Suprathreshold heat pain response predicts activity-related pain, but not rest-related pain, in an exercise-induced injury model

© 2014 Coronado et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Exercise-induced injury models are advantageous for studying pain since the onset of pain is controlled and both pre-injury and post-injury factors can be utilized as explanatory variables or predictors. In these studies, rest-related pain is often considered the primary dependent variable or outcome, as opposed to a measure of activity-related pain. Additionally, few studies include pain sensitivity measures as predictors. In this study, we examined the influence of pre-injury and post-injury factors, including pain sensitivity, for induced rest and activity-related pain following exercise induced muscle injury. The overall goal of this investigation was to determine if there were convergent or divergent predictors of rest and activityrelated pain. One hundred forty-three participants provided demographic, psychological, and pain sensitivity information and underwent a standard fatigue trial of resistance exercise to induce injury of the dominant shoulder. Pain at rest and during active and resisted shoulder motion were measured at 48- and 96-hours post-injury. Separate hierarchical models were generated for assessing the influence of pre-injury and post-injury factors on 48- and 96-hour rest-related and activityrelated pain. Overall, we did not find a universal predictor of pain across all models. However, pre-injury and post-injury suprathreshold heat pain response (SHPR), a pain sensitivity measure, was a consistent predictor of activity-related pain, even after controlling for known psychological factors. These results suggest there is differential prediction of pain. A measure of pain sensitivity such as SHPR appears more influential for activity-related pain, but not rest-related pain, and may reflect different underlying processes involved during pain appraisal

Test-retest reliability of knee kinesthesia in healthy adults

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Sensory information from mechanoreceptors in the skin, muscles, tendons, and joint structures plays an important role in joint stability. A joint injury can lead to disruption of the sensory system, which can be measured by proprioceptive acuity. When evaluating proprioception, assessment tools need to be reliable. The aim of this study was to assess the test-retest reliability of a device designed to measure knee proprioception.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Twenty-four uninjured individuals (14 women and 10 men) were examined with regard to test-retest reliability of knee kinesthesia, measured by the threshold to detection of passive motion (TDPM). Measurements were performed towards extension and flexion from the two starting positions, 20 degrees and 40 degrees knee joint flexion, giving four variables. The mean difference between test and retest together with the 95% confidence interval (test 2 minus test 1), the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC_2,1), and Bland and Altman graphs with limits of agreement, were used as statistical methods for assessing test-retest reliability.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.59 to 0.70 in all variables except one. No difference was found between test and retest in three of the four TDPM variables. TDPM would need to decrease between 10% and 38%, and increase between 17% and 24% in groups of uninjured subjects to be 95% confident of detecting a real change. The limits of agreement were rather wide in all variables. The variables associated with the 20-degree starting position tended to have higher intraclass correlation coefficients and narrower limits of agreement than those associated with 40 degrees.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Three TDPM variables were considered reliable for observing change in groups of subjects without pathology. However, the limits of agreement revealed that small changes in an individual's performance cannot be detected. The higher intraclass correlation coefficients and the narrower limits of agreement in the variables associated with the starting position of 20 degrees knee joint flexion, indicate that these variables are more reliable than those associated with 40 degrees. We, therefore, recommend that the TDPM be measured with a 20-degree starting position.</p

Knee instruments and rating scales designed to measure outcomes

In this article, the knee instruments and rating scales that are designed to measure outcomes are revised. Although the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form can be used as a general knee measure, no instrument is currently universally applicable across the spectrum of knee disorders and patient groups. Clinicians and researchers looking to use a patient-based score for measurement of outcomes must consider the specific patient population in which it has been evaluated. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index is recommended for the evaluation of treatment effect in persons with osteoarthritis (OA). This is a generic health status questionnaire that contains 36 items, is widely used, and easy to complete. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) questionnaire evaluates the functional status and quality of life (QoL) of patients with any type of knee injury who are at increased risk of developing OA; i.e., patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, meniscus injury, or chondral injury. So far, the KOOS questionnaire has been validated for several orthopedic procedures such as total knee arthroplasty, ACL reconstruction, and meniscectomy. The utilization of QoL questionnaires is crucial to the adequate assessment of a number of orthopedic procedures of the knee. The questionnaires are generally well accepted by the patients and open up new perspectives in the analysis of prognostic factors for optimal QoL of patients undergoing knee surgery

Proprioception deficiency in articular cartilage lesions of the knee

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the proprioceptive function of patients with isolated articular cartilage lesions of the knee as compared to normal controls. Methods: The Cartilage group consisted of eight subjects with radiologically and arthroscopically confirmed, isolated, unilateral, articular cartilage lesions of the knee (Outerbridge grade III or IV). They were compared to 50 normal controls. Knee proprioception was assessed by dynamic postural stabilometry using the Biodex Balance SD System. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were used to evaluate all subjects. Results: Proprioception of the injured knee of the Cartilage group was significantly poorer compared to that of the control group (p < 0.001). A significant proprioceptive deficit also was observed when the uninjured knees of the Cartilage group were compared to those in the Control group (p = 0.003). There was no significant proprioceptive difference between the injured and the contra-lateral uninjured knee of the Cartilage group (p = 0.116). A significant correlation was found between the proprioception measurements of the injured and uninjured knee of the Cartilage group (r = 0.76, p = 0.030). A significant difference was observed in all PROMs (p < 0.001) between the Cartilage and Control groups. Conclusions: Patients with isolated articular cartilage lesions of the knee had a significant proprioceptive deficit as compared to normal controls. The deficiency was profound and even affected the proprioceptive function of the contra-lateral uninjured knee. This study has shown that articular cartilage lesions have a major influence on knee proprioception. However, it remains uncertain as to whether a proprioceptive deficit leads to osteoarthritis or is a consequence of it