Bill Vicenzino

Bio: Bill Vicenzino is an academic researcher from University of Queensland. The author has contributed to research in topics: Tendinopathy & Randomized controlled trial. The author has an hindex of 73, co-authored 434 publications receiving 18282 citations. Previous affiliations of Bill Vicenzino include National Health and Medical Research Council.

Prevalence of hallux valgus in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract: Hallux valgus (HV) is a foot deformity commonly seen in medical practice, often accompanied by significant functional disability and foot pain. Despite frequent mention in a diverse body of literature, a precise estimate of the prevalence of HV is difficult to ascertain. The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate prevalence of HV in the overall population and evaluate the influence of age and gender. Electronic databases (Medline, Embase, and CINAHL) and reference lists of included papers were searched to June 2009 for papers on HV prevalence without language restriction. MeSH terms and keywords were used relating to HV or bunions, prevalence and various synonyms. Included studies were surveys reporting original data for prevalence of HV or bunions in healthy populations of any age group. Surveys reporting prevalence data grouped with other foot deformities and in specific disease groups (e.g. rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes) were excluded. Two independent investigators quality rated all included papers on the Epidemiological Appraisal Instrument. Data on raw prevalence, population studied and methodology were extracted. Prevalence proportions and the standard error were calculated, and meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. A total of 78 papers reporting results of 76 surveys (total 496,957 participants) were included and grouped by study population for meta-analysis. Pooled prevalence estimates for HV were 23% in adults aged 18-65 years (CI: 16.3 to 29.6) and 35.7% in elderly people aged over 65 years (CI: 29.5 to 42.0). Prevalence increased with age and was higher in females [30% (CI: 22 to 38)] compared to males [13% (CI: 9 to 17)]. Potential sources of bias were sampling method, study quality and method of HV diagnosis. Notwithstanding the wide variation in estimates, it is evident that HV is prevalent; more so in females and with increasing age. Methodological quality issues need to be addressed in interpreting reports in the literature and in future research.

Mobilisation with movement and exercise, corticosteroid injection, or wait and see for tennis elbow: randomised trial

Abstract: Objective To investigate the efficacy of physiotherapy compared with a wait and see approach or corticosteroid injections over 52 weeks in tennis elbow. Design Single blind randomised controlled trial. Setting Community setting, Brisbane, Australia. Participants 198 participants aged 18 to 65 years with a clinical diagnosis of tennis elbow of a minimum six weeks’ duration, who had not received any other active treatment by a health practitioner in the previous six months. Interventions Eight sessions of physiotherapy; corticosteroid injections; or wait and see. Main outcome measures Global improvement, grip force, and assessor’s rating of severity measured at baseline, six weeks, and 52 weeks. Results Corticosteroid injection showed significantly better effects at six weeks but with high recurrence rates thereafter (47/65 of successes subsequently regressed) and significantly poorer outcomes in the long term compared with physiotherapy. Physiotherapy was superior to wait and see in the short term; no difference was seen at 52 weeks, when most participants in both groups reported a successful outcome. Participants who had physiotherapy sought less additional treatment, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, than did participants who had wait and see or injections. Conclusion Physiotherapy combining elbow manipulation and exercise has a superior benefit to wait and see in the first six weeks and to corticosteroid injections after six weeks, providing a reasonable alternative to injections in the mid to long term. The significant short term benefits of corticosteroid injection are paradoxically reversed after six weeks, with high recurrence rates, implying that this treatment should be used with caution in the management of tennis elbow.

Sensory hypersensitivity occurs soon after whiplash injury and is associated with poor recovery

Abstract: Hypersensitivity to a variety of sensory stimuli is a feature of persistent whiplash associated disorders (WAD). However, little is known about sensory disturbances from the time of injury until transition to either recovery or symptom persistence. Quantitative sensory testing (pressure and thermal pain thresholds, the brachial plexus provocation test), the sympathetic vasoconstrictor reflex and psychological distress (GHQ-28) were prospectively measured in 76 whiplash subjects within 1 month of injury and then 2, 3 and 6 months post-injury. Subjects were classified at 6 months post-injury using scores on the Neck Disability Index: recovered ( 30). Sensory and sympathetic nervous system tests were also measured in 20 control subjects. All whiplash groups demonstrated local mechanical hyperalgesia in the cervical spine at 1 month post-injury. This hyperalgesia persisted in those with moderate/severe symptoms at 6 months but resolved by 2 months in those who had recovered or reported persistent mild symptoms. Only those with persistent moderate/severe symptoms at 6 months demonstrated generalised hypersensitivity to all sensory tests. These changes occurred within 1 month of injury and remained unchanged throughout the study period. Whilst no significant group differences were evident for the sympathetic vasoconstrictor response, the moderate/severe group showed a tendency for diminished sympathetic reactivity. GHQ-28 scores of the moderate/severe group were higher than those of the other two groups. The differences in GHQ-28 did not impact on any of the sensory measures. These findings suggest that those with persistent moderate/severe symptoms at 6 months display, soon after injury, generalised hypersensitivity suggestive of changes in central pain processing mechanisms. This phenomenon did not occur in those who recover or those with persistent mild symptoms.

Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide

Abstract: Without a complete published description of interventions, clinicians and patients cannot reliably implement interventions that are shown to be useful, and other researchers cannot replicate or build on research findings. The quality of description of interventions in publications, however, is remarkably poor. To improve the completeness of reporting, and ultimately the replicability, of interventions, an international group of experts and stakeholders developed the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. The process involved a literature review for relevant checklists and research, a Delphi survey of an international panel of experts to guide item selection, and a face to face panel meeting. The resultant 12 item TIDieR checklist (brief name, why, what (materials), what (procedure), who provided, how, where, when and how much, tailoring, modifications, how well (planned), how well (actual)) is an extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement (item 5) and the SPIRIT 2013 statement (item 11). While the emphasis of the checklist is on trials, the guidance is intended to apply across all evaluative study designs. This paper presents the TIDieR checklist and guide, with an explanation and elaboration for each item, and examples of good reporting. The TIDieR checklist and guide should improve the reporting of interventions and make it easier for authors to structure accounts of their interventions, reviewers and editors to assess the descriptions, and readers to use the information.

Central sensitization: implications for the diagnosis and treatment of pain.

Abstract: Nociceptor inputs can trigger a prolonged but reversible increase in the excitability and synaptic efficacy of neurons in central nociceptive pathways, the phenomenon of central sensitization. Central sensitization manifests as pain hypersensitivity, particularly dynamic tactile allodynia, secondary punctate or pressure hyperalgesia, aftersensations, and enhanced temporal summation. It can be readily and rapidly elicited in human volunteers by diverse experimental noxious conditioning stimuli to skin, muscles or viscera, and in addition to producing pain hypersensitivity, results in secondary changes in brain activity that can be detected by electrophysiological or imaging techniques. Studies in clinical cohorts reveal changes in pain sensitivity that have been interpreted as revealing an important contribution of central sensitization to the pain phenotype in patients with fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis, musculoskeletal disorders with generalized pain hypersensitivity, headache, temporomandibular joint disorders, dental pain, neuropathic pain, visceral pain hypersensitivity disorders and post-surgical pain. The comorbidity of those pain hypersensitivity syndromes that present in the absence of inflammation or a neural lesion, their similar pattern of clinical presentation and response to centrally acting analgesics, may reflect a commonality of central sensitization to their pathophysiology. An important question that still needs to be determined is whether there are individuals with a higher inherited propensity for developing central sensitization than others, and if so, whether this conveys an increased risk in both developing conditions with pain hypersensitivity, and their chronification. Diagnostic criteria to establish the presence of central sensitization in patients will greatly assist the phenotyping of patients for choosing treatments that produce analgesia by normalizing hyperexcitable central neural activity. We have certainly come a long way since the first discovery of activity-dependent synaptic plasticity in the spinal cord and the revelation that it occurs and produces pain hypersensitivity in patients. Nevertheless, discovering the genetic and environmental contributors to and objective biomarkers of central sensitization will be highly beneficial, as will additional treatment options to prevent or reduce this prevalent and promiscuous form of pain plasticity.

Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): explanation and elaboration.

Abstract: The TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) Statement includes a 22-item checklist, which aims to improve the reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes. The TRIPOD Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used. This explanation and elaboration document describes the rationale; clarifies the meaning of each item; and discusses why transparent reporting is important, with a view to assessing risk of bias and clinical usefulness of the prediction model. Each checklist item of the TRIPOD Statement is explained in detail and accompanied by published examples of good reporting. The document also provides a valuable reference of issues to consider when designing, conducting, and analyzing prediction model studies. To aid the editorial process and help peer reviewers and, ultimately, readers and systematic reviewers of prediction model studies, it is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission. The TRIPOD checklist can also be downloaded from www.tripod-statement.org.

Prospective Study of

Abstract: e thank Tuttolomondo et al. (1)fortheirinterestinourstudy(2).In response, we would like toclarify several points. First, coding ofstrokes has been ongoing in the Nurses’Health Study since 1976. We have nothad funding to implement coding byTOAST (Trial of Org 10172 in AcuteStroke Treatment) classification (3) buthope to do so in the future. In an internalcomparisonofcodingbyPerthcriteria(4)versus TOAST, the concordance rate forlacunar infarction was very high (91%);however, a percentage of large artery in-farctions as classified by Perth coding cri-teria was classified as “unknown type” byTOAST criteria due to inconclusive ca-rotid Doppler findings. Thus, it is possi-ble that differences in stroke classificationmay have lead to slightly higher risk esti-mates for large artery infarction in ourpopulation.Second, our results are consistentwithdiabetesbeingastrongriskfactorforlacunar infarction. As shown in Table 2 ofthe article, incidence rates for lacunar in-farction were higher than for large arteryinfarction among women with type 2 di-abetes (50 and 36 per 100,000 person-years, respectively), and risk estimateswere also slightly higher for lacunar thanlarge artery infarction (3.6 vs. 2.7 in age-adjusted analyses) compared with womenwithout diabetes.Third, both fatal and nonfatal infarc-tions were included, but only first eventswere considered. Thus, our methods dodifferfromsomehospital-basedstudiesinthat only first stroke events were in-cluded. As stated in the article, resultswere similar for confirmed (medicalrecords)andprobable(letterortelephonecorroboration) cases, thus the combinedresults were presented (see p. 1731, col-umn 2).Finally, as suggested by Tuttolomondoet al., it is possible that there are sex differ-ences in the strength of association be-tweendiabetesandlargearteryinfarction.Our results are limited to women, and weencourage further sex-specific evalua-tions of these associations.