The Clinical Concept of Fibromyalgia as a Changing Paradigm in the Past 20 Years

Fibromyalgia (FMS) is a valid clinical condition that affects 2%–4% of the population with a pivot symptom of widespread body pain. The cause and cure of FMS are as yet unknown. The concept of FMS has evolved over the past two decades to incorporate symptoms beyond pain as contributing to the global spectrum of suffering. FMS is now recognized to be grounded in the neurological domain with evidence of dysregulation of pain processing. Appreciation of the neurophysiologic mechanisms operative in FMS has contributed to rational treatment recommendations, although a “gold standard treatment” does not currently exist. Ideal treatments for FMS patients should be individualized with emphasis on active patient participation, good health practices, and multimodal intervention, incorporating nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatments. Predictors of outcome, which is favourable in over 50% of patients, are unknown, but those with better outcome do more physical activity and use fewer medications

The 2010 American college of rheumatology fibromyalgia survey diagnostic criteria and symptom severity scale is a valid and reliable tool in a French speaking fibromyalgia cohort

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia (FM) is a pain condition with associated symptoms contributing to distress. The Fibromyalgia Survey Diagnostic Criteria and Severity Scale (FSDC) is a patient-administered questionnaire assessing diagnosis and symptom severity. Locations of body pain measured by the Widespread Pain Index (WPI), and the Symptom Severity scale (SS) measuring fatigue, unrefreshing sleep, cognitive and somatic complaints provide a score (0–31), measuring a composite of polysymptomatic distress. The reliability and validity of the translated French version of the FSDC was evaluated. METHODS: The French FSDC was administered twice to 73 FM patients, and was correlated with measures of symptom status including: Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for global severity and pain. Test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity were evaluated. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability was between .600 and .888 for the 25 single items of the FSDC, and .912 for the total FSDC, with all correlations significant (p < 0.0001). There was good internal consistency measured by Cronbach’s alpha (.846 for FSDC assessment 1, and .867 for FSDC assessment 2). Construct validity showed significant correlations between the FSDC and FIQ 0.670, HAQ 0.413, MPQ 0.562, global VAS 0.591, and pain VAS 0.663 (all p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The French FSDC is a valid instrument in French FM patients with reliability and construct validity. It is easily completed, simple to score, and has the potential to become the standard for measurement of polysymptomatic distress in FM

Reply

No abstract.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78300/1/20291_ftp.pd

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia

Acknowledgements Support was provided by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addictions Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks public-private partnership with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

International, multidisciplinary Delphi consensus recommendations on non-pharmacological interventions for fibromyalgia

Funding Information: The Republic of Turkey Ministry of National Education for the PhD studentship. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s)Objectives: To develop evidence-based expert recommendations for non-pharmacological treatments for pain, fatigue, sleep problems, and depression in fibromyalgia. Methods: An international, multidisciplinary Delphi exercise was conducted. Authors of EULAR and the Canadian Fibromyalgia Guidelines Group, members of the American Pain Society and clinicians with expertise in fibromyalgia were invited. Participants were asked to select non-pharmacological interventions that could be offered for specific fibromyalgia symptoms and to classify them as either core or adjunctive treatments. An evidence summary was provided to aid the decision making. Items receiving >70% votes were accepted, those receiving <30% votes were rejected and those obtaining 30-70% votes were recirculated for up to two additional rounds. Results: Seventeen experts participated (Europe (n = 10), North America (n = 6), and Israel (n = 1)) in the Delphi exercise and completed all three rounds. Aerobic exercise, education, sleep hygiene and cognitive behavioural therapy were recommended as core treatments for all symptoms. Mind-body exercises were recommended as core interventions for pain, fatigue and sleep problems. Mindfulness was voted core treatment for depression, and adjunctive treatment for other symptoms. Other interventions, namely music, relaxation, hot bath, and local heat were voted as adjunctive treatments, varying between symptoms. Conclusions: This study provided evidence-based expert consensus recommendations on non-pharmacological treatments for fibromyalgia that may be used to individualise treatments in clinical practice targeting the diverse symptoms associated with fibromyalgia.publishersversionepub_ahead_of_prin

Hypothetical model ignores many important pathophysiologic mechanisms in fibromyalgia

okpublishersversionepub_ahead_of_prin

rephrasing an established mechanistic model?’

okpublishersversionepub_ahead_of_prin

Review of pharmacological therapies in fibromyalgia syndrome

This review addresses the current status of drug therapy for the management of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) and is based on interdisciplinary FMS management guidelines, meta-analyses of drug trial data, and observational studies. In the absence of a single gold-standard medication, patients are treated with a variety of drugs from different categories, often with limited evidence. Drug therapy is not mandatory for the management of FMS. Pregabalin, duloxetine, milnacipran, and amitriptyline are the current first-line prescribed agents but have had a mostly modest effect. With only a minority of patients expected to experience substantial benefit, most will discontinue therapy because of either a lack of efficacy or tolerability problems. Many drug treatments have undergone limited study and have had negative results. It is unlikely that these failed pilot trials will undergo future study. However, medications, though imperfect, will continue to be a component of treatment strategy for these patients. Both the potential for medication therapy to relieve symptoms and the potential to cause harm should be carefully considered in their administration

Attitudes of Israeli Rheumatologists to the Use of Medical Cannabis as Therapy for Rheumatic Disorders

Background While medical cannabis has been used for thousands of years in the treatment of pain and other symptoms, evidence-based use is limited and practitioners face multiple areas of uncertainty regarding the rational use of these compounds. Nonetheless, an increasing public interest and advocacy in favor of medical cannabis is causing the issue to be encountered ever more frequently by physicians in different fields of medicine and particularly in rheumatology. In view of this situation, we have surveyed the attitudes of Israeli rheumatologists to the use of medical cannabis. Objectives As rheumatologists are specialized in caring for patients presenting with musculoskeletal complaints, the confidence of rheumatologists’ knowledge of cannabinoids was surveyed. Methods All members of the Israeli Society of Rheumatology were surveyed by e-mail for their confidence and knowledge of cannabinoids and their perceived competence to prescribe herbal cannabis. Results A total of 23 out of 119 (19.3%) Israeli rheumatologists approached returned the questionnaire. Three-quarters of responders were not confident about their knowledge of cannabinoid molecules or ability to write a prescription for herbal cannabis, and 78% were not confident to write a prescription for herbal cannabis; 74% of responders held the opinion that there was some role for cannabinoids in the management of rheumatic disease. Conclusion Israeli rheumatologists lack confidence in their knowledge of cannabinoids in general, yet are open to the possibility of introducing this treatment. Additional data and guidance are necessary in order to allow rational utilization of cannabinoids for management of rheumatic pain