Lived experiences of informal caregivers of people with chronic musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review and meta-ethnography

BACKGROUND: People with chronic pain often seek support from friends and family for everyday tasks. These individuals are termed informal caregivers. There remains uncertainty regarding the lived experiences of these people who care for individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain. The aim of this paper is to synthase the evidence on the lived experiences of informal caregivers providing care to people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: A systematic literature review was undertaken of published and unpublished literature databases including: EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, the WHO International Clinical Trial Registry and ClinicalTrials.gov registry (to September 2019). Qualitative studies exploring the lived experiences of informal caregivers of people with chronic musculoskeletal pain were included. Data were synthesised using a meta-ethnography approach. Evidence was evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) qualitative appraisal tool. RESULTS: From 534 citations, 10 studies were eligible (360 participants: 171 informal caregivers of 189 care recipients). The evidence was moderate quality. Seven themes arose: the relationship of caregivers to healthcare professionals, role reversal with care recipients; acting the confidant to the care recipient; a constant burden in caregiving; legitimising care recipient’s condition; knowledge and skills to provide caregiving; and the perception of other family members and wider-society to the caregiver/care recipient dyad. CONCLUSIONS: The lived experiences of caregivers of people with chronic musculoskeletal pain is complex and dynamic. There is an inter-connected relationship between caregivers, care recipients and healthcare professionals. Exploring how these experiences can be modified to improve a caregiving dyad’s lived experience is now warranted

Systematic review of the behavioural assessment of pain in cats

Objectives The objectives were to review systematically the range of assessment tools used in cats to detect the behavioural expression of pain and the evidence of their quality; and to examine behavioural metrics (considering both the sensory and affective domains) used to assess pain. Methods A search of PubMed and ScienceDirect, alongside articles known to the authors, from 2000 onwards, for papers in English was performed. This was followed by a manual search of the references within the primary data sources. Only peer-reviewed publications that provided information on the assessment tool used to evaluate the behavioural expression of pain in cats, in conscious animals (not anaesthetised cats), were included. Results No previous systematic reviews were identified. One hundred papers were included in the final assessment. Studies were primarily related to the assessment of pain in relation to surgical procedures, and no clear distinction was made concerning the onset of acute and chronic pain. Ten broad types of instrument to assess pain were identified, and generally the quality of evidence to support the use of the various instruments was poor. Only one specific instrument (UNESP-Botucatu scale) had published evidence of validity, reliability and sensitivity at the level of a randomised control trial, but with a positive rather than placebo control, and limited to its use in the ovariohysterectomy situation. The metrics used within the tools appeared to focus primarily on the sensory aspect of pain, with no study clearly discriminating between the sensory and affective components of pain. Conclusions and relevance Further studies are required to provide a higher quality of evidence for methods used to assess pain in cats. Furthermore, a consistent definition for acute and chronic pain is needed. Tools need to be validated that can detect pain in a range of conditions and by different evaluators (veterinary surgeons and owners), which consider both the sensory and emotional aspects of pain

Chronic non-specific low back pain - sub-groups or a single mechanism?

Copyright 2008 Wand and O'Connell; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Background: Low back pain is a substantial health problem and has subsequently attracted a considerable amount of research. Clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of a variety of interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain indicate limited effectiveness for most commonly applied interventions and approaches. Discussion: Many clinicians challenge the results of clinical trials as they feel that this lack of effectiveness is at odds with their clinical experience of managing patients with back pain. A common explanation for this discrepancy is the perceived heterogeneity of patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. It is felt that the effects of treatment may be diluted by the application of a single intervention to a complex, heterogeneous group with diverse treatment needs. This argument presupposes that current treatment is effective when applied to the correct patient. An alternative perspective is that the clinical trials are correct and current treatments have limited efficacy. Preoccupation with sub-grouping may stifle engagement with this view and it is important that the sub-grouping paradigm is closely examined. This paper argues that there are numerous problems with the sub-grouping approach and that it may not be an important reason for the disappointing results of clinical trials. We propose instead that current treatment may be ineffective because it has been misdirected. Recent evidence that demonstrates changes within the brain in chronic low back pain sufferers raises the possibility that persistent back pain may be a problem of cortical reorganisation and degeneration. This perspective offers interesting insights into the chronic low back pain experience and suggests alternative models of intervention. Summary: The disappointing results of clinical research are commonly explained by the failure of researchers to adequately attend to sub-grouping of the chronic non-specific low back pain population. Alternatively, current approaches may be ineffective and clinicians and researchers may need to radically rethink the nature of the problem and how it should best be managed

Bone metastases mimicking Complex Regional Pain Syndrome I: a case report

INTRODUCTION: Since there are no valid tools available for the diagnosis of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome I, exclusion of other underlying conditions plays an important role in the diagnostic process. CASE PRESENTATION: A 77-year-old Caucasian man was referred with painful swelling and dysfunction of the right knee. Based on the history and clinical presentation, the referring physician assumed a case of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome I. However, after careful evaluation of the differential diagnosis, a metastatic urothelial carcinoma was diagnosed. CONCLUSION: Even if the clinical picture resembles Complex Regional Pain Syndrome I, the differential diagnosis must be evaluated carefully

Translating the Dutch walking stairs, walking ability and rising and sitting questionnaires into German and assessing their concurrent validity with VAS measures of pain and activities in daily living

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The Dutch Walking Stairs, Walking Ability and Rising and Sitting Questionnaires are three validated instruments to measure physical activity and limitations in daily living in patients with lower extremity disorders living at home of which no German equivalents are available. Our scope was to translate the Walking Stairs, Walking Ability and Rising and Sitting Questionnaires into German and to verify its concurrent validity in the two domains pain and activities in daily living by comparing them with the corresponding measures on the Visual Analogue Scale.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We translated the Walking Stairs, Walking Ability and Rising and Sitting Questionnaires according to published guidelines. Demographic data and validity were assessed in 52 consecutive patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome 1 of the lower extremity. Information on age, duration of symptoms, type of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome 1 and type of initiating event were obtained. We assessed the concurrent validity in the two domains pain and activities in daily living by comparing them with the corresponding measures on the Visual Analogue Scale.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found that variability in the German Walking Stairs, Walking Ability and Rising and Sitting Questionnaires was largely explained by measures of pain and activities in daily living on the Visual Analogue Scale.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our study shows that the domains pain and activities in daily living are properly represented in the German versions of the Walking Stairs, Walking Ability and Raising and Sitting Questionnaires. We would like to propagate their use in clinical practice and research alike.</p