Challenges and Recommendations for Placebo Controls in Randomized Trials in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine A Report of the International Placebo Symposium Working Group

Compared with other specialties, the field of physical and rehabilitation medicine has not received the deserved recognition from clinicians and researchers in the scientific community. One of the reasons is the lack of sound evidence to support the traditional physical and rehabilitation medicine treatments. The best way to change this disadvantage is through a well conducted clinical research, such as standard placebo- or sham-controlled randomized clinical trials. Therefore, having placebo groups in clinical trials is essential to improve the level of evidence-based practice in physical and rehabilitation medicine that ultimately translates to better clinical care. To address the challenges for the use of placebo in physical and rehabilitation medicine and randomized clinical trials and to create useful recommendations, we convened a working group during the inaugural International Symposium in Placebo (February 2009, in Sao Paulo, Brazil) in which the following topics were discussed: (1) current status of randomized clinical trials in physical and rehabilitation medicine, (2) challenges for the use of placebo in physical and rehabilitation medicine, (3) bioethics, (4) use of placebo in acupuncture trials and for the treatment of low-back pain, (5) mechanisms of placebo, and (6) insights from other specialties. The current article represents the consensus report from the working group.

Osteoporotic Fractures in the Brazilian Community-Dwelling Elderly: Prevalence and Risk Factors

The risk of osteoporotic fractures is known to vary among populations. There are no studies analyzing concomitantly clinical, densitometric, and lab risk factors in miscigenated community-dwelling population of Brazil. A total of 1007 elderly subjects (600 women and 407 men) from Sao Paulo, were evaluated using a questionnaire that included risk factors for osteoporotic fractures. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry at the hip and lumbar spine. Laboratory blood tests were also obtained. The prevalence of osteoporotic fractures was 13.2% (133 subjects), and the main fracture sites were distal forearm (6.0%), humerus (2.3%), femur (1.3%), and ribs (1.1%). Women had a higher prevalence (17.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.6-20.6) than men (6.9%; 95% CI: 4.4-9.3) (p < 0.001). After adjusting for significant variables, logistic regression revealed that female gender (odds ratio [OR] = 2.7; 95% CI; 1.6-4.5; p < 0.001), current smoking (OR = 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2-3.3; p = 0.013), and the femoral neck T-score (OR = 0.7; 95% CI: 0.5-0.9; p = 0.001) remain significant risk factors for osteoporotic fractures in the community-dwelling elderly. Our findings identified that female gender, current smoking, and low hip BMD are independent risk factors for osteoporotic fractures.

Incidence of stroke subtypes, prognosis and prevalence of risk factors in Joinville, Brazil: a 2 year community based study

Background: There have been few population based studies on stroke risk factors and prognosis conducted in Brazil. The objective of this study was to evaluate, over a 2 year period, the incidence of the subtypes of first ever stroke, the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and functional prognosis in a city located in the south of Brazil. Methods: The period from January 2005 to December 2006 was evaluated prospectively by compiling data on first ever stroke cases, medications used prior to the morbidity and the incidence of traditional risk factors. The annual incidence was adjusted for age using the direct method. Patients were monitored for at least 6 months following the event. Results: Of 1323 stroke cases, 759 were first ever stroke cases. Of these, 610 were classified as infarctions, 94 as intracerebral haemorrhage and 55 as subarachnoid haemorrhage. The crude incidence rate per 100 000 inhabitants was 61.8 for infarction (95% CI 57.0 to 66.9), 9.5 for intracerebral haemorrhage (95% CI 7.7 to 11.6) and 5.6 for subarachnoid haemorrhage (95% CI 4.2 to 7.3). The 30 day case fatality was 19.1%. The most prevalent cardiovascular risk factor was arterial hypertension. By post-stroke month 6, 25% had died (95% CI 21.4 to 29.1) whereas 61.5% had regained their independence (95% CI 56.2 to 68.3). Conclusions: Case fatality rate, prognosis and incidence adjusted for stroke subtypes were similar to those found in other population based studies. The prevalence rates of ischaemic heart disease, dyslipidaemia, arterial hypertension and diabetes suggest that Joinville presents a mixed pattern of cardiovascular risk, a pattern seen in developed and developing countries alike.

Limitations of the Mini-Mental State Examination for screening dementia in a community with low socioeconomic status

The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the most widely used instrument for the screening of cognitive impairment worldwide, but its ability to produce valid estimates of dementia in populations of low socioeconomic status and minimal literacy skills has not been adequately established. The authors investigated the psychometric properties of the MMSE in a community-based sample of older Brazilians. Cross-sectional one-phase population-based study of all residents of pre-defined areas of the city of Sao Paulo, aged 65 years or over. The Brazilian version of the MMSE was compared with DSM-IV diagnosis of dementia assessed with a harmonized one-phase procedure developed by the 10/66 Dementia Research Group. Analyses were performed with 1,933 participants of the SPAH study. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that the MMSE cut-point of 14/15 was associated with 78.7% sensitivity and 77.8% specificity for the diagnosis of dementia amongst participants with no formal education, and the cut-point 17/18 with 91.9% sensitivity and 89.5% specificity for those with at least 1 year of formal education (areas under the curves 0.87 and 0.94, respectively; P = 0.03). Even with these best fitting cut-points, the MMSE estimate of the prevalence of dementia was four times higher than determined by the DSM-IV criteria. Education, age, sex and income influenced MMSE scores, independently of dementia caseness. The MMSE is an adequate tool for screening dementia in older adults with minimum literacy skills, but misclassification is unacceptably high for older adults who are illiterate, which has serious consequences for research and clinical practice in low and middle income countries, where the proportion of illiteracy among older adults is high.