Illness perceptions as an independent predictor of chronic low back pain and pain-related disability:a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether illness perceptions, measured with the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire, are an independent predictor of chronic low back pain and pain-related disability at 12 weeks. DESIGN: A prospective, observational cohort study. SETTING: 26 outpatient primary care physiotherapy practices throughout the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Acute nonspecific low back pain patients between the age of 18 and 60 years, with or without radiating pain, and a pain-free episode of at least three months before onset. INTERVENTIONS: Standard physiotherapy care according to Dutch clinical practice guidelines. OUTCOME MEASURE: Chronic low back pain defined as pain ≥3/10 on the Numeric Pain Rating Scale and as pain-related disability ≥19/70 on the Pain Disability Index measured after 12 weeks. RESULTS: Two hundred and four people with acute nonspecific low back pain completed both assessments. In the multivariable analyses, adjusted for pain intensity, disability, duration, radiating pain, depressed mood, associations of illness perceptions were OR 1.04 (95% CI: 1.01 to 1.08) for pain and 1.04 (95% CI: 0.99 to 1.09) for pain-related disability. CONCLUSIONS: Illness perceptions independently predicted chronic low back pain but not pain-related disability at 12 weeks. The added predictive value of illness perceptions was relatively low

Cervical musculoskeletal dysfunction in headache: How should it be defined?

Neck pain commonly accompanies migraine and tension-type headache, but the literature is divided on whether this neck pain is a headache symptom or is associated with cervical musculoskeletal dysfunction. Clarification is essential for hypotheses on the pathogenesis of these headaches and their variants and for decisions on suitability of local neck treatments, both from research and clinical practice perspectives. Reasons for disparate findings could relate to participant selection in headache studies and/or the bases on which decisions on the presence of cervical musculoskeletal dysfunction are reached. Propositions towards gaining a clearer picture of migraine and tension-type headache related neck pain include first, stricter inclusion criteria and reporting of headache characteristics of study participants. Second, reliance on pain sensitivity or the presence of neck tenderness/trigger points as measures be discarded, as they are not uniquely tied to a musculoskeletal disorder. Instead, place reliance on tests of musculoskeletal (dys)function. Third, the values and interpretation of single measures or tests of impairment/dysfunctions can be non-informative and do not reflect the presentation of cervical musculoskeletal disorders. Rather, a typical presentation includes at a fundamental level, interrelated changes in cervical movement, segmental joint and muscle function. We advocate that these measures be adopted as the core set of related measures to define cervical musculoskeletal dysfunction in headache. This does not deter inclusion of other measures of interest or qualification

Exploring functional limitations in people with traumatic and nontraumatic neck pain

The aims of this thesis were to describe the clinical characteristics of two types of neck pain presenting in primary physiotherapy care, namely nontraumatic neck pain and traumatic neck pain. Therefore, two new measurement instruments were developed and evaluated. Subsequently, the clinical characteristics, in terms of severity of pain, impairments in physical or mental functions and disability, and the complexity of these types of neck pain are presented and discussed. The research concluded that clinical characteristics were differently associated with disability in both patient groups. Traumatic NP is a more complex condition as more characteristics interact, and the contribution of individual characteristics to disability is less straightforward. The findings of these studies contribute to a more thorough understanding of differences between subgroups of neck pain, the impact of neck pain on the daily functioning of people, and the use of accurate diagnostic instruments in primary care physiotherapy

Intraexaminer reliability of hand-held dynamometry in the upper extremity: a systematic review

To summarize and appraise the literature on the intraexaminer reliability of hand-held dynamometry (HHD) in the upper extremity. MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE were searched for relevant studies published up to December 2011. In addition, experts were contacted, and journals and reference lists were hand searched. To be included in the review, articles needed to (1) use a repeated-measures, within-examiner(s) design; (2) include symptomatic or asymptomatic individuals, or both; (3) use HHD to measure muscle strength in any of the joints of the shoulder, elbow, or wrist with the "make" or the "break" technique; (4) report measurements in kilogram, pound, or torque; (5) use a device that is placed between the examiner's hand and the subject's body; and (6) present estimates of intraexaminer reliability. Quality assessment and data extraction were performed by 2 reviewers independently. Fifty-four studies were included, of which 26 (48%) demonstrated acceptable intraexaminer reliability. Seven high-quality studies showed acceptable reliability for flexion and extension of the elbow in healthy subjects. Conflicting results were found for shoulder external rotation and abduction. Reliability for all other movements was unacceptable. Higher estimates were reached for within-sessions reliability and if means of trials were used. Intraexaminer reliability of HHD in upper extremity muscle strength was acceptable only for elbow measurements in healthy subjects. We provide specific recommendations for future research. Physical therapists should not rely on HHD measurements for evaluation of treatment effects in patients with upper extremity disorder

To what degree does active cervical range of motion differ between patients with neck pain, patients with whiplash, and those without neck pain?: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients with neck pain have a significantly decreased aCROM compared with persons without neck pain, and patients with WADs have less aCROM than those with nontraumatic neck pain

Clinical characteristics differ between patients with non-traumatic neck pain, patients with whiplash-associated disorders, and pain-free individuals

BackgroundEvidence is lacking to what extent patients with Whiplash-Associated Disorders (WAD), those with non-traumatic neck pain (NTNP), and pain-free individuals differ regarding type and severity of impairments, disability, and psychological factors.Objective To compare clinical characteristics between patients with WAD, with NTNP, and pain-free individuals in primary care physiotherapy. Additionally, differences between patient groups for both acute and chronic symptoms were assessed.MethodA cross-sectional study was conducted including 168 patients with WAD, 336 matched patients with NTNP, and 336 pain-free individuals. Differences and prevalence rates were calculated for pain intensity, pain distribution, cervical range of motion, neck flexor muscle endurance, self-reported disability, and psychological factors.Results Patients with WAD had higher pain intensity (median 6/10 vs. 5/10 p83%) scored in the normal range. No significant differences between the patient groups were observed (p>.16). Both patient groups scored significantly worse than pain-free individuals on all characteristics. Patients with WAD and NTNP experienced different types of activity limitations and participation restrictions.ConclusionWAD is a more severe condition than NTNP and should be considered a separate subgroup. A different approach in clinical practice and research is required for WAD and NTNP

To What Degree Does Active Cervical Range of Motion Differ Between Patients With Neck Pain, Patients With Whiplash, and Those Without Neck Pain?: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES: To quantify differences in active cervical range of motion (aCROM) between patients with neck pain and those without neck pain, in patients with whiplash-associated disorders (WADs) and nontraumatic neck pain, and in patients with acute complaints versus those with chronic complaints. DATA SOURCES: Seven bibliographic databases were searched from inception to April 2015. In addition, a manual search was performed. STUDY SELECTION: Full articles on a numerical comparison of aCROM in patients with neck pain and asymptomatic control persons of similar ages were included. Two reviewers independently selected studies and assessed risk of bias. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers extracted the data. Pooled mean differences of aCROM were calculated using a random-effects model. DATA SYNTHESIS: The search yielded 6261 hits; 27 articles (2366 participants, 13 low risk of bias) met the inclusion criteria. The neck pain group showed less aCROM in all movement directions compared with persons without neck pain. Mean differences ranged from -7.04° (95% CI, -9.70° to -4.38°) for right lateral bending (11 studies) to -89.59° (95% CI, -131.67° to -47.51°) for total aCROM (4 studies). Patients with WADs had less aCROM than patients with nontraumatic neck pain. No conclusive differences in aCROM were found between patients with acute and patients with chronic complaints. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with neck pain have a significantly decreased aCROM compared with persons without neck pain, and patients with WADs have less aCROM than those with nontraumatic neck pain

External validation and updating of prognostic models for predicting recovery of disability in people with (sub)acute neck pain was successful: broad external validation in a new prospective cohort

QUESTION: Can existing post-treatment prognostic models for predicting neck pain recovery (primarily in terms of disability and secondarily in terms of pain intensity and perceived improvement) be externally validated and updated at the end of the treatment period and at 6 and 12 weeks of follow-up in a new Dutch cohort of people with neck pain treated with guideline-based usual care physiotherapy? DESIGN: External validation and model updating in a new prospective cohort of three previously developed prognostic models. PARTICIPANTS: People with (sub)acute neck pain and registered for primary care physiotherapy treatment. OUTCOME MEASURES: Recovery of disability, pain intensity, and perceived recovery at 6 and 12 weeks and at the end of the treatment period. RESULTS: Discriminative performance (c-statistic) of the disability model at 6 weeks was 0.73 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.77) and reasonably well calibrated after intercept recalibration. The disability model at 12 weeks and at the end of the treatment period showed discriminative c-statistic performance values of 0.69 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.73) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.72), respectively, and was well calibrated. Pain models and perceived recovery models did not reach acceptable performance. Cervical mobility added value to the disability models and pain catastrophising to the disability and pain models at 6 weeks. DISCUSSION: Broad external validation of the disability model was successful in people with (sub)acute neck pain and clinicians may use this model in clinical practice with reasonable accuracy. Further research is required to assess the disability model's clinical impact and generalisability, and to identify additional valuable model predictors. REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/a6r3k/