26 research outputs found

    Lifestyle factors and psychological factors are associated with central pain processing in service members with persistent low-back pain:A cross-sectional exploratory study

    Get PDF
    Persistent low-back pain (LBP) is highly prevalent in the military. Altered central pain processing is one of the mechanisms found to underlie persistent LBP. Our aim was to explore which factors are associated with altered pain processing in Dutch service members with persistent LBP. This knowledge may guide clinicians in what factors to address in the treatment of dysfunctional pain processing in service members with persistent LBP. Twenty-one service members with persistent LBP (mean age 34.0 years, 18 males) were included in this cross-sectional exploratory study. Participants completed questionnaires regarding lifestyle and psychological factors. Altered central pain processing was measured by temporal summation of pain to examine the function of the pain facilitatory system and by conditioned pain modulation to examine the pain inhibitory function. Univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses were performed. A higher local temporal summation of pain was associated with a longer sitting time, a higher level of physical activity and a higher level of pain catastrophizing. A higher local conditioned pain modulation was associated with a higher level of pain catastrophizing, anxiety and depression symptoms, and with a lower sleep quality. A higher remote conditioned pain modulation effect was associated with a higher level of physical activity, a higher body mass index and a shorter sitting time. This study succeeded in identifying lifestyle and psychological factors associated with altered pain processing in service members with persistent LBP. Prospective studies are needed to examine causality in these relationships.</p

    Interexaminer Agreement and Reliability of an Internationally Endorsed Screening Framework for Cervical Vascular Risks Following Manual Therapy and Exercise:The Go4Safe Project

    Get PDF
    Objective: Clinicians are recommended to use the clinical reasoning framework developed by the International Federation of Orthopaedic Manipulative Physical Therapists (IFOMPT) to provide guidance regarding assessment of the cervical spine and potential for cervical artery dysfunction prior to manual therapy and exercise. However, the interexaminer agreement and reliability of this framework is unknown. This study aimed to estimate the interexaminer agreement and reliability of the IFOMPT framework among physical therapists in primary care. Methods: Ninety-six patients who consulted a physical therapist for neck pain or headache were included in the study. Each patient was tested independently by 2 physical therapists, from a group of 17 physical therapists (10 pairs) across The Netherlands. Patients and examiners were blinded to the test results. The overall interexaminer agreement, specific agreement per risk category (high-, intermediate-, and low-risk), and interexaminer reliability (weighted κ) were calculated. Results: Overall agreement was 71% (specific agreement in high-risk category = 63%; specific agreement in intermediate-risk category = 38%; specific agreement in low-risk category = 84%). Overall reliability was moderate (weighted κ = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.21-0.57) and varied considerably between pairs of physical therapists (κ = 0.14-1.00). Conclusion: The IFOMPT framework showed an insufficient interexaminer agreement and fair interexaminer reliability among physical therapists when screening the increased risks for vascular complications following manual therapy and exercise prior to treatment. Impact: The IFOMPT framework contributes to the safety of manual therapy and exercise. It is widely adopted in clinical practice and educational programs, but the measurement properties are unknown. This project describes the agreement and reliability of the IFOMPT framework

    Translating the new International IFOMPT Cervical Framework into a framework flowchart for clinical practice and education

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: In 2020, a revised version of the International IFOMPT Cervical Framework was published. This framework provides both physical therapists and educators the necessary information to guide the assessment of the cervical spine region for potential vascular pathologies of the neck in advance of planned Orthopaedic Manual Therapy (OMT) interventions. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to develop a framework flowchart which is useful in clinical practice and education to assist physical therapists to improve the safety of OMT, and apply this in a case report. METHODS: The framework was developed in co-creation with manual therapy experts, researchers, educators in manual therapy, patients, medical specialists and the Manual Therapy Association in The Netherlands and Belgium. Manual therapists and patients tested the framework for intelligibility and usefulness. RESULTS: A framework flowchart is developed and presented, that is easy to use in both clinical practice and education. It is a visual representation of the sequence of steps and decisions needed during the process. A case description of a patient with neck pain and headache is added to illustrate the clinical usefulness of the framework flowchart. CONCLUSION: The framework flowchart helps physical therapists in their clinical reasoning to provide safe OMT interventions

    Lifestyle factors and psychological factors are associated with central pain processing in service members with persistent low-back pain:A cross-sectional exploratory study

    Get PDF
    Persistent low-back pain (LBP) is highly prevalent in the military. Altered central pain processing is one of the mechanisms found to underlie persistent LBP. Our aim was to explore which factors are associated with altered pain processing in Dutch service members with persistent LBP. This knowledge may guide clinicians in what factors to address in the treatment of dysfunctional pain processing in service members with persistent LBP. Twenty-one service members with persistent LBP (mean age 34.0 years, 18 males) were included in this cross-sectional exploratory study. Participants completed questionnaires regarding lifestyle and psychological factors. Altered central pain processing was measured by temporal summation of pain to examine the function of the pain facilitatory system and by conditioned pain modulation to examine the pain inhibitory function. Univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses were performed. A higher local temporal summation of pain was associated with a longer sitting time, a higher level of physical activity and a higher level of pain catastrophizing. A higher local conditioned pain modulation was associated with a higher level of pain catastrophizing, anxiety and depression symptoms, and with a lower sleep quality. A higher remote conditioned pain modulation effect was associated with a higher level of physical activity, a higher body mass index and a shorter sitting time. This study succeeded in identifying lifestyle and psychological factors associated with altered pain processing in service members with persistent LBP. Prospective studies are needed to examine causality in these relationships.</p

    Translating the new International IFOMPT Cervical Framework into a framework flowchart for clinical practice and education

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: In 2020, a revised version of the International IFOMPT Cervical Framework was published. This framework provides both physical therapists and educators the necessary information to guide the assessment of the cervical spine region for potential vascular pathologies of the neck in advance of planned Orthopaedic Manual Therapy (OMT) interventions. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to develop a framework flowchart which is useful in clinical practice and education to assist physical therapists to improve the safety of OMT, and apply this in a case report. METHODS: The framework was developed in co-creation with manual therapy experts, researchers, educators in manual therapy, patients, medical specialists and the Manual Therapy Association in The Netherlands and Belgium. Manual therapists and patients tested the framework for intelligibility and usefulness. RESULTS: A framework flowchart is developed and presented, that is easy to use in both clinical practice and education. It is a visual representation of the sequence of steps and decisions needed during the process. A case description of a patient with neck pain and headache is added to illustrate the clinical usefulness of the framework flowchart. CONCLUSION: The framework flowchart helps physical therapists in their clinical reasoning to provide safe OMT interventions

    How do people in China think about causes of their back pain? A predominantly qualitative cross-sectional survey

    No full text
    Background: Low back pain (LBP) is the second highest cause of health burden in China. Delayed recovery, poor clinical outcomes and persistence of LBP are associated with negative pain beliefs about LBP. Chinese philosophies are nested into the daily life of people in China, which is likely to influence pain beliefs. However, there is lack of knowledge about people's discourses regarding their LBP in China. The primary aim of this study was to explore the discourses underlying the beliefs of people in China about what causes their persistent or recurrent LBP. The secondary aim was to investigate the sources of these pain beliefs. Methods: People (n = 152) from South Central, East and North Mainland China with LBP completed an online survey about what they believed caused their persistent or recurrent LBP and where these understandings came from. Potential causes of persistent or recurrent LBP were explored qualitatively using discourse analysis. The sources of these discourses were assessed by descriptive statistics with conventional content analysis. Results: Five discourses were identified to underpin participants' beliefs about what caused their persistent or recurrent LBP, namely: (1) biomedical problems (66.4%), (2) unbalanced lifestyle (48.7%), (3) menstruation and 'kidney' status (9.2%), (4) the 'Five Elements' imbalance (7.9%), and (5) energy status (5.9%). Most participants responded that their pain beliefs were based on information derived from healthcare professionals (59.2%), followed by the internet (24.3%) and family (23.0%). Conclusions: People from moderately and well-developed parts of Mainland China think predominantly in line with a Western biomedical viewpoint about their LBP. Traditional Chinese medicine related pain beliefs mainly to the concept of 'balance' were evident on contemporary Chinese society's understandings of LBP. These cultural beliefs could be relevant to consider in LBP management and involve healthcare professionals, family and patient in this process

    Identifying the most important confounders when assessing the association between low-grade systemic inflammation and musculoskeletal pain: A modified Delphi study

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: The association between low-grade systemic inflammation and musculoskeletal pain may be influenced by multiple factors. However, little is known about the relative importance of these factors, and few studies account for them. This Delphi study aimed to reach consensus on the most important confounders which influence the association between low-grade systemic inflammation and musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: The panel consisted of 48 experts. In Round 1, the experts proposed what they believed were important confounders. In Round 2, the experts indicated for each confounder whether they believed it was important (yes/no). At least 50% of experts had to indicate the confounder was important to be considered in the final round. In Round 3, the experts rated the importance of each confounder on a 7-point Likert scale. Consensus was reached if ≥ 75% of the experts considered the factor either extremely or moderately important. RESULTS: In Round 1, 120 confounders were proposed, which were synthesised into 38 distinct factors. In Round 2, 33 confounders met the criterion to be considered important. In Round 3, consensus was reached for 14 confounders: acute illness/trauma, immune disease, medication use, endocrine, nutritional, or metabolic disease, other musculoskeletal conditions, age, handling of blood samples, sex, cancer, body composition, pregnancy, cardiovascular disease, physical activity, and pain characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide insight in the complexity of the association between low-grade systemic inflammation and musculoskeletal pain. Some factors currently listed as confounders may be re-classified as moderators or mediators as insights progress

    Novice assessors demonstrate good intra-rater agreement and reliability when determining pressure pain thresholds; a cross-sectional study

    No full text
    Background Experienced assessors show good intra-rater reproducibility (within-session and between-session agreement and reliability) when using an algometer to determine pressure pain thresholds (PPT). However, it is unknown whether novice assessors perform equally well. This study aimed to determine within and between-session agreement and reliability of PPT measurements performed by novice assessors and explored whether these parameters differed per assessor and algometer type. Methods Ten novice assessors measured PPTs over four test locations (tibialis anterior muscle, rectus femoris muscle, extensor carpi radialis brevis muscle and paraspinal muscles C5-C6) in 178 healthy participants, using either a Somedic Type II digital algometer (10 raters; 88 participants) or a Wagner Force Ten FDX 25 digital algometer (nine raters; 90 participants). Prior to the experiment, the novice assessors practiced PPTs for 3 h per algometer. Each assessor measured a different subsample of ~9 participants. For both the individual assessor and for all assessors combined (i.e., the group representing novice assessors), the standard error of measurement (SEM) and coefficient of variation (CV) were calculated to reflect within and between-session agreement. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC1,1). Results Within-session agreement expressed as SEM ranged from 42 to 74 kPa, depending on the test location and device. Between-session agreement, expressed as SEM, ranged from 36 to 76 kPa and the CV ranged from 9–16% per body location. Individual assessors differed from the mean group results, ranging from −55 to +32 kPa or from −9.5 to +6.6 percentage points. Reliability was good to excellent (ICC1,1: 0.87 to 0.95). Results were similar for both types of algometers. Conclusions Following 3 h of algometer practice, there were slight differences between assessors, but reproducibility in determining PPTs was overall good

    Fluctuations in local and widespread mechanical sensitivity throughout the migraine cycle:a prospective longitudinal study

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: People with migraine have localised (i.e., cephalic) mechanical sensitivity. There is uncertainty regarding widespread (i.e., extra-cephalic) mechanical sensitivity and variations in mechanical sensitivity throughout the migraine cycle. Therefore, this study aimed (1) to comprehensively assess mechanical sensitivity in both cephalic and extra-cephalic regions during the preictal, ictal, postictal and interictal phases; and (2) to compare these findings with mechanical sensitivity at corresponding time-points and locations in healthy participants. METHODS: According to sample size calculations, 19 people with migraine and 19 matched healthy volunteers participated in a prospective longitudinal study. Pressure pain thresholds were evaluated in three cephalic regions (temporalis, upper trapezius and C1 paraspinal muscles) and two extra-cephalic regions (extensor carpi radialis and tibialis anterior muscle) with a digital algometer during the four phases of the migraine cycle in people with migraine and at corresponding intervals and locations in healthy participants. Linear mixed model analyses with a random intercept were used. RESULTS: People with migraine had increased mechanical sensitivity in cephalic and extra-cephalic regions in all phases of the migraine cycle compared to healthy participants. Furthermore, this mechanical sensitivity was more severe in the preictal, ictal and postictal phase compared to the interictal phase in cephalic and extra-cephalic regions. CONCLUSION: People with migraine have localised as well as widespread mechanical sensitivity compared to healthy participants. This sensitivity is even more pronounced immediately before, during and after a migraine attack

    High concurrent validity between digital and analogue algometers to measure pressure pain thresholds in healthy participants and people with migraine: a cross-sectional study

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) are commonly assessed to quantify mechanical sensitivity in various conditions, including migraine. Digital and analogue algometers are used, but the concurrent validity between these algometers is unknown. Therefore, we assessed the concurrent validity between a digital and analogue algometer to determine PPTs in healthy participants and people with migraine. METHODS: Twenty-six healthy participants and twenty-nine people with migraine participated in the study. PPTs were measured interictally and bilaterally at the cephalic region (temporal muscle, C1 paraspinal muscles, and trapezius muscle) and extra-cephalic region (extensor carpi radialis muscle and tibialis anterior muscle). PPTs were first determined with a digital algometer, followed by an analogue algometer. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC3.1) and limits of agreement were calculated to quantify concurrent validity. RESULTS: The concurrent validity between algometers in both groups was moderate to excellent (ICC3.1 ranged from 0.82 to 0.99, with 95%CI: 0.65 to 0.99). Although PPTs measured with the analogue algometer were higher at most locations in both groups (p < 0.05), the mean differences between both devices were less than 18.3 kPa. The variation in methods, such as a hand-held switch (digital algometer) versus verbal commands (analogue algometer) to indicate when the threshold was reached, may explain these differences in scores. The limits of agreement varied per location and between healthy participants and people with migraine. CONCLUSION: The concurrent validity between the digital and analogue algometer is excellent in healthy participants and moderate in people with migraine. Both types of algometer are well-suited for research and clinical practice but are not exchangeable within a study or patient follow-up
    corecore