Objective: Telerehabilitation is an option that should be adapted as soon as possible to face the crisis caused by coronavirus disease 2019. An umbrella and mapping review with meta–meta-analysis (MMA) of the available scientific evidence was performed to determine whether telerehabilitation could be an effective alternative to conventional rehabilitation in physical therapist practice. Methods: A systematic review of reviews and a synthesis of the findings of all systematic evidence published to date with a visual map and a meta–meta-analysis (MMA) were performed. A systematic search was realized in Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE (PubMed), and Google Scholar. Two independent reviewers performed a data analysis and assessed the quality of the included reviews, assessing the risk of bias using ROBIS. Results: Twenty-nine articles that met the inclusion criteria were selected and divided according to the type of patient targeted for rehabilitation (patients with cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neurological conditions). The MMA regarding physical function between telerehabilitation and usual care rehabilitation did not reveal a statistically significant difference for patients with cardiorespiratory and musculoskeletal conditions. For patients with neurological conditions, the MMA revealed a statistically significant but negligible effect size in 6 reviews in favor of telerehabilitation (standardized mean difference = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.03–0.34). Conclusion: The results of the present review showed that telerehabilitation offers positive clinical results, even comparable to conventional face-to-face rehabilitation approaches. Impact: The advantages of lower cost and less interference by the rehabilitation processes in patients’ daily life could justify implementing telerehabilitation in clinical settings in the coronavirus disease 2019 era.

Objective: The aim of this umbrella review with meta-meta-analysis was to assess the effectiveness of orthopedic manual therapy in isolation on pain sensitization in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Design: A systematic search was performed in different databases including systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis. The outcome measures included were pressure pain threshold, temporal summation, and conditioned pain modulation. The results of the different reviews were statistically synthesized through a random-effect meta-analysis, of all standardized mean differences and the corresponding 95% confidence interval reported by each study. Results: For mechanical hyperalgesia, the meta-meta-analysis of three meta-analyses revealed a statistically significant small-moderate effect of orthopedic manual therapy, with no evidence of heterogeneity and moderate-quality evidence. In terms of temporal summation, one meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant small effect of orthopedic manual therapy intervention, with moderate heterogeneity and low quality of evidence. Finally, one review without meta-analysis found that orthopedic manual therapy improved endogenous analgesia with low-quality evidence. Conclusion: Orthopedic manual therapy in isolation improved mechanical hyperalgesia with moderate-quality evidence, as well as temporal summation and conditioned pain modulation with low-quality evidence. However, its effects are limited only to immediate and short-term.

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of cervical manual therapy (MT) on patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) and to compare cervico-craniomandibular MT vs cervical MT. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis (MA). Methods: A search in PubMed, EMBASE, PEDro, and Google Scholar was conducted with an end date of February 2019. Two independent reviewers performed the data analysis, assessing the relevance of the randomized clinical trials regarding the studies’ objectives. The qualitative analysis was based on classifying the results into levels of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Results: Regarding cervical MT, MA included three studies and showed statistically significant differences in pain intensity reduction and an increase in masseter pressure pain thresholds (PPTs), with a large clinical effect. In addition, the results showed an increase in temporalis PPT, with a moderate clinical effect. MA included two studies on cervical MT vs cervico-craniomandibular MT interventions and showed statistically significant differences in pain intensity reduction and pain-free maximal mouth opening, with a large clinical effect. Conclusions: Cervical MT treatment is more effective in decreasing pain intensity than placebo MT or minimal intervention, with moderate evidence. Cervico-craniomandibular interventions achieved greater short-term reductions in pain intensity and increased pain-free MMO over cervical intervention alone in TMD and headache, with low evidence.

The aim of the present study was to explore the pain modulation effects of motor imagery (MI) and action observation (AO) of specific neck therapeutic exercises both locally, in the cervical region, and remotely. A single-blind, placebo clinical trial was designed. A total of 30 patients with chronic neck pain (CNP) were randomly assigned to an AO group, MI group, or placebo observation (PO) group. Pain pressure thresholds (PPTs) of C2/C3, trapezius muscles, and epicondyle were the main outcome variables. Secondary outcomes included heart rate measurement. Statistically significant differences were observed in PPTs of the cervical region in the AO and MI groups between the preintervention and first postintervention assessment. Significant differences were found in the AO group in the epicondyle between the preintervention, first and second post-intervention assessments. Regarding heart rate response, differences were found in the AO and MI groups between the preintervention and average intervention measurements. AO and MI induce immediate pain modulation in the cervical region and AO also induces remote hypoalgesia. OA appears to lead to greater pain modulation as well as a greater heart rate response, however, both should be clinically considered in patients with CNP.