Attention toward interpersonal stimuli in individuals with and without chronic daily headache

Attentional capture of threat is a normal and adaptive process, although facilitated processing of mildly threatening stimuli irrelevant to current goals may result in attentional interference and compromised performance. In the field of chronic pain, attentional biases towards pain-related information have been commonly found. Pain is inexorably connected with emotion however, and a transdiagnostic approach elucidating similar mechanisms underlying pain and mood disorders has been advocated. One such mechanism may be repetitive thinking on negative themes, including worry and rumination. Attentional biases for threatening (e.g., angry faces) and negative (e.g., sad faces) information have been observed in anxious and depressed populations, although to date it has not been fully established whether biases for such information are heightened in individuals with chronic pain relative to healthy individuals. In this study, attentional biases for angry, sad and also happy facial expressions, at 500 and 1250 ms presentation times, were assessed via visual-probe task in chronic daily headache (n = 20) and healthy control (n = 26) groups. Results showed participants to demonstrate significant bias towards angry and sad expressions at 500 and 1250 ms, and happy expressions at 1250 ms. No significant differences in attentional bias were found between chronic daily headache and healthy control groups. These results suggest that attentional biases towards interpersonal threat are not specifically heightened in individuals with chronic daily headache. While similar mechanisms such as rumination may underlie biases in different disorders, this does not translate to heightened biases for the same specific content

Tracking daily fatigue fluctuations in multiple sclerosis : ecological momentary assessment provides unique insights

The preparation of this manuscript was supported by a UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) PhD studentship (ES/1026266/1) awarded to DP. The study was funded by the Psychology Unit at the University of Southampton. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. The authors thank all participants of this study. Open access via Springer Compact Agreement.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Internet-delivered attentional bias modification training (iABMT) for the management of chronic musculoskeletal pain: A protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Introduction Chronic musculoskeletal pain is a complex medical condition that can significantly impact quality of life. Patients with chronic pain demonstrate attentional biases towards pain-related information. The therapeutic benefits of modifying attentional biases by implicitly training attention away from pain-related information towards neutral information have been supported in a small number of published studies. Limited research however has explored the efficacy of modifying pain-related biases via the internet. This protocol describes a randomised, double-blind, internet-delivered attentional bias modification intervention, aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention on reducing pain interference. Secondary outcomes are pain intensity, state and trait anxiety, depression, pain-related fear, and sleep impairment. This study will also explore the effects of training intensity on these outcomes, along with participants' perceptions about the therapy. Methods and analysis The study is a double-blind, randomised controlled trial with four arms exploring the efficacy of online attentional bias modification training versus placebo training theorised to offer no specific therapeutic benefit. Participants with chronic musculoskeletal pain will be randomised to one of four groups: (1) 10-session attentional modification group; (2) 10-session placebo training group; (3) 18-session attentional modification group; or (4) 18-session placebo training group. In the attentional modification groups, the probe-classification version of the visual-probe task will be used to implicitly train attention away from threatening information towards neutral information. Following the intervention, participants will complete a short interview exploring their perceptions about the online training. In addition, a subgroup analysis for participants aged 16-24 and 25-60 will be undertaken. Ethics and dissemination This study has been approved by the University of Southampton Research Ethics Committee. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, academic conferences, and in lay reports for pain charities and patient support groups. Trial registration number NCT02232100; Pre-results

Barriers and facilitators to asthma self-management in adolescents:a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies

BACKGROUND: Many adolescents have poor asthma control and impaired quality of life despite the availability of modern pharmacotherapy. Research suggests that poor adherence to treatment and limited engagement in self-management could be contributing factors. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of the barriers and facilitators to self-management of asthma reported by adolescents using a narrative synthesis approach to integrate the findings. DESIGN: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched for all types of study design. Full papers were retrieved for study abstracts that included data from participants aged 12-18 years referring to barriers or facilitators of asthma self-management behaviors. RESULTS: Sixteen studies (5 quantitative and 11 qualitative) underwent data extraction, quality appraisal, and thematic analysis. Six key themes were generated that encompassed barriers and/or facilitators to self-management of asthma in adolescents: Knowledge, Lifestyle, Beliefs and Attitudes, Relationships, Intrapersonal Characteristics, and Communication. CONCLUSIONS: There is a pressing need to prepare adolescents for self-management, using age-appropriate strategies that draw on the evidence we have synthesized. Current clinical practice should focus on ensuring adolescents have the correct knowledge, beliefs, and positive attitude to self-manage their illness. This needs to be delivered in a supportive environment that facilitates two-way communication, fosters adolescents' self-efficacy to manage their disease, and considers the wider social influences that impinge on self-management. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2016; 9999:XX-XX. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc

Definition and assessment of paediatric breakthrough pain: A qualitative interview study

Infants, children and young people with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions often experience acute, transient pain episodes known as breakthrough pain. There is currently no established way to assess breakthrough pain in paediatric palliative care. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it is frequently underdiagnosed and undertreated, resulting in reduced quality of life. The development of a standardised paediatric breakthrough pain assessment, based on healthcare professionals’ insights, could improve patient outcomes. This study aimed to explore how healthcare professionals define and assess breakthrough pain in paediatric palliative care and their attitudes towards a validated paediatric breakthrough pain assessment. This was a descriptive qualitative interview study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 healthcare professionals working in paediatric palliative care across the UK. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted on the data. Five themes were generated: ‘the elusive nature of breakthrough pain,’ ‘breakthrough pain assessment,’ ‘positive attitudes towards’, ‘reservations towards’ and ‘features to include in’ a paediatric breakthrough pain assessment. The definition and assessment of breakthrough pain is inconsistent in paediatric palliative care. There is a clear need for a validated assessment questionnaire to improve assessment, diagnosis and management of breakthrough pain followed by increased healthcare professional education on the concept

A rapid systematic review of breakthrough pain definitions and descriptions

Background Breakthrough pain is common in life-limiting conditions and at end-of-life. Despite over 30 years of study, there is little consensus regarding the definition and characteristics of breakthrough pain. Objective This study aims to update and expand a 2010 systematic review by Haugen and colleagues to identify (1) all definitions of breakthrough pain and (2) all descriptions and classifications of breakthrough pain reported by patients, caregivers, clinicians, and experts. Design This rapid systematic review followed the Cochrane Rapid Review Methods Group guidelines. A protocol is published on PROSPERO (CRD42019155583). Data sources CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Web of Science were searched for breakthrough pain terms from the inception dates of each database to 26th August 2022. Results We identified 65 studies that included data on breakthrough pain definitions, descriptions, or classifications from patients ( n = 30), clinicians ( n = 6), and experts ( n = 29), but none with data from caregivers. Most experts proposed that breakthrough pain was a sudden, severe, brief pain occurring in patients with adequately controlled mild-moderate background pain. However, definitions varied and there was no consensus. Pain characteristics were broadly similar across studies though temporal factors varied widely. Experts classified breakthrough pain into nociceptive, neuropathic, visceral, somatic, or mixed types. Patients with breakthrough pain commonly experienced depression, anxiety, and interference with daily life. Conclusions Despite ongoing efforts, there is still no consensus on the definition of breakthrough pain. A compromise is needed on breakthrough pain nomenclature to collect reliable incidence and prevalence data and to inform further refinement of the construct

A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify measures of breakthrough pain and evaluate their psychometric properties.

INTRODUCTION: Breakthrough pain is common in children and adults with cancer and other conditions, including those approaching end-of-life, although it is often poorly managed, possibly partly due to a lack of validated assessment tools. This review aims to (1) identify all available instruments measuring breakthrough pain in infants, children, adolescents or adults and (2) critically appraise, compare and summarise the quality of the psychometric properties of the identified instruments using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two searches will be carried out between October 2019 and January 2020, one for each aim of the review. The Cochrane Library, International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Google Scholar, the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Database, Evidence Search and OpenGrey databases will be searched from database inception until the date the search is conducted. Reference lists of eligible articles will be screened and authors in the field contacted. For search 1, articles will be screened by two reviewers by abstract, and full-text where necessary, to identify if a breakthrough pain assessment was used. Search 2 will then be conducted to identify studies evaluating measurement properties of these assessments. Two reviewers will screen articles from search 2 by title and abstract. All potentially relevant studies will be screened by full text by both reviewers. For search 2, data will be extracted in parallel with the quality assessment process, as recommended by COSMIN. Two reviewers will assess methodological quality using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist and the COSMIN updated criteria for good measurement properties. Findings will be summarised and, if possible, data will be pooled using meta-analysis. The quality of the evidence will be graded and summarised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Results of this review will be submitted for publication in a peer review journal and presented at conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019155583