The Effects of Coexisting Fibromyalgia Syndrome on Pain Intensity, Disability, and Treatment Outcome in Patients with Chronic Lateral Epicondylitis

Correlations Between Anxiety and/or Depression Diagnoses and Dysphagia Severity

OBJECTIVE

An increased prevalence of mood and anxiety disorders in patients with dysphagia has been noted previously, but whether dysphagia severity may be exacerbated by anxiety and depression has never been studied before. The purpose of this study is to identify the effect of pre-existing diagnosis of anxiety and/or depression (anxiety/depression) on the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10), a validated patient-reported outcome measure for dysphagia. We hypothesized that patients with dysphagia and normal instrumental evaluation have higher EAT-10 score in the presence of pre-existing anxiety and depression.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted of patients seen at the multi-disciplinary dysphagia clinic of an urban academic institution. EAT-10 scores and pre-existing diagnoses of anxiety/depression were collected at the first visit with laryngologists. The two-sample t-test was used to compare mean EAT-10 scores between the anxiety/depression and no anxiety/depression groups, stratified by swallowing dysfunction etiology.

RESULTS

The study included 290 consecutive patients seen starting in January 2018. In this cohort, 60 (21%) had pre-existing anxiety, 49 (17%) depression, and 36 (12%) both. Overall, 59 patients had normal swallowing based on instrumental swallowing testing (flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing, videofluoroscopic swallow study, esophagram, or esophagoscopy). Among those, mean EAT-10 score was significantly higher in patients with anxiety and/or depression (n = 30) (14.63, SD = 11.42) compared to those with no anxiety and/or depression (n = 29) (8.93, SD = 6.59) (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

While anxiety/depression may aggravate dysphagia in patients with normal swallowing function, this correlation may not hold in those with objective swallowing dysfunction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 Laryngoscope, 134:2115-2120, 2024.

What factors influence pain scores following Corticosteroid injection in patients with Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Cortico-Steroid Injections (CSI) are commonly used to treat patients with Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome (GTPS) but it is unclear which patients will experience improvements in pain.

OBJECTIVES

To identify factors that influence improvements in pain for patients with GTPS treated with CSI.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A search was undertaken of AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline and PEDro databases. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they investigated factors that influenced changes in pain experienced by patients with GTPS who received a CSI. Studies needed to include relevant summary statistics and tests of clinical significance. Risk Of Bias in Non-randomised Trials Of Interventions (ROBINS-I) and Risk Of Bias 2 (ROB2) tools were used to assess bias.

RESULTS

The search identified 466 studies, 8 were included in the final review with a total of 643 participants. There was no association between demographic variables such as age, sex, symptom duration or obesity and pain outcomes post-CSI. Having a co-existing musculoskeletal (MSK) condition such as knee osteoarthritis or sacroiliac/lumbar spine pain was associated with less pain reduction post-CSI. Injections into the Trochanteric Bursa were associated with longer lasting pain reduction than Gluteus Medius Bursa or extra-bursal injections. Image guidance of CSI maintained lower pain scores at six months but did not increase the duration of the therapeutic effect past six months. The presence of specific ultrasound scan features was not associated with differences in pain scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with co-existing MSK conditions may not respond to CSI as well as those without. Injections into the Greater Trochanteric Bursa may have longer lasting benefit. Further research is needed on the use of USS imaging findings and image guidance.

Emerging Advances in Nanocarriers Approaches in the Effective Therapy of Pain Related Disorders: Recent Evidence and Futuristic Needs

Pain disorders are the primary cause of disability nowadays. These disorders, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA), cause loss of function, joint pain and inflammation and deteriorate the quality of life. The treatment of these inflammatory diseases includes anti-inflammatory drugs administered via intra-articular, topical or oral routes, physical rehabilitation or surgery. Owing to the various side effects these drugs could offer, the novel approaches and nanomaterials have shown potential to manage inflammatory diseases, prolonged half-life of anti-inflammatory drugs, reduced systemic toxicity, provide specific targeting, and refined their bioavailability. This review discusses in brief about the pain pathophysiology and its types. The review summarizes the conventional therapies used to treat pain disorders and the need for novel strategies to overcome the adverse effects of conventional therapies. The review describes the recent advancements in nanotherapeutics for inflammatory diseases using several lipids, polymers and other materials and their excellent efficiency in improving the treatment over conventional therapies. The results of the nanotherapeutic studies inferred that the necessity to use nanocarriers is due to their controlled release, targeting drug delivery to inflamed tissues, low toxicity and biocompatibility. Therefore, it is possible to assert that nanotechnology will emerge as a great tool for advancing the treatment of pain disorders in the near future.

Pain patterns in chronic pancreatitis and chronic primary pain

BACKGROUND

Abdominal pain is the most distressing symptom of chronic pancreatitis (CP), and current treatments show limited benefit. Pain phenotypes may be more useful than diagnostic categories when planning treatments, and the presence or absence of constant pain in CP may be a useful prognostic indicator.

AIMS

This cross-sectional study examined dimensions of pain in CP, compared pain in CP with chronic primary pain (CPP), and assessed whether constant pain in CP is associated with poorer outcomes.

METHODS

Patients with CP (N = 91) and CPP (N = 127) completed the Comprehensive Pancreatitis Assessment Tool. Differences in clinical characteristics and pain dimensions were assessed between a) CP and CPP and b) CP patients with constant versus intermittent pain. Latent class regression analysis was performed (N = 192) to group participants based on pain dimensions and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Compared to CPP, CP patients had higher quality of life (p < 0.001), lower pain severity (p < 0.001), and were more likely to use strong opioids (p < 0.001). Within CP, constant pain was associated with a stronger response to pain triggers (p < 0.05), greater pain spread (p < 0.01), greater pain severity, more features of central sensitization, greater pain catastrophising, and lower quality of life compared to intermittent pain (all p values ≤ 0.001). Latent class regression analysis identified three groups, that mapped onto the following patient groups 1) combined CPP and CP-constant, 2) majority CPP, and 3) majority CP-intermittent.

CONCLUSIONS

Within CP, constant pain may represent a pain phenotype that corresponds with poorer outcomes. CP patients with constant pain show similarities to some patients with CPP, potentially indicating shared mechanisms.

Evidence of Bilateral Localized, but Not Widespread, Pressure Pain Hypersensitivity in Patients With Upper Extremity Tendinopathy/Overuse Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The presence of altered nociceptive pain processing in patients with upper extremity tendinopathy/overuse injury is conflicting. Our aim was to compare pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in symptomatic and distant pain-free areas between patients with upper extremity tendinopathy/overuse injury and controls.

METHODS

Five databases were searched from inception to October 15, 2020. The authors selected case-control studies comparing PPTs between individuals with upper extremity tendinopathy/overuse injury and pain-free controls. Data were extracted for population, diagnosis, sample size, outcome, and type of algometer. Results were extracted by 3 reviewers. The methodological quality/risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale) and evidence level (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach) were assessed. Meta-analyses of symptomatic, segment-related, and distant pain-free areas were compared.

RESULTS

The search identified 807 publications with 19 studies (6 shoulder, 13 elbow) eligible for inclusion. The methodological quality ranged from fair (48%) to good (37%). Patients exhibited lower bilateral PPTs than controls at the symptomatic area (affected side: MD = -175.89 kPa [95% CI = -220.30 to -131.48 kPa]; nonaffected side: MD = -104.50 kPa [95% CI = -142.72 to -66.28 kPa]) and the segment-related area (affected side: MD = -150.63 kPa [95% CI = -212.05 to -89.21 kPa]; nonaffected side: MD = -170.34 kPa [95% CI = - 248.43 to -92.25]) than controls. No significant differences in PPTs over distant pain-free areas were observed.

CONCLUSION

Low to moderate quality evidence suggests bilateral hypersensitivity to pressure pain at the symptomatic and contralateral/mirror areas in patients with upper extremity tendinopathies/overuse injury. Moderate quality of evidence supports bilateral pressure pain sensitivity in the segment-related area (neck) in lateral epicondylalgia, but not in subacromial impingement syndrome. No evidence of widespread pressure pain hyperalgesia was reported.

IMPACT

Early identification of people with altered pain modulation could guide clinicians in treatment strategies. This review shows that there is a complex interplay between peripheral and central pain mechanisms in upper extremity tendinopathies/overuse injuries and that there likely are different subgroups of patients with upper extremity conditions.

Chronic pain: an update on burden, best practices, and new advances

Chronic pain exerts an enormous personal and economic burden, affecting more than 30% of people worldwide according to some studies. Unlike acute pain, which carries survival value, chronic pain might be best considered to be a disease, with treatment (eg, to be active despite the pain) and psychological (eg, pain acceptance and optimism as goals) implications. Pain can be categorised as nociceptive (from tissue injury), neuropathic (from nerve injury), or nociplastic (from a sensitised nervous system), all of which affect work-up and treatment decisions at every level; however, in practice there is considerable overlap in the different types of pain mechanisms within and between patients, so many experts consider pain classification as a continuum. The biopsychosocial model of pain presents physical symptoms as the denouement of a dynamic interaction between biological, psychological, and social factors. Although it is widely known that pain can cause psychological distress and sleep problems, many medical practitioners do not realise that these associations are bidirectional. While predisposing factors and consequences of chronic pain are well known, the flipside is that factors promoting resilience, such as emotional support systems and good health, can promote healing and reduce pain chronification. Quality of life indicators and neuroplastic changes might also be reversible with adequate pain management. Clinical trials and guidelines typically recommend a personalised multimodal, interdisciplinary treatment approach, which might include pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, integrative treatments, and invasive procedures.

Central sensitisation in chronic pain conditions: latest discoveries and their potential for precision medicine

Chronic pain is a leading cause of disability globally and associated with enormous health-care costs. The discrepancy between the extent of tissue damage and the magnitude of pain, disability, and associated symptoms represents a diagnostic challenge for rheumatology specialists. Central sensitisation, defined as an amplification of neural signalling within the CNS that elicits pain hypersensitivity, has been investigated as a reason for this discrepancy. Features of central sensitisation have been documented in various pain conditions common in rheumatology practice, including fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, upper extremity tendinopathies, headache, and spinal pain. Within individual pain conditions, there is substantial variation among patients in terms of presence and magnitude of central sensitisation, stressing the importance of individual assessment. Central sensitisation predicts poor treatment outcomes in multiple patient populations. The available evidence supports various pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies to reduce central sensitisation and to improve patient outcomes in several conditions commonly seen in rheumatology practice. These data open up new treatment perspectives, with the possibility for precision pain medicine treatment according to pain phenotyping as a logical next step. With this view, studies suggest the possibility of matching non-pharmacological approaches, or medications, or both to the central sensitisation pain phenotypes.

Clinical Reasoning for the Examination and Physical Therapy Treatment of Temporomandibular Disorders (TMD): A Narrative Literature Review

The current narrative literature review aims to discuss clinical reasoning based on nociceptive pain mechanisms for determining the most appropriate assessment and therapeutic strategy and to identify/map the most updated scientific evidence in relation to physical therapy interventions for patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). We will also propose an algorithm for clinical examination and treatment decisions and a pain model integrating current knowledge of pain neuroscience. The clinical examination of patients with TMDs should be based on nociceptive mechanisms and include the potential identification of the dominant, central, or peripheral sensitization driver. Additionally, the musculoskeletal drivers of these sensitization processes should be assessed with the aim of reproducing symptoms. Therapeutic strategies applied for managing TMDs can be grouped into tissue-based impairment treatments (bottom-up interventions) and strategies targeting the central nervous system (top-down interventions). Bottom-up strategies include joint-, soft tissue-, and nerve-targeting interventions, as well as needling therapies, whereas top-down strategies include exercises, grade motor imagery, and also pain neuroscience education. Evidence shows that the effectiveness of these interventions depends on the clinical reasoning applied, since not all strategies are equally effective for the different TMD subgroups. In fact, the presence or absence of a central sensitization driver could lead to different treatment outcomes. It seems that multimodal approaches are more effective and should be applied in patients with TMDs. The current paper also proposes a clinical decision algorithm integrating clinical diagnosis with nociceptive mechanisms for the application of the most appropriate treatment approach.

The Association of Skinfold Anthropometric Measures, Body Composition and Disease Severity in Obese and Non-obese Fibromyalgia Patients: A Cross-sectional Study

Objectives

This study aims to determine the effects of obesity and obesity related anthropometric and body composition determiners on the severity of fibromyalgia syndrome (FS) and to compare obese, overweight and normoweight FS patients according to general health and psychological status.

Patients and methods

The study included 42 obese (mean age 48.8±11.6; range 24 to 65 years), 27 overweight (mean age 47.3±3.4; range 24 to 61 years) and 32 normoweight (mean age 47.1±7.8 years; range 31 to 60 years) female FS patients. Widespread pain scores and symptom severity scores were noted. Pain pressure thresholds of tender points and control points were measured and total myalgic score (TMS) was calculated. The anthropometric assessments and skinfold measurements of all participants were recorded. Quality of life was evaluated by Health Assessment Questionnaire while psychological status was evaluated using Beck Depression Inventory.

Results

Control points, TMS values and hand grip strength values of obese FS patients were significantly lower, while disease duration, symptom severity, widespread pain scores, visual analog scale and Health Assessment Questionnaire scores were significantly higher than normoweight and overweight FS patients. Fat free mass, fat mass, body fat percentage and waist/hip ratio values were significantly higher in obese FS patients than overweight and normoweight FS patients (p<0.001 for all values). Stepwise linear regression analysis showed that increased body mass index, decreased fat free mass (R2=0.11) and increased disease duration (R2=0.13) were associated with lower TMS.

Conclusion

We found that obesity had significant negative effects on pain, disease severity and quality of life in patients with FS.

Bilateral deficits in fine motor control ability and manual dexterity in women with fibromyalgia syndrome

The aim of the current study was to investigate fine motor control ability and manual dexterity women with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) without symptoms in the upper extremity compared to healthy women. Subtests of the Purdue Pegboard Test (one-hand, bilateral and assembly) and of the Jebsen-Taylor hand-function test (writing, turning cards, picking up small, light and large heavy objects, simulated feeding and stacking checkers) were evaluated bilaterally in 20 women with FMS (aged 35-55 years) without symptoms in the upper limb and 20 age- and hand dominance-matched healthy women. Differences between sides and groups were analysed with several analysis of variance (ANOVA). The ANOVA revealed significant differences between groups (P < 0.001) and sides (P = 0.007) for one-hand pin placement subtest: women with FMS showed bilateral worse scores than controls. Patients also exhibited significantly lower scores in bilateral pin placement and assembly subtests when compared to healthy controls (P < 0.001). The ANOVA also revealed significant differences between groups for writing, turning over cards, picking up small objects, stacking checkers, picking up large light objects and picking up large heavy objects (all, P < 0.001): women with FMS needed more time for these subtests than healthy women with both hands. No difference for simulated feeding was found between groups. Our findings revealed bilateral deficits in fine motor control ability and manual dexterity in patients with FMS without symptoms in the upper extremity. These deficits are not related to the clinical features of the symptoms supporting an underlying central mechanism of altered motor control.