeding on probing. For tooth-supported crowns, the most common complications were loss of retention, endodontic treatment, veneering material fractures, and bleeding on probing. The results suggest that the success rate of tooth-supported and implant-supported zirconia-based crowns is adequate, similar, and comparable to that of conventional porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns. These results are, however, based on a relatively small number of studies, many that are not controlled clinical trials. Well-designed studies with large patient groups and long follow-up times are needed before general recommendations for the use of zirconia-based restorations can be provided.

From the Editor-in-Chief

Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention: January/February 2014 - Volume 34 - Issue 1 - p 1 doi: 10.1097/HCR.0000000000000044

Introduction to the special issue on individual placement and support.

This issue of the Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal presents an update on individual placement and support (IPS), the evidence-based practice of supported employment for people with psychiatric disabilities. The papers in this special issue testify to the enormous potential of the IPS model. Clients, families, researchers, policy experts, practitioners, and administrators continue to identify creative ways to expand services to reach more people. The state of the art of IPS is expanding, changing, and ramifying broadly. IPS is appearing in middle-income countries in Latin America and in new populations, such as young adults with autism-spectrum disorders in Europe. Continued growth should follow the fundamental principles of values and science. First, we must honor basic values by listening to and learning from clients (Strickler, 2014), as well from IPS trainers, mental health and vocational rehabilitation leaders, and practitioners who face the daily realities of developing and sustaining recovery-oriented services (Swanson et al., 2014). Second, we must insist on rigorous research to ground our employment services in hard evidence.

The <italic>Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation</italic> starts as the international journal

The Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation is listed in the PubMed Central, few months after changing to English journal. This means that the Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation is crowned as the international journal. The Korean Society of Exercise Rehabilitation, founded 2004, has encouraged academic communication for the integrative health promotion in the social, mental, and physical areas. The Korean Society of Exercise Rehabilitation aims to contribute to the promotion of health, the prevention of disease, the overcome of disability, and the establishment of a welfare system. The Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation is the comprehensive vehicle for the aim of the Korean Society of Exercise Rehabilitation. The Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation contains following 6 sections: 1) basic research on exercise rehabilitation, 2) clinical research on exercise rehabilitation, 3) exercise rehabilitation pedagogy, 4) exercise rehabilitation education, 5) exercise rehabilitation psychology, and 6) exercise rehabilitation welfare. As the Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation is listed in the PubMed Central, the Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation can lead to the multi-national and multi-centered research for the exercise rehabilitation. I believe that the Journal of Exercise Rehabilitation will stand as the leading journal in the scope of exercise and rehabilitation. I would like to give many thanks to those who gave assistance.

An introduction to pain pathways and mechanisms

Pain is a vital function of the nervous system in providing the body with a warning of potential or actual injury. It is both a sensory and emotional experience, affected by psychological factors such as past experiences, beliefs about pain, fear or anxiety.

Honorary Authorship: Frequency and Associated Factors in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Articles

ObjectivesTo estimate the prevalences of perceived honorary authorship and International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)-defined honorary authorship, and identify factors affecting each rate in the physical medicine and rehabilitation literature. DesignInternet-based survey. SettingNot applicable. ParticipantsFirst authors of articles published in 3 major physical medicine and rehabilitation journals between January 2009 and December 2011 were surveyed in June and July 2012 (N=1182). InterventionsNot applicable. Main Outcome MeasuresThe reported prevalences of perceived and ICMJE-defined honorary authorship were the primary outcome measures, and multiple factors were analyzed to determine whether they were associated with these measures. ResultsThe response rate was 27.3% (248/908). The prevalences of perceived and ICMJE-defined honorary authorship were 18.0% (44/244) and 55.2% (137/248), respectively. Factors associated with perceived honorary authorship in the multivariate analysis included the suggestion that an honorary author should be included (P<.0001), being a medical resident or fellow (P=.0019), listing “reviewed manuscript” as 1 of the nonauthorship tasks (P=.0013), and the most senior author deciding the authorship order (P=.0469). Living outside North America was independently associated with ICMJE-defined honorary authorship (P=.0079) in the multivariate analysis. In the univariate analysis, indicating that the most senior author decided authorship order was significantly associated with ICMJE-defined honorary authorship (P=<.001). ConclusionsOur results suggest that honorary authorship does occur in a significant proportion of the physical medicine and rehabilitation literature. Additionally, we found several factors associated with perceived and ICMJE-defined honorary authorship and a discrepancy between the 2 rates. Further studies with larger response rates are recommended to further explore this topic.

The Handbook of Touch

American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 92(10):p 945, October 2013. | DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31829e78ed

International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation

International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation

Formerly the British Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation

Formerly the British Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation