The second quarter of 2026 was a period of intensive scientific, organisational and professional activity for the Polish Society of Physiotherapy. The spring months brought conferences organised by the Lower Silesian Branch and the Stomatognathic Section of the PTF, important decisions concerning the professional self-government, the appointment of Renata Szczepaniak as a provincial consultant, further development of international cooperation, and the next stages of preparations for the 18th Scientific Conference of the PTF, “Perspectives for the Development of Physiotherapy”.
OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and its shortened version (ie, the QuickDASH). METHODS:MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched up to July 2022. Studies on people with upper limb musculoskeletal disorders that calculated the MCID by anchor-based methods were included. Descriptive and quantitative synthesis was used for the MCID and the minimal detectable change with 90% confidence (MDC90). Fixed-effects models and random-effect models were used for the meta-analysis. I2 statistics was computed to assess heterogeneity. The methodological quality of studies was assessed with the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments checklist for measurement error and an adaptation of the checklist for the studies on MCID proposed by Bohannon and Glenney. RESULTS:Twelve studies (1677 patients) were included, producing 17 MCID estimates ranging from 8.3 to 18.0 DASH points and 8.0 to 18.1 QuickDASH points. The pooled MCIDs were 11.00 DASH points (95% CI = 8.59-13.41; I2 = 0%) and 11.97 QuickDASH points (95% CI = 9.60-14.33; I2 = 0%). The pooled MDC90s were 9.04 DASH points (95% CI = 6.46-11.62; I2 = 0%) and 9.03 QuickDASH points (95% CI = 6.36-11.71; I2 = 18%). Great methodological heterogeneity in the calculation of the MCID was identified among the primary studies. CONCLUSION:Reasonable MCID ranges of 12 to 14 DASH points and 12 to 15 QuickDASH points were established. The lower boundaries represent the first available measure above the pooled MDC90, and the upper limits represent the upper 95% CI of the pooled MCID. IMPACT:Reasonable ranges for the MCID of 12 to 14 DASH points and 12 to 15 QuickDASH points were proposed. The lower boundaries represent the first available measure above the pooled MDC90, and the upper limits represent the upper 95% CI of the pooled MCID. Information regarding the interpretability of the 2 questionnaires was derived from very different methodologies, making it difficult to identify reliable thresholds. Now clinicians and researchers can rely on more credible data. The proposed MCIDs should be used to assess people with musculoskeletal disorders. Heterogeneity was found related particularly to the anchor levels used in the primary studies. To promote comparability of MCID values, shared rules defining the most appropriate types of anchoring will be needed in the near future.
Objective: Scar adherence due to a pathological healing process can cause physical and psychological disturbance. Soft tissue mobilisation (STM) techniques are widely used to treat and prevent scar adherence, but little is known on their effects. We aimed to analyse the effect of STM in patients with subacute post-surgical scar adhesions affecting the extremities. Method: A single-group quasi-experimental study was conducted on consecutive patients undergoing post-surgery limb rehabilitation. Patients with a baseline Adhesion Severity (AS) index of <0.5 at the worst scar point, as measured by the Adheremeter, were eligible. All patients who completed a minimum of five manual treatment sessions were included. The primary outcome was the AS index and the secondary outcome was the Italian version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scales (POSAS-I). Results: A cohort of 19 patients underwent an average of eight STM sessions over a period of one month. The AS index value increased from a median of 0.12 at baseline (interquartile range (IQR): 0.05–0.25) to 0.41 post-treatment (IQR: 0.26–0.63; median change: 0.24; IQR: 0.16–0.40; p<0.001). A large effect size was observed for both AS and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS-I) (Cohen r=0.6), with a large probability of superiority (PS) (87% and 86%, respectively). A moderate effect was observed for the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS-I) (Cohen=0.4; PS=71%). Pre–post treatment changes exceeded the minimal detectable changes for the AS and OSAS-I in 68% of subjects, and for PSAS-I in 21% of subjects. Conclusion: STM manual techniques may produce a large effect on the mobility of adherent subacute post-surgical scars.
Medical Humanities is a rapidly expanding field of medical education. However, in Italy, only a few humanities are included in the curricula of medical schools. Other humanities are provided in the form of elective courses, with great heterogeneity among the various medical schools. The objective of this paper is to present an optional course in Medical Humanities, based on an integrated approach, aiming at fostering the human and professional growth of medical students. In addition, the paper presents the research project associated with the integrated course, aimed at evaluating the effects of the course program on students' personal and professional skills and psychological well-being.
