Results: The findings showed piano players have a higher NDI, lower CVA, and RSP when compared with the non-piano players at a statistically significant level of p-value <0.05.
Objective: Playing-related musculoskeletal disorders (PRMSD) are a common problem for the pianist. The poor upper body ergonomics influences the natural positioning of the neck and shoulders, which involves forward head posture (FHP) and rounded shoulder posture (RSP). This misaligned position could produce a sensation of pain over the upper body, which affects the piano player and computer users with similar ergonomic posture. Recently, photogrammetry methods are commonly applied in a clinical setting to assess posture. The goal of this research is to compare the upper body playing-related muscu-loskeletal disorders between the piano and the non-piano players by applying photogrammetry.
Materials and Methods: This causal-comparative study includes 70 participants with 35 piano and 35 non-piano players. The participant's FHP was assessed using a digitized photo to record the Craniovertebral angle (CVA) with the support of Kinovea software. Besides, digital Vernier Calliper used to assess the scapular index on the RSP and Neck disability indices (NDI) used to measure neck pain and functional disability of the participants.
METHODS: A total of 11 participants with NS-NP were recruited. Pain intensity, active range of motion (AROM), posture, deep neck flexor (DNF) endurance, combined neck movements and disability were measured using face-to-face and TR methods, with a one-hour break in between. TelePTsys, an image-based TR system, was used for TR assessment.
RESULTS: A high degree of concurrent validity for pain (bias = 0.90), posture (bias = 0.96°), endurance (bias = -2.3 seconds), disability (bias = 0.10), AROM (extension bias = -0.60 cm, flexion bias = 1.2 cm, side flexion bias = -1.00, rotation bias = -0.30 cm) was found. Standard error of measurement and coefficient of variation (CV) values were within the acceptable level for concurrent validity, except the CV for cervical flexion and endurance. There was a high degree of reliability demonstrated for pain, posture, AROM, endurance and disability measurements. The average-measure interclass correlation coefficient (ICC(3,1)) ranged from 0.96 to 0.99 for inter-rater, and 0.93 to 0.99 for intra-rater reliabilities. There was moderate agreement for combination movement for validity (78.5%, p
METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Web of Science, ProQuest, and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry were searched. Studies were included if they randomized adults with orthostatic hypotension to droxidopa or to control, and outcomes related to symptoms, daily activity, blood pressure, or adverse events. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. Risk of bias was judged against the Cochrane risk of bias tool and quality of evidence measured using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. A fixed-effects model was used for pooled analysis.
RESULTS: Of 224 identified records, four studies met eligibility, with a pooled sample size of 494. Study duration was between 1 and 8 weeks. Droxidopa was effective at reducing dizziness [mean difference -0.97 (95% confidence interval -1.51, -0.42)], overall symptoms [-0.52 (-0.98, -0.06)] and difficulty with activity [-0.86 (-1.34, -0.38)]. Droxidopa was also effective at improving standing SBP [3.9 (0.1, 7.69)]. Rates of adverse events were similar between droxidopa and control groups, including supine hypertension [odds ratio 1.93 (0.87, 4.25)].
CONCLUSION: Droxidopa is well tolerated and effective at reducing the symptoms associated with neurogenic orthostatic hypotension without increasing the risk of supine hypertension.
REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ID CRD42015024612.