Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34337189›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2021

The iSTOPP study: Protocol for a proof-of-concept randomised clinical trial of sensory discrimination training in people with persistent neck pain.

Daniel S Harvie, Nick Olthof, Andrea Hams, Hayley Thomson, Michel W Coppieters

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 93% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Daniel S HarvieMenzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane and Gold Coast, Australia.
Nick OlthofMenzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane and Gold Coast, Australia.
Andrea HamsSchool of Allied Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Brisbane and Gold Coast, Australia.
Hayley ThomsonMenzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane and Gold Coast, Australia.
Michel W CoppietersMenzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane and Gold Coast, Australia.
Griffith University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeck pain can be associated with a reduction in tactile acuity that is thought to reflect disrupted sensory processing. Tactile acuity training may normalise sensory processing and improve symptoms. This proof-of-concept trial will assess the feasibility of a novel tactile acuity training method and whether this intervention improves tactile acuity in people with persistent neck pain.

methodsand analysis: In this two-arm randomised clinical proof-of-concept trial we will recruit participants with neck pain receiving usual care physiotherapy in a secondary outpatient healthcare setting. Thirty-six participants will be randomised 2:1 to receive four weeks of either tactile acuity training using the Imprint Tactile Acuity Device (iTAD) or a placebo intervention, in addition to usual care. The placebo intervention will consist of a de-activated TENS machine (iTENS) said to deliver a sub-threshold inhibitory therapy. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, mid-treatment, and at 5-weeks and 2-months follow-up. The primary outcome tactile acuity will be evaluated using the two-point discrimination test and locognosia tests. Feasibility will be informed by recruitment and attrition rates, adherence, credibility of the interventions, treatment satisfaction and blinding. Pain intensity and anatomical spread will be analysed as secondary outcomes. The effect of iTAD training on tactile acuity will be assessed using a 2 (Group: iTAD vs. iTENS) x 4 (Time: baseline, mid-treatment, 5-week and 2-month outcome assessment) mixed ANOVA. Secondary outcomes including pain and pain spread, will be analysed with a focus on informing sample size calculations in future trials. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Risks associated with this study are minor. Usual care is not withheld, and participants consent to random allocation of either iTAD or iTENS. Potential benefits to participants include any benefit associated with the interventions and contributing to research that may assist people with chronic pain in the future. Trial results will be disseminated via academic journals and conference presentations. The study is approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Griffith University (2017/128).

Indexed as

Chronic painCortical reorganisationNeck painSensory trainingTactile acuityTwo-point discrimination

Identifiers

PMID34337189
PMCPMC8313602
OpenAlexW3183266675

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.