Achtergrond: Pijn is een lastig te meten, subjectief fenomeen. Pijn wordt vaak gemeten met subjectieve self-reported vragenlijsten. Een andere manier om pijn vast te leggen is het objectief meten van de pijndrempel (Pressure Pain Threshold, PPT) door middel van het uitoefenen van mechanische druk met behulp van een drukalgometer. De pijndrempel is het punt waarop een persoon voor het eerst pijn opmerkt. Het is een bruikbare en betrouwbare manier om op een objectieve wijze de PPT in kaart te brengen. Normaalwaarden van pijndrempels en de invloed van diverse variabelen hierop zijn nog onbekend. Ook is nog onduidelijk of er binnen een individu verschillen kunnen zijn tussen de gevoeligheid voor pijn aan de dominante en niet-dominante zijde van het lichaam. Vraagstelling: Wat is de mate van variatie in pijndrempelwaarden op diverse locaties op het lichaam, gemeten met een drukalgometer, aan de dominante zijde ten opzichte van de niet-dominante zijde bij pijnvrije ouderen van 40 tot 85 jaar?”Methode: Bij gezonde deelnemers (zonder pijn) in de leeftijd van 40 tot 85 jaar werden pijndrempels gemeten op drie locaties rond de knie, twee locaties op de arm en één op het voorhoofd. Metingen werden op elke locatie drie keer verricht, met een tussenpose van 30 seconden. Dit werd gedaan op de dominante en niet-dominante zijde van het lichaam. Op elke locatie werd de gemiddelde pijndrempel van drie metingen berekend. Door middel van een ongepaarde t-toets werd per locatie de gemiddelde pijndrempel aan de dominante zijde vergeleken met de niet-dominante zijde. Resultaten: De steekproef bestond uit 53 deelnemers, waarvan 23 mannen (gemiddelde leeftijd 64,3 jaar ±13,3) en 30 vrouwen (gemiddelde leeftijd 55,5 jaar ±9,4), waarvan vijf linkshandige deelnemers en één linksbenige deelnemer. Gemiddelde pijndrempels waren op alle zes locaties aan de dominante zijde niet significant hoger dan aan de niet-dominante zijde (p<0,05). Conclusie: Er zijn geen significante verschillen in de hoogte van de pijndrempels aan de op dominante zijde ten opzichte van de niet-dominante zijde. Dit maakt het gebruik van pijndrempels eenvoudiger wanneer dit wordt toegepast in een klinische setting.Implicatie voor de fysiotherapie: Pijndrempelmetingen kunnen in de praktijk gebruikt worden om pijn objectief te meten. Hierbij hoeft er geen rekening gehouden te worden met de dominante of niet-dominante zijde van de arm en het been.
DOCUMENT
Studies about clinical pain in schizophrenia are rare. Conclusions on pain sensitivity in people with schizophrenia are primarily based on experimental pain studies. This review attempts to assess clinical pain, that is, everyday pain without experimental manipulation, in people with schizophrenia. PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase.com, and Cochrane were searched with terms related to schizophrenia and pain. Methodological quality was assessed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Fourteen studies were included. Persons with schizophrenia appear to have a diminished prevalence of pain, as well as a lower intensity of pain when compared to persons with other psychiatric diseases. When compared to healthy controls, both prevalence and intensity of pain appear to be diminished for persons with schizophrenia. However, it was found that this effect only applies to pain with an apparent medical cause, such as headache after lumbar puncture. For less severe situations, prevalence and intensity of pain appears to be comparable between people with schizophrenia and controls. Possible underlying mechanisms are discussed. Knowledge about pain in schizophrenia is important for adequate pain treatment in clinical practice. Perspective This review presents a valuable insight into clinical pain in people with schizophrenia
DOCUMENT
Objective To develop and internally validate a prognostic model to predict chronic pain after a new episode of acute or subacute non-specific idiopathic, non-traumatic neck pain in patients presenting to physiotherapy primary care, emphasising modifiable biomedical, psychological and social factors. Design A prospective cohort study with a 6-month follow-up between January 2020 and March 2023. Setting 30 physiotherapy primary care practices. Participants Patients with a new presentation of non-specific idiopathic, non-traumatic neck pain, with a duration lasting no longer than 12 weeks from onset. Baseline measures Candidate prognostic variables collected from participants included age and sex, neck pain symptoms, work-related factors, general factors, psychological and behavioural factors and the remaining factors: therapeutic relation and healthcare provider attitude. Outcome measures Pain intensity at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months on a Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) after inclusion. An NPRS score of ≥3 at each time point was used to define chronic neck pain. Results 62 (10%) of the 603 participants developed chronic neck pain. The prognostic factors in the final model were sex, pain intensity, reported pain in different body regions, headache since and before the neck pain, posture during work, employment status, illness beliefs about pain identity and recovery, treatment beliefs, distress and self-efficacy. The model demonstrated an optimism-corrected area under the curve of 0.83 and a corrected R2 of 0.24. Calibration was deemed acceptable to good, as indicated by the calibration curve. The Hosmer–Lemeshow test yielded a p-value of 0.7167, indicating a good model fit. Conclusion This model has the potential to obtain a valid prognosis for developing chronic pain after a new episode of acute and subacute non-specific idiopathic, non-traumatic neck pain. It includes mostly potentially modifiable factors for physiotherapy practice. External validation of this model is recommended.
LINK
BackgroundWorking alliance can possibly influence patients’ experiences of pain and physical functioning. The aim of this systematic review is to merge evidence from literature regarding the influence of patients’ perceived working alliance on pain and physical functioning in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.MethodsA systematic review in which randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were included that assessed the influence of working alliance on either pain or physical functioning in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. The methodological quality of the included studies were rated by means of the PEDro score and STROBE statement.ResultsThe first step of the search process provided 1469 studies. After screening, five studies were included in this review including one RCT and four cohort studies of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. One cohort study was rated as low methodological quality and the other studies as high methodological quality. There was a significant effect of working alliance on the outcome of pain severity, pain interference, and physical functioning in all studies. Physical functioning was measured by means of questionnaires and functional capacity tests. The effect on questionnaires was positive; the effect was conflicting on functional capacity.ConclusionWhen influencing pain with treatment, a patient’s perceived working alliance during treatment does predict pain reduction and improvement in physical functioning. It is recommended to inquire about a patient’s working alliance during treatment in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.
DOCUMENT
Introduction: Illness Perceptions (IPs) may play a role in the management of persistent low back pain. The mediation and/or moderation effect of IPs on primary outcomes in physiotherapy treatment is unknown. Methods: A multiple single-case experimental design, using a matched care physiotherapy intervention, with three phases (phases A-B-A’) was used including a 3 month follow up (phase A’). Primary outcomes: pain intensity, physical functioning and pain interference in daily life. Analyzes: linear mixed models, adjusted for fear of movement, catastrophizing, avoidance, sombreness and sleep. Results: Nine patients were included by six different primary care physiotherapists. Repeated measures on 196 data points showed that IPs Consequences, Personal control, Identity, Concern and Emotional response had a mediation effect on all three primary outcomes. The IP Personal control acted as a moderator for all primary outcomes, with clinically relevant improvements at 3 month follow up. Conclusion: Our study might indicate that some IPs have a mediating or a moderating effect on the outcome of a matched care physiotherapy treatment. Assessing Personal control at baseline, as a relevant moderator for the outcome prognosis of successful physiotherapy management of persistent low back pain, should be further eplored.
DOCUMENT
Chronic widespread pain is highly present in patients with the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome hypermobility type (EDS-HT), but up to now, evidence for generalized hyperalgesia is lacking. The aim of this study is to investigate whether pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) at both symptomatic and asymptomatic body areas differ in EDS-HT patients compared to healthy subjects. Twenty-three women with EDS-HT and 23 gender- and age-matched healthy controls participated. All subjects marked on Margolis Pain Diagram where they felt pain lasting longer than 24 h in the past 4 weeks. Then, they completed several questionnaires assessing pain cognitions, fatigue, disability, and general health status, in order to take the possible influence of these factors on PPTs into account. Patients also completed a form concerning the type of pain they experienced. Thereupon, a blinded researcher assessed PPTs at 14 body locations on the trunk and extremities. PPTs were compared for the two complete groups. In addition, PPTs of patients and controls who did not report pain in a respective zone were compared. PPTs of the patients were significantly lower compared to those of the control group, also when pain-free samples per zone were compared. The mean (SD) PPT was 2.9 (1.62) kg/cm(2) in the EDS-HT patients and 5.2 (1.88) kg/cm(2) in the controls (P < 0.001). No confounding factors responsible for the observed differences could be revealed. In half of the patient group, a predominantly neuropathic pain component was likely present. This study provides evidence for the existence of hyperalgesia even in asymptomatic areas (generalized secondary hyperalgesia). The generalized hyperalgesia may represent the involvement of a sensitized central nervous system, which inquires an adapted pain management for this patient group.
DOCUMENT
Background: In postoperative pain treatment patients are asked to rate their pain experience on a single uni-dimensional pain scale. Such pain scores are also used as indicator to assess the quality of pain treatment. However, patients may differ in how they interpret the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score. Objectives: This study examines how patients assign a number to their currently experienced postoperative pain and which considerations influence this process. Methods: A qualitative approach according to grounded theory was used. Twenty-seven patients were interviewed one day after surgery. Results: Three main themes emerged that influenced the Numeric Rating Scale scores (0–10) that patients actually reported to professionals: score-related factors, intrapersonal factors, and the anticipated consequences of a given pain score. Anticipated consequences were analgesic administration—which could be desired or undesired—and possible judgements by professionals. We also propose a conceptual model for the relationship between factors that influence the pain rating process. Based on patients’ score-related and intrapersonal factors, a preliminary pain score was ‘‘internally’’ set. Before reporting the pain score to the healthcare professional, patients considered the anticipated consequences (i.e., expected judgements by professionals and anticipation of analgesic administration) of current Numeric Rating Scale scores. Conclusions: This study provides insight into the process of how patients translate their current postoperative pain into a numeric rating score. The proposed model may help professionals to understand the factors that influence a given Numeric Rating Scale score and suggest the most appropriate questions for clarification. In this way, patients and professionals may arrive at a shared understanding of the pain score, resulting in a tailored decision regarding the most appropriate treatment of current postoperative pain, particularly the dosing and timing of opioid administration.
DOCUMENT
OBJECTIVE: To reach consensus on the most important biopsychosocial factors that influence functional capacity results in patients with chronic nonspecific musculoskeletal pain, arranged in the framework of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health.DESIGN: Three-round, internet-based Delphi survey.SETTING: Not applicable.PARTICIPANTS: Participants were scientists, clinicians, and patients familiar with functional capacity testing. Scientists were invited through purposive sampling based on the number of relevant publications in peer-reviewed journals. The scientists recruited clinicians and patients through snowball sampling.INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Consensus was reached if at least moderate influence (25%) was achieved and an interquartile range of no more than 1 point was reached.RESULTS: Thirty-three scientists, 21 clinicians, and 21 patients from 9 countries participated. Participants reached consensus on 6 factors that can influence the outcome of the lifting test, having a median of severe influence (50%-95%): catastrophic thoughts and fear, patient adherence to "doctor's orders," internal and external motivation, muscle power, chronic pain behavior, and avoidance behavior. Motivation, chronic pain behavior, and sensation of pain were the top 3 factors affecting postural tolerance and repetitive movement functional capacity tests. Furthermore, participants reported 28 factors having a median of moderate influence (25%-49%) that could influence the outcome of lifting, postural tolerance, and repetitive movement tests.CONCLUSIONS: Overall, chronic pain behavior, motivation, and sensation of pain are the main factors that can influence functional capacity results. We recommend that scientists and clinicians, respectively, consider the most important factors when planning future studies and when interpreting functional capacity test results.
LINK
Objective: To compare the effects of traditional mirror therapy (MT), a patient-centred teletreatment (PACT) and sensomotor exercises without a mirror on phantom limb pain (PLP). Design: Three-arm multicentre randomized controlled trial. Setting: Rehabilitation centres, hospital and private practices. Subjects: Adult patients with unilateral lower limb amputation and average PLP intensity of at least 3 on the 0–10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Interventions: Subjects randomly received either four weeks of traditional MT followed by a teletreatment using augmented reality MT, traditional MT followed by self-delivered MT or sensomotor exercises of the intact limb without a mirror followed by self-delivered exercises. Main measures: Intensity, frequency and duration of PLP and patient-reported outcomes assessing limitations in daily life at baseline, 4 weeks, 10 weeks and 6 months. Results: In total, 75 patients received traditional MT (n = 25), teletreatment (n = 26) or sensomotor exercises (n = 24). Mean (SD) age was 61.1 (14.2) years and mean (SD) pain intensity was 5.7 (2.1) on the NRS. Effects of MT at four weeks on PLP were not significant. MT significantly reduced the duration of PLP at six months compared to the teletreatment (P = 0.050) and control group (P = 0.019). Subgroup analyses suggested significant effects on PLP in women, patients with telescoping and patients with a motor component in PLP. The teletreatment had no additional effects compared to self-delivered MT at 10 weeks and 6 months. Conclusion: Traditional MT over four weeks was not more effective than sensomotor exercises without a mirror in reducing PLP, although significant effects were suggested in some subgroups.
DOCUMENT
Achtergrond: Pijn is een lastig te meten, subjectief fenomeen. Pijn wordt vaak gemeten met subjectieve self-reported vragenlijsten. Een andere manier om pijn vast te leggen is het objectief meten van de pijndrempel (Pressure Pain Threshold, PPT) door middel van het uitoefenen van mechanische druk met behulp van een drukalgometer. De pijndrempel is het punt waarop een persoon voor het eerst pijn opmerkt. Het is een bruikbare en betrouwbare manier om op een objectieve wijze de PPT in kaart te brengen. Referentiewaarden van pijndrempels en de invloed van diverse variabelen hierop zijn nog vrij onbekend. Ook is nog onduidelijk of er binnen een individu verschillen kunnen zijn tussen de gevoeligheid voor pijn aan de dominante en niet-dominante zijde van het lichaam. Vraagstelling: Wat is de mate van variatie in de hoogte van pijndrempelwaarden op diverse locaties op het lichaam, gemeten met een drukalgometer, aan de dominante zijde ten opzichte van de niet-dominante zijde bij pijnvrije ouderen van 40 tot 85 jaar?” Methode: Bij gezonde deelnemers (zonder pijn) in de leeftijd van 40 tot 85 jaar werden pijndrempels gemeten op drie locaties rond de knie, twee locaties op de arm en één op het voorhoofd. Metingen werden op elke locatie drie keer verricht, met een tussenpose van 30 seconden. Dit werd gedaan aan de dominante en niet-dominante zijde van het lichaam. Op elke locatie werd de gemiddelde pijndrempel van drie metingen berekend. Door middel van een ongepaarde t-toets werd per locatie de gemiddelde pijndrempel aan de dominante zijde vergeleken met de niet-dominante zijde. Resultaten: De steekproef bestond uit 53 deelnemers, waarvan 23 mannen (gemiddelde leeftijd 64,3 jaar ±13,3) en 30 vrouwen (gemiddelde leeftijd 55,5 jaar ±9,4), waarvan vijf linkshandige deelnemers en één linksbenige deelnemer. Gemiddelde pijndrempels waren op alle zes locaties aan de dominante zijde niet significant hoger dan aan de niet-dominante zijde (p<0,05). Conclusie: Er zijn geen significante verschillen in de hoogte van de pijndrempels aan de op dominante zijde ten opzichte van de niet-dominante zijde bij pijnvrije ouderen van 40 tot 85 jaar. Dit maakt het gebruik van pijndrempels eenvoudiger wanneer dit wordt toegepast in een klinische setting. Implicatie voor de fysiotherapie: Pijndrempelmetingen kunnen in de praktijk gebruikt worden om pijn objectief te meten. Hierbij hoeft er geen rekening gehouden te worden met de dominante of niet-dominante zijde van de arm en het been.
MULTIFILE
