-
Best Practice & Research. Clinical... Jun 2019Active research is being conducted on musculoskeletal pain, and recent concepts will help clinicians and researchers to develop better approaches: -the new pain taxonomy... (Review)
Review
Active research is being conducted on musculoskeletal pain, and recent concepts will help clinicians and researchers to develop better approaches: -the new pain taxonomy recently has been modified with a third descriptor with the concept of nociplastic pain. -the latest International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) includes an IASP task force that developed a new classification system for pain. In this new classification, one can differentiate primary musculoskeletal pain including fibromyalgia and low back pain and secondary musculoskeletal pain related to specific etiologies. -the concept of central sensitization in inflammatory rheumatic diseases is increasingly discussed. In these conditions, even with very active biological treatment, almost a third of patients are still complaining of persisting pain. These persisting pain states under adequate treatment, without any sign of inflammation, led researchers to look for evidence of central sensitization states.
Topics: Central Nervous System Sensitization; Humans; Musculoskeletal Pain
PubMed: 31703792
DOI: 10.1016/j.berh.2019.04.007 -
Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 2017Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain has a major impact on people's quality of life. Chronic MSK pain causes sleep interruption, fatigue, depressed mood, activity limitations and... (Review)
Review
Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain has a major impact on people's quality of life. Chronic MSK pain causes sleep interruption, fatigue, depressed mood, activity limitations and participation restrictions. The impact of MSK pain is influenced by contextual factors, including comorbidity, arthritis coping efficacy and access to MSK care. Thus, MSK pain assessment warrants a bio-psychosocial perspective that includes pain, its downstream effects and contextual factors. Such an approach should incorporate elicitation of symptoms using patient-report questionnaires and physical examination to help localize the pain and assess for signs of inflammation, tenderness on palpation, pain on motion, joint instability and malalignment. Using such an approach to the assess chronic pain in MSK conditions has potential to improve our ability to target the right treatment to the right patient, resulting in improved outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Musculoskeletal Pain; Pain Measurement
PubMed: 28967361
DOI: No ID Found -
Transactions of the American Clinical... 2015Chronic musculoskeletal pain is one of the most intractable clinical problems faced by clinicians and can be devastating for patients. Central pain amplification is... (Review)
Review
Chronic musculoskeletal pain is one of the most intractable clinical problems faced by clinicians and can be devastating for patients. Central pain amplification is perceived pain that cannot be fully explained on the basis of somatic or neuropathic processes and is due to physiologic alterations in pain transmission or descending pain modulatory pathways. In any individual, central pain amplification may complicate nociceptive or neuropathic pain. Furthermore, patients with somatic symptom disorders may have alterations in their psychological or behavioral responses to pain that contribute significantly to the clinical presentation. Genetic, physiologic, and psychological factors associated with central pain amplification are beginning to be understood. One important contributor to chronic pain is perceived stress and stress response systems. We and others have shown a complex relationship between the physiologic stress response and chronic pain symptoms. Unfortunately, treatments for chronic pain are woefully inadequate and often worsen clinical outcomes. Developing new treatment strategies for patients with chronic pain is of utmost urgency. This essay provides a framework for thinking about chronic pain and developing new treatment approaches.
Topics: Adaptation, Psychological; Brain; Chronic Pain; Cost of Illness; Humans; Musculoskeletal Pain; Neural Pathways; Pain Management; Pain Perception; Pain Threshold; Prognosis; Risk Factors
PubMed: 26330672
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma May 2019We aimed to produce comprehensive guidelines and recommendations that can be utilized by orthopaedic practices as well as other specialties to improve the management of... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
We aimed to produce comprehensive guidelines and recommendations that can be utilized by orthopaedic practices as well as other specialties to improve the management of acute pain following musculoskeletal injury.
METHODS
A panel of 15 members with expertise in orthopaedic trauma, pain management, or both was convened to review the literature and develop recommendations on acute musculoskeletal pain management. The methods described by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Working Group were applied to each recommendation. The guideline was submitted to the Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) for review and was approved on October 16, 2018.
RESULTS
We present evidence-based best practice recommendations and pain medication recommendations with the hope that they can be utilized by orthopaedic practices as well as other specialties to improve the management of acute pain following musculoskeletal injury. Recommendations are presented regarding pain management, cognitive strategies, physical strategies, strategies for patients on long term opioids at presentation, and system implementation strategies. We recommend the use of multimodal analgesia, prescribing the lowest effective immediate-release opioid for the shortest period possible, and considering regional anesthesia. We also recommend connecting patients to psychosocial interventions as indicated and considering anxiety reduction strategies such as aromatherapy. Finally, we also recommend physical strategies including ice, elevation, and transcutaneous electrical stimulation. Prescribing for patients on long term opioids at presentation should be limited to one prescriber. Both pain and sedation should be assessed regularly for inpatients with short, validated tools. Finally, the group supports querying the relevant regional and state prescription drug monitoring program, development of clinical decision support, opioid education efforts for prescribers and patients, and implementing a department or organization pain medication prescribing strategy or policy.
CONCLUSIONS
Balancing comfort and patient safety following acute musculoskeletal injury is possible when utilizing a true multimodal approach including cognitive, physical, and pharmaceutical strategies. In this guideline, we attempt to provide practical, evidence-based guidance for clinicians in both the operative and non-operative settings to address acute pain from musculoskeletal injury. We also organized and graded the evidence to both support recommendations and identify gap areas for future research.
Topics: Humans; Musculoskeletal Pain; Musculoskeletal System; Pain Management; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Wounds and Injuries
PubMed: 30681429
DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001430 -
The International Journal of Behavioral... Dec 2021Sedentary behaviour (SB; time spent sitting) is associated with musculoskeletal pain (MSP) conditions; however, no prior systematic review has examined these... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Sedentary behaviour (SB; time spent sitting) is associated with musculoskeletal pain (MSP) conditions; however, no prior systematic review has examined these associations according to SB domains. We synthesised evidence on occupational and non-occupational SB and MSP conditions.
METHODS
Guided by a PRISMA protocol, eight databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, SPORTDiscus, and AMED) and three grey literature sources (Google Scholar, WorldChat, and Trove) were searched (January 1, 2000, to March 17, 2021) for original quantitative studies of adults ≥ 18 years. Clinical-condition studies were excluded. Studies' risk of bias was assessed using the QualSyst checklist. For meta-analyses, random effect inverse-variance pooled effect size was estimated; otherwise, best-evidence synthesis was used for narrative review.
RESULTS
Of 178 potentially-eligible studies, 79 were included [24 general population; 55 occupational (incuding15 experimental/intervention)]; 56 studies were of high quality, with scores > 0.75. Data for 26 were meta-synthesised. For cross-sectional studies of non-occupational SB, meta-analysis showed full-day SB to be associated with low back pain [LBP - OR = 1.19(1.03 - 1.38)]. Narrative synthesis found full-day SB associations with knee pain, arthritis, and general MSP, but the evidence was insufficient on associations with neck/shoulder pain, hip pain, and upper extremities pain. Evidence of prospective associations of full-day SB with MSP conditions was insufficient. Also, there was insufficient evidence on both cross-sectional and prospective associations between leisure-time SB and MSP conditions. For occupational SB, cross-sectional studies meta-analysed indicated associations of self-reported workplace sitting with LBP [OR = 1.47(1.12 - 1.92)] and neck/shoulder pain [OR = 1.73(1.46 - 2.03)], but not with extremities pain [OR = 1.17(0.65 - 2.11)]. Best-evidence synthesis identified inconsistent findings on cross-sectional association and a probable negative prospective association of device-measured workplace sitting with LBP-intensity in tradespeople. There was cross-sectional evidence on the association of computer time with neck/shoulder pain, but insufficient evidence for LBP and general MSP. Experimental/intervention evidence indicated reduced LBP, neck/shoulder pain, and general MSP with reducing workplace sitting.
CONCLUSIONS
We found cross-sectional associations of occupational and non-occupational SB with MSP conditions, with occupational SB associations being occupation dependent, however, reverse causality bias cannot be ruled out. While prospective evidence was inconclusive, reducing workplace sitting was associated with reduced MSP conditions. Future studies should emphasise prospective analyses and examining potential interactions with chronic diseases.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO ID # CRD42020166412 (Amended to limit the scope).
Topics: Adult; Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Leisure Activities; Musculoskeletal Pain; Sedentary Behavior; Workplace
PubMed: 34895248
DOI: 10.1186/s12966-021-01191-y -
British Journal of Sports Medicine Jul 2019
Review
Topics: Central Nervous System; Chronic Pain; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Musculoskeletal Pain
PubMed: 29925503
DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098983 -
JAMA Oncology May 2021The opioid crisis creates challenges for cancer pain management. Acupuncture confers clinical benefits for chronic nonmalignant pain, but its effectiveness in cancer... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
IMPORTANCE
The opioid crisis creates challenges for cancer pain management. Acupuncture confers clinical benefits for chronic nonmalignant pain, but its effectiveness in cancer survivors remains uncertain.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the effectiveness of electroacupuncture or auricular acupuncture for chronic musculoskeletal pain in cancer survivors.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
The Personalized Electroacupuncture vs Auricular Acupuncture Comparative Effectiveness (PEACE) trial is a randomized clinical trial that was conducted from March 2017 to October 2019 (follow-up completed April 2020) across an urban academic cancer center and 5 suburban sites in New York and New Jersey. Study statisticians were blinded to treatment assignments. The 360 adults included in the study had a prior cancer diagnosis but no current evidence of disease, reported musculoskeletal pain for at least 3 months, and self-reported pain intensity on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable).
INTERVENTIONS
Patients were randomized 2:2:1 to electroacupuncture (n = 145), auricular acupuncture (n = 143), or usual care (n = 72). Intervention groups received 10 weekly sessions of electroacupuncture or auricular acupuncture. Ten acupuncture sessions were offered to the usual care group from weeks 12 through 24.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was change in average pain severity score on the BPI from baseline to week 12. Using a gatekeeping multiple-comparison procedure, electroacupuncture and auricular acupuncture were compared with usual care using a linear mixed model. Noninferiority of auricular acupuncture to electroacupuncture was tested if both interventions were superior to usual care.
RESULTS
Among 360 cancer survivors (mean [SD] age, 62.1 [12.7] years; mean [SD] baseline BPI score, 5.2 [1.7] points; 251 [69.7%] women; and 88 [24.4%] non-White), 340 (94.4%) completed the primary end point. Compared with usual care, electroacupuncture reduced pain severity by 1.9 points (97.5% CI, 1.4-2.4 points; P < .001) and auricular acupuncture reduced by 1.6 points (97.5% CI, 1.0-2.1 points; P < .001) from baseline to week 12. Noninferiority of auricular acupuncture to electroacupuncture was not demonstrated. Adverse events were mild; 15 of 143 (10.5%) patients receiving auricular acupuncture and 1 of 145 (0.7%) patients receiving electroacupuncture discontinued treatments due to adverse events (P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this randomized clinical trial among cancer survivors with chronic musculoskeletal pain, electroacupuncture and auricular acupuncture produced greater pain reduction than usual care. However, auricular acupuncture did not demonstrate noninferiority to electroacupuncture, and patients receiving it had more adverse events.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02979574.
Topics: Acupuncture, Ear; Adult; Cancer Survivors; Chronic Pain; Electroacupuncture; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Musculoskeletal Pain; Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33734288
DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.0310 -
European Journal of Physical and... Oct 2013In this systematic review article, we assessed the effects of therapeutic Kinesio Taping (KT) on pain and disability in participants suffering from musculoskeletal,... (Review)
Review
In this systematic review article, we assessed the effects of therapeutic Kinesio Taping (KT) on pain and disability in participants suffering from musculoskeletal, neurological and lymphatic pathologies. Four online databases (CINAHL, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PEDro) were comprehensively searched from their inception through March 2012. The initial literature search found 91 controlled trials. Following elimination procedures, 26 studies were fully screened. Subsequently, 12 met our inclusion criteria. The final 12 articles were subdivided according to the basic pathological disorders of the participants' musculoskeletal (N.=9), neurological (N.=1) and lymphatic (N.=2) systems. As to the effect on musculoskeletal disorders, moderate evidence was found supporting an immediate reduction in pain while wearing the KT. In 3 out of 6 studies, reduction of pain was superior to that of the comparison group. However, there is no support indicating any long-term effect. Additionally, no evidence was found connecting the KT application to elevated muscle strength or long-term improved range of movement. No evidence to support the effectiveness of KT for neurological conditions. As to lymphatic disorders, inconclusive evidence was reported. Although KT has been shown to be effective in aiding short-term pain, there is no firm evidence-based conclusion of the effectiveness of this application on the majority of movement disorders within a wide range of pathologic disabilities. More research is clearly needed.
Topics: Athletic Tape; Databases, Bibliographic; Humans; Lymphatic Diseases; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Musculoskeletal Pain; Nervous System Diseases; Pain Management
PubMed: 23558699
DOI: No ID Found -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Jan 2018Placebo and nocebo effects are embodied psycho-neurobiological responses capable of modulating pain and producing changes at different neurobiological, body at... (Review)
Review
Placebo and nocebo effects are embodied psycho-neurobiological responses capable of modulating pain and producing changes at different neurobiological, body at perceptual and cognitive levels. These modifications are triggered by different contextual factors (CFs) presented in the therapeutic encounter between patient and healthcare providers, such as healing rituals and signs. The CFs directly impact on the quality of the therapeutic outcome: a positive context, that is a context characterized by the presence of positive CFs, can reduce pain by producing placebo effects, while a negative context, characterized by the presence of negative CFs, can aggravate pain by creating nocebo effects. Despite the increasing interest about this topic; the detailed study of CFs as triggers of placebo and nocebo effects is still lacked in the management of musculoskeletal pain.Increasing evidence suggest a relevant role of CFs in musculoskeletal pain management. CFs are a complex sets of internal, external or relational elements encompassing: patient's expectation, history, baseline characteristics; clinician's behavior, belief, verbal suggestions and therapeutic touch; positive therapeutic encounter, patient-centered approach and social learning; overt therapy, posology of intervention, modality of treatment administration; marketing features of treatment and health care setting. Different explanatory models such as classical conditioning and expectancy can explain how CFs trigger placebo and nocebo effects. CFs act through specific neural networks and neurotransmitters that were described as mediators of placebo and nocebo effects.Available findings suggest a relevant clinical role and impact of CFs. They should be integrated in the clinical reasoning to increase the number of treatment solutions, boosts their efficacy and improve the quality of the decision-making. From a clinical perspective, the mindful manipulation of CFs represents a useful opportunity to enrich a well-established therapy in therapeutic setting within the ethical border. From a translational perspective, there is a strong need of research studies on CFs close to routine and real-world clinical practice in order to underline the uncertainty of therapy action and help clinicians to implement knowledge in daily practice.
Topics: Clinical Decision-Making; Humans; Musculoskeletal Pain; Nocebo Effect; Pain Management; Physician-Patient Relations; Placebo Effect
PubMed: 29357856
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-018-1943-8 -
PloS One 2017Musculoskeletal pain, the most common cause of disability globally, is most frequently managed in primary care. People with musculoskeletal pain in different body... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Musculoskeletal pain, the most common cause of disability globally, is most frequently managed in primary care. People with musculoskeletal pain in different body regions share similar characteristics, prognosis, and may respond to similar treatments. This overview aims to summarise current best evidence on currently available treatment options for the five most common musculoskeletal pain presentations (back, neck, shoulder, knee and multi-site pain) in primary care.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted. Initial searches identified clinical guidelines, clinical pathways and systematic reviews. Additional searches found recently published trials and those addressing gaps in the evidence base. Data on study populations, interventions, and outcomes of intervention on pain and function were extracted. Quality of systematic reviews was assessed using AMSTAR, and strength of evidence rated using a modified GRADE approach.
RESULTS
Moderate to strong evidence suggests that exercise therapy and psychosocial interventions are effective for relieving pain and improving function for musculoskeletal pain. NSAIDs and opioids reduce pain in the short-term, but the effect size is modest and the potential for adverse effects need careful consideration. Corticosteroid injections were found to be beneficial for short-term pain relief among patients with knee and shoulder pain. However, current evidence remains equivocal on optimal dose, intensity and frequency, or mode of application for most treatment options.
CONCLUSION
This review presents a comprehensive summary and critical assessment of current evidence for the treatment of pain presentations in primary care. The evidence synthesis of interventions for common musculoskeletal pain presentations shows moderate-strong evidence for exercise therapy and psychosocial interventions, with short-term benefits only from pharmacological treatments. Future research into optimal dose and application of the most promising treatments is needed.
Topics: Humans; Musculoskeletal Pain; Primary Health Care
PubMed: 28640822
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178621