PURPOSE: To analyse how decisions to dichotomise the frequency and impediment of phantom pain into absent and present influence the outcome of studies by performing a sensitivity analysis on an existing database.METHOD: Five hundred and thirty-six subjects were recruited from the database of an orthopaedic workshop and filled out a questionnaire in which the following items were assessed: demographics, side, date, level and reason of amputation, presence and frequency of phantom sensations, phantom pain and stump pain, and impediment due to phantom pain.RESULTS: The prevalence of phantom pain ranged from 7-72% when different cut off points for the frequency of phantom pain were applied. The significance of the various risk factors for the prevalence of phantom pain changed when different cut off points were applied. Only stump pain and phantom sensations were significant risk factors for all cut off points. Risk factors for the impediment of phantom pain changed when different cut off points were applied and these risk factors were different from those for the prevalence of phantom pain.CONCLUSION: The choice of cut off points influences the outcome of phantom pain studies considerably. This study provides some insight into the differences in prevalence and risk factors found in literature.
DOCUMENT
Description: The Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPDS or NPAD) is a questionnaire aiming to quantify neck pain and disability.1 It is a patient-reported outcome measure for patients with any type of neck pain, of any duration, with or without injury.1,2 It consists of 20 items: three related to pain intensity, four related to emotion and cognition, four related to mobility of the neck, eight related to activity limitations and participation restrictions and one on medication.1,3 Patients respond to each item on a 0 to 5 visual analogue scale of 10 cm. There is also a nine-item short version.4 Feasibility: The NPDS is published and available online (https://mountainphysiotherapy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Neck-Pain-and-Disability-Scale.pdf).1 The NPDS is an easy to use questionnaire that can be completed within 5 to 8 minutes.1,5 There is no training needed to administer the instrument but its validity is compromised if the questionnaire must be read to the patient.2 Higher scores indicate higher severity (0 for normal functioning to 5 for the worst possible situation ‘your’ pain problem has caused you).2 The total score is the sum of scores on the 20 items (0 to 100).1 The maximum acceptable number of missing answers is three (15%).4 Two studies found a minimum important change of 10 points (sensitivity 0.93; specificity 0.83) and 11.5 points (sensibility 0.74; specificity 0.70), respectively.6,7 The NPDS is available in English, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Hindi, Iranian, Korean, Turkish, Japanese and Thai. Reliability and validity: Two systematic reviews have evaluated the clinimetric properties of 11 of the translated versions.5,8 The Finnish, German and Italian translations were particularly recommended for use in clinical practice. Face validity was established and content validity was confirmed by an adequate reflection of all aspects of neck pain and disability.1,8 Regarding structural validity, the NPDS is a multidimensional scale, with moderate evidence that the NPDS has a three-factor structure (with explained variance ranging from 63 to 78%): neck dysfunction related to general activities; neck pain and neck-specific function; and cognitive-emotional-behavioural functioning. 4,5,9 A recent overview of four systematic reviews found moderate-quality evidence of high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alphas ranging from 0.86 to 0.93 for the various factors).10 Excellent test-retest reliability was found (ICC of 0.97); however, the studies were considered to be of low quality.3,10 Construct validity (hypotheses-testing) seems adequate when the NPDS is compared with the Neck Disability Index and the Global Assessment of Change with moderate to strong correlations (r = 0.52 to 0.86), based on limited moderate-quality studies.3,11,12 One systematic review reported good responsiveness to change in patients (r = 0.59).12
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
Pain following burn injuries can be severe and may persist after hospital discharge. The experience of pain is influenced by multiple biological and psychosocial factors. Post-discharge pain may be related to pain experienced during hospitalization as well as anxiety associated with these pain experiences. There are also protective factors; one notable example is optimism. However, the role of optimism in burn-related pain has not yet been investigated. This study aimed to describe the extent of pain measured over 14 consecutive days post-discharge and to examine its relationship with background pain, procedural pain, pain-related anxiety, and optimism. This multi-center longitudinal cohort study was conducted in five burns centres. The results showed that 50 % of the patients had a pain score ≥ 2 on a 0 – 10 scale after discharge, which on average decreased further over the next 14 days. However, a subgroup of patients maintained elevated pain levels. Patients with higher pain scores post-discharge were more likely to have experienced higher levels of background pain and procedural pain in-hospital and they scored lower on optimism. Pain-related anxiety did not independently contribute to pain post-discharge. The results indicate that patients with high pain scores during hospital admission may need specific attention regarding pain management when they leave the hospital. Furthermore, patients may benefit from optimism-inducing interventions in the hospital and thereafter.
DOCUMENT
Pain in critically ill adults with burns should be assessed using structured pain behavioural observation measures. This study tested the clinimetric qualities and usability of the behaviour pain scale (BPS) and the critical-care pain observation tool (CPOT) in this population. This prospective observational cohort study included 132 nurses who rated pain behaviour in 75 patients. The majority of nurses indicated that BPS and CPOT reflect background and procedural pain-specific features (63–72 and 87–80%, respectively). All BPS and CPOT items loaded on one latent variable (≥0.70), except for compliance ventilator and vocalisation for CPOT (0.69 and 0.64, respectively). Internal consistency also met the criterion of ≥0.70 in ventilated and non-ventilated patients for both scales, except for non-ventilated patients observed by BPS (0.67). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of total scores were sufficient (≥0.70), but decreased when patients had facial burns. In general, the scales were fast to administer and easy to understand. Cut-off scores for BPS and CPOT were 4 and 1, respectively. In conclusion, both scales seem valid, reliable, and useful for the measurement of acute pain in ICU patients with burns, including patients with facial burns. Cut-off scores associated with BPS and CPOT for the burn population allow professionals to connect total scores to person-centred treatment protocols.
DOCUMENT
Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is being used extensively in the search for pathoanatomical factors contributing to low back pain (LBP) such as Modic changes (MC). However, it remains unclear whether clinical findings can identify patients with MC. The purpose of this explorative study was to assess the predictive value of six clinical tests and three questionnaires commonly used with patients with low-back pain (LBP) on the presence of Modic changes (MC).Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed using data from Dutch military personnel in the period between April 2013 and July 2016. Questionnaires included the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, Numeric Pain Rating Scale, and Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire. The clinical examination included (i) range of motion, (ii) presence of pain during flexion and extension, (iii) Prone Instability Test, and (iv) straight leg raise. Backward stepwise regression was used to estimate predictive value for the presence of MC and the type of MC. The exploration of clinical tests was performed by univariable logistic regression models.Results: Two hundred eighty-six patients were allocated for the study, and 112 cases with medical records and MRI scans were available; 60 cases with MC and 52 without MC. Age was significantly higher in the MC group. The univariate regression analysis showed a significantly increased odds ratio for pain during flexion movement (2.57 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08-6.08]) in the group with MC. Multivariable logistic regression of all clinical symptoms and signs showed no significant association for any of the variables. The diagnostic value of the clinical tests expressed by sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive, and negative predictive values showed, for all the combinations, a low area under the curve (AUC) score, ranging from 0.41 to 0.53. Single-test sensitivity was the highest for pain in flexion: 60% (95% CI: 48.3-70.4).Conclusion: No model to predict the presence of MC, based on clinical tests, could be demonstrated. It is therefore not likely that LBP patients with MC are very different from other LBP patients and that they form a specific subgroup. However, the study only explored a limited number of clinical findings and it is possible that larger samples allowing for more variables would conclude differently.
DOCUMENT
A significant proportion of adolescents with chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) experience difficulties in physical functioning, mood and social functioning, contributing to diminished quality of life. Generalized joint hypermobility (GJH) is a risk factor for developing CMP with a striking 35-48% of patients with CMP reporting GJH. In case GJH occurs with one or more musculoskeletal manifestations such as chronic pain, trauma, disturbed proprioception and joint instability, it is referred to as generalized hypermobility spectrum disorder (G-HSD). Similar characteristics have been reported in children and adolescents with the hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (hEDS). In the management of CMP, a biopsychosocial approach is recommended as several studies have confirmed the impact of psychosocial factors in the development and maintenance of CMP. The fear-avoidance model (FAM) is a cognitive-behavioural framework that describes the role of pain-related fear as a determinant of CMP-related disability. Pubmed was used to identify existing relevant literature focussing on chronic musculoskeletal pain, generalized joint hypermobility, pain-related fear and disability. Relevant articles were cross-referenced to identify articles possibly missed during the primary screening. In this paper the current state of scientific evidence is presented for each individual component of the FAM in hypermobile adolescents with and without CMP. Based on this overview, the FAM is proposed explaining a possible underlying mechanism in the relations between GJH, pain-related fear and disability. It is assumed that GJH seems to make you more vulnerable for injury and experiencing more frequent musculoskeletal pain. But in addition, a vulnerability for heightened pain-related fear is proposed as an underlying mechanism explaining the relationship between GJH and disability. Further scientific confirmation of this applied FAM is warranted to further unravel the underlying mechanism. In explaining disability in individuals with G-HSD/hEDS, it is important to focus on both the physical components related to joint hypermobility, in tandem with the psychological components such as pain-related fear, catastrophizing thoughts and generalized anxiety.
DOCUMENT
OBJECTIVE: To analyse the prevalence of phantom (limb) pain over time and to analyse factors associated with phantom (limb) pain in a prospective cohort of amputees.DESIGN: A multicentre longitudinal study.PATIENTS: One hundred and thirty-four patients scheduled for amputation were included.METHODS: Patients filled in questionnaires before amputation, and postal questionnaires six months, 1(1/2) years and 2(1/2) years to a maximum of 3(1/2) years after amputation. Preoperative assessment included patients' characteristics, date, side and level of, and reason for amputation. The follow-up questionnaires assessed the frequencies of the experienced phantom pain, prosthetic use and walking distance. The occurrence of phantom pain was defined as phantom pain a few times a day or more frequently.RESULTS: Pre- and postoperative questionnaires were available filled in by 85 amputees (33 females and 52 males). The percentage of lower limb amputees with phantom pain was the highest at six months after amputation, and of upper limb amputees at 1(1/2) years. In general, more women than men experienced phantom pain. One and a half years and 2(1/2) years after amputation the highest percentages of the lower limb amputees used their prosthesis more than 4 hours a day (66%), after that time this percentage decreased to 60%. The results of the two-level logistic regression analysis to predict phantom pain show that phantom pain was less frequently present in men (odds ratio (OR) = 0.12), in lower limb amputees (OR = 0.14) and that it decreased in due course (OR = 0.53 for 1 year).CONCLUSION: Protective factors for phantom pain are: being male, having a lower limb amputation and the time elapsed since amputation.
DOCUMENT
Migraine, tension-type headache (TTH) and headaches attributed to temporomandibular disorders (TMD) are prevalent in patients with TMD-pain. The objective was to describe the course of headache complaints as compared to the course of TMD complaints in TMD-pain patients with headache during usual care multidisciplinary treatment for TMD. This was a 12-week longitudinal observational study following adults with TMD-pain and headache during a usual-care multidisciplinary TMD-treatment. The Graded Chronic Pain Scale was used for both TMD and headache to measure pain-related disability (primary outcome measure), pain intensity, days with pain and days experiencing disability (secondary outcome measures). Stratified for the headache type, general linear modelling for repeated measures was used to analyze changes over time in the TMD complaints and the headache complaints. TMD-pain patients with migraine (n = 22) showed significant decrease of pain-related disability for both TMD and headache complaints over time. No difference in the effect over time was found between the two complaints. Patients with TMD-pain and TTH (n = 21) or headache attributed to TMD (n = 17) did not improve in disability over time. For the secondary outcome measures, the results were equivocal. In conclusion, TMD-pain patients with migraine, improvement in TMD-related disability was comparable to headache-related disability for TMD-pain patients with TTH or with headache attributed to TMD, no improvements in disability were found.
DOCUMENT
Stimulating patients to approach their pain from a biopsychosocial perspective is central to chronic pain rehabilitation. However, conversations between patients and their healthcare professionals about the social and psychological factors that may contribute to the continuation of pain and disability can be challenging. The current scientific literature does not sufficiently pinpoint the difficulties in patient–practitioner interaction on chronic pain, and it falls short of answering the question of how a joint exploration of the social and psychological factors that might be involved in the patient’s pain and evolving disability can be enhanced. In this theoretical article, we introduce discursive psychology as a potentially valuable research perspective to gain a better understanding of the difficulties in patient–practitioner interaction in the context of chronic pain rehabilitation. Discursive psychology focuses on features of people’s talk (e.g. that of patients and practitioners) and is concerned with the social practices that people perform as part of a specific interactional context. In this paper, we provide an introduction to the main theoretical notions of discursive psychology. We illustrate how discursive psychological analyses can inform our understanding of the specific sensitivities in conversations between patients with chronic pain and their practitioners. Finally, we address how a better understanding of these sensitivities offers a gateway towards improving these conversations. Een belangrijk principe in revalidatie bij chronische pijn is de benadering van de pijn vanuit een biopsychosociaal perspectief. Het blijkt echter een uitdaging voor patiënten en behandelaars om de sociale en psychologische factoren die een rol spelen bij chronische pijn te bespreken. In de huidige wetenschappelijke literatuur is hier nog niet voldoende aandacht voor; en wordt geen perspectief geboden voor verbetering van de gezamenlijke verkenning van sociale en psychologische factoren. In dit theoretische artikel introduceren we discursieve psychologie als een mogelijk waardevol onderzoeksperspectief om een beter begrip tot stand te brengen van de complexiteit van interactie in de context van chronische pijn revalidatie. Discursieve psychologie richt zich op kenmerken van interactie, in het bijzonder de sociale praktijken die tot stand worden gebracht binnen een specifieke interactionele context. We beschrijven de belangrijkste theoretische principes van discursieve psychologie en illustreren hoe een DP analyse licht kan werpen op de specifieke gevoeligheden in conversaties tussen patiënten met chronische pijn en hun behandelaars. Tot slot bespreken we hoe een beter begrip van deze gevoeligheden een ingang biedt tot het verbeteren van deze conversaties.
DOCUMENT
