Central Sensitization Inventory is a useless instrument for detection of the impairment of the conditioned pain modulation in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain

Limited content overlap between commonly used self-report instruments for central (pain) sensitization in rheumatology

Objectives

Central pain mechanisms may be prominent in a considerable subset of rheumatology patients with persistent pain. Several self-report instruments have been used in previous research to infer the presence and severity of central sensitization (CS) that stem from different definitions or approaches of CS. The current study aimed to evaluate and quantify the overlap of actual symptoms measured among self-report measures of CS in rheumatology.

Methods

We used Fried's (2017) comprehensive systematic approach to analyse the content of five commonly used or typical self-report measures (Generalized Pain Questionnaire, Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire, Central Sensitization Inventory, Central Aspects of Pain in the Knee scale and the painDETECT) used in rheumatology research and to visualize and quantify the overlap in symptoms measured.

Results

The five instruments together measured 39 different symptoms, most of which could be grouped into nociplastic pain manifestations (7 symptoms), neuropathic pain qualities (5 symptoms), and psychosomatic symptoms and emotional distress (25 symptoms). Most symptoms (74.4%) were unique to a single instrument. Thermal allodynia was the most frequently measured symptom across the different instruments, assessed in four of the measures. Average content overlap was very low and ranged from no overlap at all to moderate overlap (Jaccard index = 0.43) between pairs of instruments.

Conclusion

There is high heterogeneity and limited overlap in the content of self-report measures used to infer central pain sensitization. This may lead to results that are specific to the particular instrument and may limit the generalizability and comparability of study findings in rheumatology research.

Central sensitization inventory is associated with psychological functioning but not with psychophysical assessment of pain amplification

BACKGROUND

The central sensitization inventory (CSI) is a questionnaire that has been widely used as a tool for assessing symptoms associated with sensitization. However, its ability to identify individuals with this phenomenon has recently been questioned. The aim of this study was to assess the correlation of CSI with psychosocial and psychophysical factors in patients with painful TMD diagnosed according to diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (DC/TMD) and asymptomatic controls, as well as to determine the influence of these variables on the CSI scores variations.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study with 77 patients diagnosed with painful TMD according to DC/TMD and 101 asymptomatic controls realized correlations between CSI, WUR, PPT, CPM and psychosocial questionnaires (HADS, PSQI, PCS and PSS). In cases where significant correlations existed, the potential influence of these variables on CSI variation was explored through linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

It has been found that the CSI correlates with psychosocial variables (anxiety, depression, catastrophizing, sleep and stress) (p < 0.0006) regardless of the presence of TMD, and that 68.9% of the variation in CSI scores can be influenced by all these variables (except stress). On the contrary, the CSI does not correlate with psychophysical parameters indicative of pain amplification (wind-up ratio and conditioned pain modulation) (p > 0.320).

CONCLUSION

CSI is more associated with psychosocial factors than with more robust indicators of probable central sensitization (CS), thus limiting its utility in detecting this phenomenon both in TMD patients and healthy individuals.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

The research highlights a noteworthy relationship between the central sensitization inventory and psychological factors, emphasizing their substantial influence on inventory values. This correlation offers crucial insights into mental health markers within the questionnaire. Additionally, the lack of connection with pain amplification implies a necessary re-evaluation of the inventory's diagnostic suitability, especially in cases of painful temporomandibular disorders. Thus, caution is urged in its application for identifying CS in these individuals.

Correlations of The Central Sensitization Inventory, conditioned pain modulation, cognitions and psychological factors in individuals with chronic neck pain: A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Chronic neck pain (CNP) is a global public health problem, with high prevalence and absenteeism rates. Central sensitization (CS) as a basis for chronic pain may play an essential role in its development and progression. It is often comorbid with low conditioned pain modulation (CPM) effects, cognitions, and psychological problems.

OBJECTIVES

The purposes of this study were to (1) explore the relationship between pain-related cognitions and psychological factors, CPM effects, and the central sensitization inventory (CSI) scores; and (2) determine whether cognitions and psychological factors can predict CSI scores and CPM effects in individuals with CNP.

METHODS

Fifty-four individuals with CNP were recruited for this cross-sectional study. The following outcome measures were evaluated: The CSI (screening tool) was compared with the cold pressor test (CPT), which was the psychophysical test used to assess the CPM; neck pain intensity using the visual analogue scale (VAS), as well as pain-related cognitions (including kinesiophobia and pain catastrophization) and psychological states (including anxiety and depression) using self-report questionnaires.

RESULTS

CSI score was not associated with the CPM effect (r = 0.257, p > 0.05), and no cognitions or psychological factors were associated with CPM (p > 0.05), but CSI score was moderately positively correlated with kinesiophobia (r = 0.554, p < 0.01), lowly positively correlated with pain catastrophization (r = 0.332, p = 0.017) and anxiety (r = 0.492, p < 0.01), but not depression (r = 0.207, p = 0.132). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that kinesiophobia (B = 1.308, p < 0.01) and anxiety (B = 1.806, p = 0.02) were significant positive predictors of CSI score.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings confirm some of our hypotheses. Accordingly, the findings inferred that the CSI does not seem to respond to CPM effect in patients with CNP effectively. In addition, CSI score was associated with cognitions and psychological factors, of which kinesiophobia and anxiety were effective predictors. In clinical practice, pain-related cognitions and psychological factors should be fully considered to manage neck pain efficiently.

Is the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) associated with quantitative sensory testing (QST)? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Central sensitization (CS) involves an amplification of neural processing within the central nervous system that can result in widespread pain patterns and hypersensitivity to stimuli. The Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) and various quantitative sensory testing (QST) methods purport to assess clinical markers of CS. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize and quantify the associations between total CSI scores and QST measures from previous studies. A systematic search identified 39 unique studies that were deemed eligible for the systematic review and 33 studies for meta-analyses (with 3314 subjects and 154 effect sizes), including five QST modalities: conditioned pain modulation, temporal summation, pressure pain threshold, heat pain threshold, and cold pain threshold. The meta-analysis yielded statistically significant CSI-QST correlations in total subject samples for all five QST modalities. The strongest associations were identified between CSI scores and pain threshold testing, especially pressure pain threshold, in which 51% of effects sizes, from 29 studies and 3071 subjects, were determined to be in a medium to large range.

Central sensitization: its prevalence and impact on quality of life among hemodialyzed patients

BACKGROUND/AIM

Data on the role of central sensitization in hemodialyzed patients are scarce. The aim was to identify the impact of central sensitization on quality of life and elucidate the risk factors for the development of central sensitization in patients receiving hemodialysis.

METHODS

Central sensitization, quality of life, psychological well-being, and sleep were assessed by the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), abbreviated version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument (WHOQOL-BREF), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and Jenkins Sleep Evaluation Scale (JSS), respectively. The effect of central sensitization on quality of life and the predictors of the development of central sensitization were assessed by regression analyses.

RESULTS

The frequency of central sensitization was 48% in the study population (n = 100). Patients with central sensitization had significantly higher pain intensity, worse sleep quality, and more impaired psychological status (p < 0.05 for all). The CSI score negatively affected all quality of life domains on its own (p < 0.001 for all, adjusted R2 ranged from 0.17 to 0.47). Dialysis vintage (OR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.7 to 1.0), pain (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.0), JSS (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.5), and HADS-total (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.2) were determined as the independent risk factors for central sensitization (p < 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that given the high frequency of central sensitization and its significant negative impact on quality of life, the presence of central sensitization should be investigated in patients undergoing hemodialysis.

Retrospective review of the efficacy for sublingual ketamine in the treatment of chronic low back pain defined by a cause and central functional pain symptom focused clinical model

PURPOSE

Chronic low back pain is a leading cause of disability worldwide. A clinical model for its cause is lacking. Defining a cause based clinical model and a framework of understanding back pain in terms of peripheral structural and central functional pain is essential for optimal management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We describe the results of the largest published audit of 41 chronic low back pain patients, receiving outpatient sublingual ketamine therapy for defined central functional pain along with conventional peripheral structural pain management. Our clinical model assigns Movement Dysfunction as the primary cause for low back pain symptoms and restores it with Movement Therapy focused rehabilitation which is also defined. Patients were derived from a tertiary single neurosurgical specialist practice in Brisbane Australia over a three year period.

RESULTS

Severe pain and disability measurements more than halved and only 13% of patients ceased ketamine prematurely due to predominantly non-sinister side effects common to all pharmaceutical therapies. All other surveyed metrics of utility were highly favourable in this challenging cohort of chronic back pain patients biased to poor outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient ketamine maintains high efficacy and safety used in conjunction with a unique clinical model that describes chronic low back pain.

Cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of conditioned pain modulation and pain in fibromyalgia: CPM as an effect modifier of pain changes over time

Background and purpose

Fibromyalgia (FM) is associated with altered descending pain modulatory pathways, which can be assessed through Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM). In this study, we aimed to explore the relationship between CPM and self-reported baseline characteristics in patients with fibromyalgia. We also performed a longitudinal analysis exploring CPM as a potential predictor of clinical improvement over time in individuals with FM.

Methods

We performed cross-sectional univariable and multivariable analyses of the relationship between CPM and other variables in 41 FM patients. We then performed longitudinal analyses, building linear mixed effects models with pain in the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) as the dependent variable, and testing for the interaction between time and CPM. We also tested the interaction between CPM and time in models using other outcomes, such as the revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQR) and Quality of Life Scale (QOLs).

Results

We found no association between CPM and other demographic and clinical variables in the univariable analysis. We found a statistically significant association in the multivariable linear regression model between CPM and the QOLs at baseline, after controlling for age, sex, and duration of symptoms. In the longitudinal analyses, we found that CPM is an effect modifier for clinical improvement over time for the pain VAS, QOLs and FIQR: individuals with low-efficient CPM at baseline have a different (improved) pattern of response over time when compared to those with high-efficient CPM.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that CPM is not a reliable biomarker of clinical manifestations in chronic pain patients during cross-sectional assessments. However, our results are consistent with previous findings that CPM can be used to predict the evolution of clinical pain over time. We expect that our findings will help in the selection of patients with the best profile to respond to specific interventions and assist clinicians in tailoring pain treatments.

The relationship of behavioral and psychological traits with pain sensitivity in females with patellofemoral pain: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to describe the relationship between behavioral and psychological traits with indicators of central sensitization in female runners with patellofemoral pain (PFP), and to determine if behavioral and psychological traits improve with strength training.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

University laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-eight active females (mean age 32 ± 8.1 years) with PFP completed testing at baseline, 8 weeks (post intervention), and 12 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Behavioral and psychological questionnaires included the General Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionairre-9, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia-11, and Central Sensitization Inventory. Quantitative sensory testing (QST) measures were also collected. After baseline testing, subjects were instructed in a hip and knee strengthening intervention to be completed twice daily over 8 weeks.

RESULTS

A statistically significant improvement was found at 12 weeks for anxiety (p = .015; ηp (Boling et al., 2010) = 0.099) and kinesiophobia (p = .041; ηp (Boling et al., 2010) = 0.076). There was no significant improvement for depression, catastrophizing, or subjective central sensitization. No significant correlations were found between any of the behavioral and psychological questionnaires with baseline QST variables.

CONCLUSIONS

No relationship was found for behavioral and psychological characteristics with QST measures in female runners with persistent PFP.

Altered somatosensory functioning and mechanism-based classification in breast cancer patients with persistent pain

Pain is one of the most frequent and persistent side effects of breast cancer treatment. Besides pain, breast cancer survivors (BCS) are prone to experience a myriad of other signs and symptoms related to altered somatosensory function, including for example, hypoesthesia, allodynia, and hyperalgesia, both at the local site of cancer and in remote body parts. Different breast cancer treatments can have a direct effect on somatosensory functioning, resulting in a wide range of these signs and symptoms. To our knowledge, currently no comprehensive overview exists on altered somatosensory functioning and resulting signs and symptoms in BCS with persistent pain. Investigating altered somatosensory functioning in this population could provide more insights in the underpinning pathophysiological mechanisms and consequently improve prevention and treatment in the future. Therefore, in this paper, first, normal somatosensory functioning is described. Second, quantitative sensory testing is presented as the recommend method to evaluate somatosensory functioning. Third, existing evidence on altered somatosensory functioning in BCS with persistent pain is summarized. Altered somatosensory functioning related to the most common cancer treatment modalities, including surgery and radiotherapy, hormone therapy, and chemotherapy are discussed. In addition, evidence on the presence of nociplastic pain as pain resulting from altered somatosensory functioning without evidence for nociception and/or neuropathy in BCS is summarized. At last, a discussion on this available evidence, limitations, and perspectives for clinical practice and for research are made.

Exercise-Induced Hypoalgesia in Patients with Chronic Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Differences between Subgroups Based on the Central Sensitization Inventory

BACKGROUND

Physical exercise is an important element in the rehabilitation of chronic whiplash-associated disorders, with the physiological process underlying pain reduction called exercise-induced hypoalgesia. In chronic whiplash-associated disorders, exercise-induced hypoalgesia appears impaired, and the research suggests a relationship with symptoms of dysfunctional nociceptive processing, such as central sensitization. This study improves our understanding of exercise-induced hypoalgesia in chronic whiplash-associated disorders by examining the differences between the extent of exercise-induced hypoalgesia in subgroups based on scores on the central sensitization inventory (CSI).

METHODS

Data were collected from 135 participants with chronic whiplash-associated disorders who completed a set of questionnaires. Pain pressure thresholds and temporal summations were assessed before and after a submaximal aerobic bicycle exercise test.

RESULTS

We observed no interaction effect between exercise-induced hypoalgesia and the CSI scores for both pain pressure threshold and temporal summation. No overall statistical effect was measured in the analysis of the effect of time. The pain pressure threshold significantly related to the CSI. The temporal summation showed no correlation.

CONCLUSIONS

During this study, we did not find evidence for a difference in the presence of exercise-induced hypoalgesia when the subgroups were created based on the central sensitization cluster calculator. Limited evidence was found for the influence of CSI scores on the delta pain pressure threshold.

Validity of the Central Sensitization Inventory to Address Human Assumed Central Sensitization: Newly Proposed Clinically Relevant Values and Associations

Central sensitization cannot be directly demonstrated in humans and thus a gold standard is missing. Therefore, we used human assumed central sensitization (HACS) when associated with humans. The central sensitization inventory (CSI) is a screening questionnaire for addressing symptoms that are associated with HACS. This cross-sectional study compared patients with chronic pain and at least one central sensitivity syndrome with healthy, pain-free controls via ROC analyses. Analyses were performed for all participants together and for each sex separately. Regression analyses were performed on patients with chronic pain with and without central sensitivity syndromes. Based on 1730 patients and 250 healthy controls, cutoff values for the CSI for the total group were established at 30 points: women: 33 points; men: 25 points. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to identify possible predictors for the CSI score in 2890 patients with chronic pain. The CSI score is associated with all independent factors and has a low association with pain severity in women and a low association with pain severity, age, and body mass index in men. The newly established CSI cutoff values are lower than in previous studies and different per sex, which might be of clinical relevance in daily practice and importance in research.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients Receiving Physical Therapy for Low Back Pain with a Nociplastic Pain Presentation: A Secondary Analysis

Introduction

Individuals with low back pain (LBP) may be classified based on mechanistic descriptors, such as a nociplastic pain presentation (NPP). The purpose of this secondary analysis was to examine the frequency and characteristics of patients with a NPP referred to physical therapy with LBP. Additionally, we characterized patients with LBP meeting the criteria for NPP by demographic, clinical, psychological, and pain sensitivity variables. Finally, we examined short- and long-term clinical outcomes in patients with a NPP compared to those without a NPP.

Materials and Methods

Patients referred to physical therapy for LBP completed the Patient Self-report Survey for the Assessment of Fibromyalgia. Participants were categorized as "LBP with NPP" or "LBP without NPP" based on the threshold established in this measure. A rank sum test examined for differences in pain-related psychological factors and pressure-pain threshold between groups. Next, a Friedman test examined if LBP intensity and disability trajectories differed by groups at one and six months after initiation of physical therapy.

Results

22.2% of patients referred to physical therapy for LBP met the criteria for a NPP. Patients with a NPP reported significantly greater disability, pain catastrophizing, depression, anxiety, and somatization compared to individuals without a NPP (p < 0.05). Pressure-pain threshold did not differ between groups (p > 0.05). Individuals with LBP with a NPP demonstrated nonsignificant, small to medium reductions in pain and disability at one and six months. Individuals experiencing LBP without a NPP demonstrated significant reductions in pain and disability in the short- and long term.

Conclusion

Patients with LBP with a NPP displayed greater negative pain-related psychological factors but similar pain sensitivity compared to LBP without NPP.

Validity of the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) through Rasch analysis in patients with knee osteoarthritis

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVE

Central sensitization (CS) is a known contributor to chronic pain in people with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and is commonly measured by psychophysical testing or patient-reported methods such as the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI). However, previous studies have shown a weak association between the two. We therefore sought to evaluate the validity of the CSI through Rasch analysis in patients with KOA.

METHOD

We performed a secondary analysis of a multicenter cohort study with patients with KOA consulting orthopedic surgeons. Rasch analysis was conducted considering person factors of age, sex, BMI, pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, and quantitative sensory test findings using pressure pain thresholds and temporal summation to assess how the CSI fits to the Rasch model (supporting validity). We used RUMM2030 software to model fit estimates, making adjustments as required to achieve model fit (P > 0.05).

RESULTS

Data from 293 patients were included (58.7% female, mean age 63.6 years, 49.1% obese) Initial evaluation with Rasch modelling indicated misfit. Eleven of 25 items on the CSI displayed disordered thresholds which were rescored by collapsing response categories until the thresholds demonstrated sequential progression. Reanalysis demonstrated persistent model misfit so a subtest was developed to address local dependency of 6 items. Thereafter, model fit was achieved (P = 0.071, indicating not differing from Rasch model) and acceptable unidimensionality (P = 0.068 with 95% CI 0.043-0.093).

CONCLUSIONS

The CSI was able to be fit to the Rasch model after rescoring while retaining all 25 items. The unidimensionality validates CS as measured by the CSI as a singular construct. Key Points • The Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) was able to be fit to the Rasch model after rescoring while retaining all 25 items. • The unidimensionality of the CSI validates CS as a singular construct. • Our results suggest rescoring of the CSI for people with KOA, but it should be confirmed and replicated in larger samples prior to clinical use.

Differences in Quantitative Sensory Testing Outcomes Between Patients With Low Back Pain in Primary Care and Pain-free Controls

OBJECTIVES

Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) is used to test somatosensory functioning in on people with chronic LBP in secondary/tertiary health care facilities. Studies using QST-testing on LBP populations in primary care are scarce. Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) measures central sensitization (CS)-related symptoms and studies investigating the differences between QST-testing and participants with LBP with a positive and negative score on the CSI questionnaire are also rare. This case-control study investigates differences of an extensive QST-measurement between patients with acute, chronic LBP, and pain-free controls (PFCs) in primary care. Secondary aim is to investigate differences of an extensive QST-measurement between "CS" and "no-CS" group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Participants with LBP were recruited from November 2016 to October 2019. Demographic and clinical information was collected and a standardized QST protocol was taken. Data analysis involved determining differences between groups.

RESULTS

Data of 100 participants with LBP and 50 PFCs were analyzed. Heat pain thresholds, pressure pain threshold, and conditioned pain modulation local and remote were significantly moderately to relatively strongly affected by acute, chronic LBP and PFCs (P<0.001 to 0.001). Lumbar temporal summation was significantly moderately affected by acute, chronic LBP, and PFCs (P=0.001). Only pressure pain threshold showed significant difference between "CS" and "no-CS" group (P=0.001 to 0.002).

DISCUSSION

Signs of enhanced nociceptive processing and disturbed top-down nociceptive modulation are apparent in people with acute and chronic LBP in primary care. Results indicate existence of central mechanisms in LBP in primary care.

Questionnaire-based somatosensory profiling in breast cancer survivors: are we there yet? Associations between questionnaires and quantitative sensory testing

PURPOSE

Pain and sensory disturbances are common side effects of breast cancer treatment. Differential somatosensory functioning may reflect distinct pathophysiological backgrounds and therapeutic needs. Aim was to examine whether questionnaires evaluating signs and symptoms related to somatosensory functioning correlate sufficiently with quantitative sensory testing (QST) in breast cancer survivors to warrant consideration for somatosensory profiling in clinical practice.

METHODS

One year after breast cancer surgery, 147 women underwent QST and completed following questionnaires: Douleur Neuropathique en 4 questions (DN4), Central Sensitization Inventory, Margolis Pain Diagram and Visual Analog Scales (VAS). Associations between the questionnaires and QST were evaluated using Spearman correlation coefficients (rs).

RESULTS

Significant but weak (rs < 0.30) correlations were found between total DN4 score and QST results at the inner upper arm for detection of sharp stimuli (rs = 0.227), cold stimuli (rs = -0.186), and painful heat stimuli (rs = 0.179), as well as between QST evaluating conditioned pain modulation and the Margolis Pain Diagram on one hand (rs = 0.176) and minimum-maximum pain intensity differences (VAS) on the other (rs = -0.170).

CONCLUSION

Questionnaires evaluating signs and symptoms related to somatosensory functioning are insufficient for somatosensory profiling. Although somatosensory profiling may be valuable in a mechanism-based management, more research on the most appropriate clinical tools is needed.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONClinicians should be able to recognize that patients with persistent pain or sensory disturbances following breast cancer surgery may have a component of altered somatosensory processing as a significant contributor to their complaint in order to address it appropriately.Somatosensory profiling has yet to be implemented into clinical practice.No evidence-based recommendations can be made on the use of self-reported questionnaires to assess somatosensory processing in a breast cancer population based on the findings of this study.It is suggested to combine information on how individuals process and experience somatosensory stimulation with information from the patient interview or questionnaires to consider which biological, psychological and/or social factors may drive or sustain these neurophysiological processes.

Retrospective Analysis of Functional Pain among Professional Climbers

Climbing became one of the official Olympic sports in 2020. The nociplastic pain mechanism is indicated as important in professional sports. Functional pain, which has not been examined in climbers until now, can be an example of nociplastic pain. This study aimed to determine functional pain locations in climbers according to gender and dominant climbing style. Climbers (n = 183) and healthy subjects (n = 160) completed an online survey focused on functional pain occurrence in the head, spine, and upper limbs. The logistic regression showed that climbing predisposes one to functional pain at: Gleno-humeral joint (odds ratio (OR): 3.06; area under the curve (AUC): 0.635), elbow (OR: 2.86; AUC: 0.625), fingers (OR: 7.74; AUC: 0.733), all (p < 0.05). Among the climbers, the female gender predisposed one to pain at: GHJ (OR: 3.34; AUC: 0.638), thoracic spine (OR: 1.95; AUC: 0.580), and lumbosacral spine (OR: 1.96; AUC: 0.578), all (p < 0.05). Climbing predisposes one to functional pain development in the upper limb. While the male climbers mainly suffered from finger functional pain, the female climbers reported functional pain in the GHJ and the thoracic and lumbosacral spine. Further studies on functional pain occurrence are recommended.

Use of the painDETECT to discriminate musculoskeletal pain phenotypes

Background

Musculoskeletal pain patients present similar pain characteristics regardless of the clinical diagnosis. PainDETECT questionnaire is useful for screening neuropathic-like symptoms in many musculoskeletal conditions. However, no previous studies compared pain phenotypes of patients with musculoskeletal pain using the painDETECT. Therefore, the current study aimed to compare the pain characteristics of patients with musculoskeletal pain classified according to the painDETECT as nociceptive pain, unclear, and neuropathic-like symptoms.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted in 308 participants with musculoskeletal pain. Demographic and clinical characteristics of the participants were examined. Neuropathic-like symptoms, pain intensity, pain area, Central Sensitization-related sign and symptoms, functional limitation, and conditioned pain modulation were assessed in patients with musculoskeletal pain. Independent one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test for between-group differences for the outcome measures with continuous variables and Pearson chi-square test verified between-group differences on the efficiency of the conditioned pain modulation.

Results

Participants had a mean age of 52.21 (±15.01) years old and 220 (71.42%) were females. One hundred seventy-three (56.16%) participants present nociceptive pain, 69 (22.40%) unclear, and 66 (21.42%) neuropathic-like symptoms. A one-way ANOVA showed differences for the pain intensity [F (2,305) = 20.097; p < .001], pain area [F (2,305) = 28.525; p < .001], Central Sensitization-related sign and symptoms [F (2,305) = 54.186; p < .001], and functional limitation [F (2,256) = 8.061; p < .001]. However, conditioned pain modulation was similarly impaired among the three groups (X² = 0.333, p = 0.847).

Conclusion

Patients with neuropathic-like symptoms revealed unfavorable pain characteristics compared to their counterparts, including pain intensity, generalized pain, Central Sensitization-related sign and symptoms, and functional limitation.

Biopsychosocial risk factors for pain and pain-related disability 1 year after surgery for breast cancer

PURPOSE

Knowledge regarding risk factors for pain in the long term after surgery for breast cancer may be of great value in preventing this prevalent and debilitating side effect. Despite the biopsychosocial nature of pain, the predictive value of both pre- and postoperative biopsychosocial functioning for long-term pain intensity and pain-related disability has not yet been studied.

METHODS

One hundred sixty-six women planned for unilateral breast cancer surgery were included in this prospective cohort study. Pre- and postoperative outcomes related to pain, psychosocial, and somatosensory functioning (questionnaires and quantitative sensory testing) were evaluated as risk factors for pain intensity (visual analog scale) and pain-related disability (pain disability index) 1 year after surgery for breast cancer. Both bivariable and stepwise linear regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The most consistent biopsychosocial risk factors were symptoms related to altered central somatosensory functioning (central sensitization inventory), psychological symptoms, and social support (psychological symptoms and support subscale of McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire). Results also showed that a pre- and postoperative disturbed functioning of the somatosensory nervous system in the surgical area could provide additional information regarding pain intensity or pain-related disability in the long term after surgery for breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed several biopsychosocial characteristics that might be used to identify women more vulnerable to have pain and pain-related disability in the long term after surgery for breast cancer, allowing for more effective pain management and prevention.