Introduction: Exercise is an effective nonpharmacological intervention for individuals with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS); however, considerable variability is observed in their pain response after a single exercise session that could be due to differences in baseline central pain inhibition (ie, conditioned pain modulation [CPM]). Objectives: This study examined the effect of isometric exercise on CPM in people with FMS and control participants. A subaim was to identify whether pain inhibition after exercise was due to differences in baseline CPM. Methods: Twenty-one individuals with FMS (50.5 ± 14.9 years) and 22 age-matched and sex-matched controls (49.2 ± 13.3 years) participated in a familiarization session and 2 randomized experimental sessions: (1) low-intensity isometric exercise and (2) quiet rest control. Conditioned pain modulation was measured before and after each experimental session. In addition, body composition and physical activity levels were collected to determine potential group differences. Results: Both groups had comparable body composition and physical activity levels and reported similar exercise-induced hypoalgesia (increase in pressure pain thresholds) at the exercising muscle (quadriceps muscle) and systemically (deltoid muscle). Both groups had a decrease in CPM after exercise and quiet rest; however, in both FMS and control participants with impaired baseline CPM, there was an increase in CPM at the deltoid muscle after exercise. Conclusion: In persons with low CPM, irrespective of health status, isometric exercise enhanced CPM at a site distal from the exercising muscle. Our results support the use of isometric exercise when initiating an exercise program especially for individuals with impaired CPM.

Background/Objectives: Bedside manners are an important part of patient-centered physical therapy care, yet little is known about how Saudi physical therapists understand and apply them in practice. This study examined therapists’ perceptions of bedside manners and ethics, and explored differences related to gender and work setting. Methods: A cross-sectional mixed-methods study was conducted among 147 licensed Saudi physical therapists. Quantitative data were collected using a 28-item questionnaire, and qualitative data were gathered through semi-structured interviews with 22 participants. Survey responses were summarized using frequencies and percentages, and differences by gender and work setting were reported. Interview data were analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis. Results: Most participants were female (66.7%) and aged 20–30 years (70.7%). Overall, therapists reported very high agreement with bedside-manner principles across most items. Descriptive patterns by gender and work setting in some perceptions (e.g., patient privacy, therapist presence, and attention to minor cases) were noted. Qualitative analysis identified seven themes: building trust, perceived positive contribution to care, body language, differing views on empathy, therapist presence, patient equity, and seeking help from colleagues. Conclusions: Saudi physical therapists strongly supported core bedside manner behaviors, especially communication, privacy, reassurance, and fair treatment of patients. These findings may inform efforts to incorporate bedside manners into physical therapy education and professional development in support of ethical, patient-centered practice.

Background/Objectives: Bedside manners are central to patient-centered rehabilitation, yet patient perspectives on physical therapy in Saudi Arabia remain underexplored. This study examined patients’ perceptions of physical therapists’ bedside manners and explored variation according to patient and therapist characteristics. Methods: A cross-sectional convergent mixed-methods study included 510 patients who had completed physical therapy within the previous year. Participants completed a 25-item questionnaire comprising six sociodemographic and 19 bedside-manner items; 25 participants also completed semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were summarized descriptively, and selected Likert-scale items with sufficient response variability were examined using chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests with Bonferroni correction and Cramér’s V. Interview data underwent thematic analysis. Results: Responses to the nine yes/no items were predominantly affirmative (88.6–98.6%). The first item assessed familiarity with the term “bedside manners,” whereas the remaining eight items assessed patients’ reported experiences of therapist behaviors. Agreement exceeded 90% for six of the ten Likert-scale items, while responses regarding empathy, therapist presence, and attention according to case complexity were more variable. After correction for multiple comparisons, preferences regarding therapist presence differed by therapist sex and patient–therapist sex match (both p < 0.001; Cramér’s V = 0.17). The qualitative analysis identified seven themes: therapeutic relationship, treatment adherence, nonverbal communication, emotional support, therapist supervision, initial impression, and professional consultation. Conclusions: Patients in this sample strongly valued communication, consent, privacy, reassurance, and respectful interpersonal behavior, while preferences regarding empathy and therapist supervision were more individualized. Interpretation is limited by the cross-sectional convenience sample, restriction to treatment completers, and the small magnitude of the observed associations.