A comprehensive evaluation of standardized assessment tools in the diagnosis of fibromyalgia and in the assessment of fibromyalgia severity

Phenotypic characteristics of patients with chronic widespread pain and fibromyalgia: a cross-sectional cluster analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore whether phenotypic characteristics of patients with chronic widespread pain (CWP) and fibromyalgia (FM) can be aggregated into definable clusters that may help to tailor treatments.

METHOD

Baseline variables (sex, age, education, marital/employment status, pain duration, prior CWP/FM diagnosis, concomitant rheumatic disease, analgesics, tender point count, and disease variables derived from standardized questionnaires) collected from 1099 patients (93.4% females, mean age 44.6 years) with a confirmed CWP or FM diagnosis were evaluated by hierarchical cluster analysis. The number of clusters was based on coefficients in the agglomeration schedule, supported by dendrograms and silhouette plots. Simple and multiple regression analyses using all variables as independent predictors were used to assess the likelihood of cluster assignment, reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Only one cluster emerged (Cluster 1: 455 patients). Participants in this cluster were characterized as working (OR 66.67, 95% CI 7.14 to 500.00), with a medium-term/higher education (OR 16.80, 95% CI 1.94 to 145.41), married/cohabiting (OR 14.29, 95% CI 1.26 to 166.67), and using mild analgesics (OR 25.64, 95% CI 0.58 to > 999.99). The odds of being an individual in Cluster 1 were lower when having a worse score on the PDQ (score ≥ 18) (OR < 0.001, 95% CI < 0.001 to 0.02).

CONCLUSION

We identified one cluster, where participants were characterized by a potentially favourable clinical profile. More studies are needed to evaluate whether these characteristics could be used to guide the management of patients with CWP and FM.

Multi-disciplinary community-based group intervention for fibromyalgia: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Fibromyalgia is characterized by widespread pain, fatigue, sleep disturbances, mood disturbances, and cognitive impairment. Most individuals with fibromyalgia experience poorly managed symptoms and increased healthcare service use. Multicomponent therapies, with a focus on nonpharmacological modalities, are increasingly supported in the literature. However, given the limited resources available, implementation in smaller communities remains a challenge. This research tested a community-based multidisciplinary group intervention for individuals diagnosed with FM living in a small urban centre. The primary outcome was perceptions of quality of care and secondary outcomes included disease-related functioning, anxious and depressive symptoms, pain beliefs, and health service utilization. A pilot randomized control trial was conducted in which 60 patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia were randomized into a 10-week community-based multidisciplinary group intervention program or usual care. Treatment components included twice-weekly exercise sessions and weekly education sessions (e.g., pain education, cognitive behavioral strategies for stress, nutrition, peer support). The trial (NCT03270449) was registered September 1 2017. Statistically significant post-intervention improvements were found in the primary outcome, perceived quality of care (Cohen's d = 0.61, 0.66 for follow up care and goal setting, respectively). Secondary outcomes showing statistically significant improvements were disease-related daily functioning (Cohen's d = 0.70), depressive symptoms (Cohen's d = 0.87), and pain beliefs (Cohen's d = 0.61, 0.67, 0.82 for harm, disability and control, respectively). No adverse events were reported. Community-based multidisciplinary group interventions for fibromyalgia show promise for improving satisfaction with quality of care, disease-related functioning, and depression, and fostering more adaptive pain beliefs.

Qualitative and psychometric evaluation of the PROMIS®-Fatigue SF-7a scale to assess fatigue in patients with moderately to severely active inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the content validity and psychometric properties of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS)-Fatigue Short Form 7a (SF-7a) v1.0 scale to determine its suitability in clinical trials to assess fatigue in patients with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC).

METHODS

A qualitative interview assessed patients' experience living with CD (N = 20) and UC (N = 19). The contents of the SF-7a scale were cognitively debriefed to evaluate content validity. A psychometric evaluation was performed using data from clinical trials of patients with CD (N = 360) and UC (N = 214). Correlations with Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ), Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI; CD only), and Mayo score (UC only) determined validity. The Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) was used to evaluate reliability and responsiveness to change. Using PGIC as an anchor, a preliminary threshold for clinically meaningful change was identified to define fatigue response in both CD and UC patients.

RESULTS

All patients reported fatigue as a common symptom. Patients confirmed SF-7a items were relevant to assessing fatigue, instructions and response options were clear, and its 7-day recall period was appropriate. Higher SF-7a scores were associated with higher disease activity (CDAI and Mayo score) and lower health-related quality of life (IBDQ), confirming known groups validity. The correlation of the SF-7a scale was higher with fatigue-related items. (rs ≥ -0.70) than with items not directly associated with fatigue. Test-retest reliability was moderate to good (0.54-0.89) among patients with stable disease, and responsiveness to change in disease severity was demonstrated from baseline to Week 12. A ≥7point decrease was identified as a reasonable threshold to define clinically meaningful improvement.

CONCLUSION

The SF-7a scale is a valid, reliable, and sensitive measure of fatigue in patients with moderately to severely active IBD and can be used to evaluate treatment response.

The validity of the Danish version of the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire - Revised applied in a clinical setting: a Rasch analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Danish version of the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire - Revised (FIQR), when used to quantify the severity of disease burden in a Danish population of patients with chronic widespread pain (CWP), including fibromyalgia (FM).

METHOD

A total of 924 participants diagnosed with CWP and/or FM completed an electronic version of the FIQR via touchscreens in the clinic at referral for specialist care. Data were collected from 1 January 2018 to 3 September 2020. Rasch measurement methods were applied.

RESULTS

Rating scale analysis suggested multiple threshold disordering in the 0-10 category rating scale. A principal component analysis suggested assessment of a multidimensional construct. Thus, the Rasch analysis of the full FIQR was discontinued. Instead, Rasch analyses were performed on the two subscales: 'function' and 'symptoms'. By collapsing the rating scale to a 0-4 category scale, the remaining threshold disordering of both subscale was solved. Only the symptom subscale indicated multidimensionality. There was underfitting misfit of item 21 and overfitting misfit of item 12. No significant differential item functioning, defined by sex, ethnicity, or education, was found.

CONCLUSION

The FIQR should be considered as an instrument consisting of three separate subscales representing 'function', 'overall impact', and 'symptoms'. We recommend calculating and reporting on both a 0-10 and a 0-4 category scale. Also, if using the total FIQR score as an outcome measure, this should be done with caution, until revision of the rating scale.

Online ACT intervention for fibromyalgia: An exploratory study of feasibility and preliminary effectiveness with smartphone-delivered experiential sampling assessment

INTRODUCTION

Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) is an effective treatment for chronic pain conditions. ACT seeks to produce clinical change by enhancing Psychological Flexibility (PF). This exploratory (feasibility and preliminary effectiveness) study presents a pilot application of an online ACT group intervention for fibromyalgia (FM) with an extensive Experiential Sampling (ES) assessment of outcome and process variables via smartphone.

METHOD

5-weekly ACT online group sessions were applied to 9 female FM patients. Questionnaire-based assessments of several clinical outcomes and PF processes were conducted pre- and post-intervention, and at 6-month follow-up. Extensive (6 weeks pre- and 6 weeks post-intervention) smartphone-delivered ES was implemented to gather process and outcome data in the patients' usual contexts. Clinically significant change was evaluated both at the group level and individually.

RESULTS

This treatment format appears to be feasible and acceptable to participants, with good adoption and completion rates (75 %) and excellent rates of treatment completion and clinical adherence (100 %). Participants showed significant reductions in affective pain, distress and biopsychosocial impact of FM both post-intervention and at 6-month follow-up (as measured with questionnaires), as well as significant improvements in satisfaction with actions and emotional discomfort (as measured through ES). Multilevel regression analyses indicated that PF-related processes assessed through ES had a significant impact on clinical outcomes and predicted the impact of FM at the 6-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

A brief online group ACT intervention for FM was both feasible and acceptable to participants. Also, there was preliminary evidence of effectiveness in enhancing pain-related PF and producing clinical benefits in FM.

Prognostic factors for work disability in patients with chronic widespread pain and fibromyalgia: protocol for a cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The association between chronic widespread pain (CWP) and disability is well established. Although research support large interindividual differences in functional outcomes, limited studies are available on the socio-economic consequences of offering stratified treatment based on prognostic factors. Identification of predictors of long-term functional outcomes such as work disability as a critical consequence, could assist early and targeted personalised interventions. The primary objective of this cohort study is to identify prognostic factors for the primary endpoint work status (employed and working vs not working) in patients with CWP assessed 3 years from baseline, that is, at referral for specialist care.

METHODS AND ANALYSES

Data are collected at the diagnostic unit at Department of Rheumatology, Frederiksberg Hospital. The first 1000 patients ≥18 years of age registered in a clinical research database (DANFIB registry) with CWP either 'employed and working' or 'not working' will be enrolled. Participants must meet the American College of Rheumatology 1990 definition of CWP, that is, pain in all four body quadrants and axially for more than 3 months and are additionally screened for fulfilment of criteria for fibromyalgia. Clinical data and patient-reported outcomes are collected at referral (baseline) through clinical assessment and electronic questionnaires. Data on the primary endpoint work status at baseline and 3 years from baseline will be extracted from the Integrated Labour Market Database, Statistics Denmark and the nationwide Danish DREAM database. Prognostic factor analysis will be based on multivariable logistic regression modelling with the dichotomous work status as dependent variable.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Sensitive personal data will be anonymised according to regulations by the Danish Data Protection Agency, and informed consent are obtained from all participants. Understanding and improving the prognosis of a health condition like CWP should be a priority in clinical research and practice. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04862520.

Effects of Wearable Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation on Fibromyalgia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Fibromyalgia is a chronic condition characterized by widespread pain and interference with daily activities. The aim of this study is to assess the benefit of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for persons diagnosed with fibromyalgia.

Patients and Methods

Adults meeting diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia were randomized in a double-blind trial to receive either an active (n=62) or sham (n=57) wearable TENS device for 3-months. Subjects were classified as having lower or higher pain sensitivity by Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST). Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC, primary outcome) and secondary efficacy measures including Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQR), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and painDETECT questionnaire (PDQ) were assessed at baseline, 6-weeks and 3-months. Treatment effects were determined by a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) analysis of the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (N=119). A pre-specified subgroup analysis of pain sensitivity was conducted using an interaction term in the model.

Results

No differences were found between active and sham treatment on PGIC scores at 3-months (0.34, 95% CI [−0.37, 1.04], p=0.351) in the ITT population. However, in subjects with higher pain sensitivity (n=60), PGIC was significantly greater for active treatment compared to sham (1.19, 95% CI [0.24, 2.13], p=0.014). FIQR total score (−7.47, 95% CI [−12.46, −2.48], p=0.003), FIQR pain item (−0.62, 95% CI [−1.17, −0.06], p=0.029), BPI Interference (−0.70, 95% CI [−1.30, −0.11], p=0.021) and PDQ (−1.69, 95% CI [−3.20, −0.18], p=0.028) exhibited significant improvements for active treatment compared to sham in the ITT population. Analgesics use was stable and comparable in both groups.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated modest treatment effects of reduced disease impact, pain and functional impairment from wearable TENS in individuals with fibromyalgia. Subjects with higher pain sensitivity exhibited larger treatment effects than those with lower pain sensitivity. Wearable TENS may be a safe treatment option for people with fibromyalgia.

Clinicaltrials.gov Registration

NCT03714425.

A Narrative Review of the Assessment of Depression in Chronic Pain

OBJECTIVES

This narrative review sought to explore the main critical issues in the assessment of depression in chronic pain and to identify self-report tools that can be reliably used for measuring it.

DESIGN

Narrative review of the literature.

METHODS

Articles were obtained through a search of three databases and a hand search of the references of full-text papers. Key results within the retrieved articles were summarized and integrated to address the review objectives.

RESULTS

Criterion contamination, different ways to define and evaluate pain and depression across studies, variability in chronic pain samples and settings, pitfalls of diagnostic systems and self-reports, and reluctance to address (or difficulty of recognizing) depression in patients and healthcare providers emerged as main critical issues. The Beck Depression Inventory seems to be the more accurate tool to evaluate depression in chronic pain patients, while other instruments such as the Patient Health Questionnaire could be recommended for a rapid screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment of depression comorbidity in chronic pain represents a challenge in both research and clinical practice; the choice and use of tests, as well as the score interpretation, require clinical reasoning.

NURSING PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Nurses play an important role in screening for depression. Cognitive contents of depression should be carefully evaluated since somatic symptoms may be confusing in the chronic pain context. Some self-reports may be useful for rapid screening. It is also advisable to consider other relevant patient information in evaluating depression.

[Effectiveness of pain neuroscience education in patients with fibromyalgia: Structured group intervention in Primary Care]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of a group intervention in Primary Care in patients with fibromyalgia (FM) based on pain neuroscience education (PNE).

DESIGN

Pre-post study.

LOCATION

Urban Primary Health Centre in Bilbao.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with FM (2010 American College of Rheumatology Diagnostic Criteria for fibromyalgia), ≥18 years.

INTERVENTION

5 weekly sessions (2hours each), and a reminder session one month later.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS

Compliance with FM criteria, assessed using the WPI (Widespread Pain Index, number of pain areas) and the SS (severity of symptoms) questionnaires. An assessment was also made on the impact of FM on functional capacity (FIQ:≥20% and ≥50% reduction in the FIQ total score from baseline to after treatment, and proportion of patients with FIQ<39 at the end of the study). Assessments were made at baseline, one month following the 5th session, and during the 6- and 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

All the study evaluations were completed by 85/98 patients. A statistically significant improvement was observed in the 3 studied categories (WPI, SS, and FIQ) since the first visit, and was maintained until the final visit (12 months later). A total of 45 patients (53%, 95% CI: 42%-63%), more than those at baseline, scored FIQ<39 (no worse than mild functional impairment). One month following the 5th session there were 44 patients (52%, 95% CI: 41%-62%) that no longer met FM criteria and, at the end of follow-up, there were 56 patients (66%, 95% CI: 55%-75%).

CONCLUSIONS

An intervention based on PNE has shown to be feasible in Primary Care, with results in the upper range of those published with other treatments for FM.

A Systematic Review of Studies Using the Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue Scale

PURPOSE

To review how the Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF) has been used and evaluate its psychometric properties.

METHODS

We conducted a database search using "multidimensional assessment of fatigue" or "MAF" as key terms from 1993 to 2015, and located 102 studies.

RESULTS

Eighty-three were empirical studies and 19 were reviews/evaluations. Research was conducted in 17 countries; 32 diseases were represented. Nine language versions of the MAF were used. The mean of the Global Fatigue Index ranged from 10.9 to 49.4. The MAF was reported to be easy-to-use, had strong reliability and validity, and was used in populations who spoke languages other than English.

CONCLUSION

The MAF is an acceptable assessment tool to measure fatigue and intervention effectiveness in various languages, diseases, and settings across the world.

Flexibility exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Exercise training is commonly recommended for adults with fibromyalgia. We defined flexibility exercise training programs as those involving movements of a joint or a series of joints, through complete range of motion, thus targeting major muscle-tendon units. This review is one of a series of reviews updating the first review published in 2002.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of flexibility exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database), Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2017, unrestricted by language, and we reviewed the reference lists of retrieved trials to identify potentially relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized trials (RCTs) including adults diagnosed with fibromyalgia based on published criteria. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, trial withdrawals, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected articles for inclusion, extracted data, performed 'Risk of bias' assessments, and assessed the certainty of the body of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. All discrepancies were rechecked, and consensus was achieved by discussion.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 RCTs (743 people). Among these RCTs, flexibility exercise training was compared to an untreated control group, land-based aerobic training, resistance training, or other interventions (i.e. Tai Chi, Pilates, aquatic biodanza, friction massage, medications). Studies were at risk of selection, performance, and detection bias (due to lack of adequate randomization and allocation concealment, lack of participant or personnel blinding, and lack of blinding for self-reported outcomes). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcomes were self-reported and were expressed on a 0-to-100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs) indicate improvement). We prioritized the findings of flexibility exercise training compared to land-based aerobic training and present them fully here.Very low-certainty evidence showed that compared with land-based aerobic training, flexibility exercise training (five trials with 266 participants) provides no clinically important benefits with regard to HRQoL, pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function. Low-certainty evidence showed no difference between these groups for withdrawals at completion of the intervention (8 to 20 weeks).Mean HRQoL assessed on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) Total scale (0 to 100, higher scores indicating worse HRQoL) was 46 mm and 42 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (2 studies, 193 participants); absolute change was 4% worse (6% better to 14% worse), and relative change was 7.5% worse (10.5% better to 25.5% worse) in the flexibility group. Mean pain was 57 mm and 52 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (5 studies, 266 participants); absolute change was 5% worse (1% better to 11% worse), and relative change was 6.7% worse (2% better to 15.4% worse). Mean fatigue was 67 mm and 71 mm in the aerobic and flexibility groups, respectively (2 studies, 75 participants); absolute change was 4% better (13% better to 5% worse), and relative change was 6% better (19.4% better to 7.4% worse). Mean physical function was 23 points and 17 points in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (1 study, 60 participants); absolute change was 6% worse (4% better to 16% worse), and relative change was 14% worse (9.1% better to 37.1% worse). We found very low-certainty evidence of an effect for stiffness. Mean stiffness was 49 mm to 79 mm in the flexibility and aerobic groups, respectively (1 study, 15 participants); absolute change was 30% better (8% better to 51% better), and relative change was 39% better (10% better to 68% better). We found no evidence of an effect in all-cause withdrawal between the flexibility and aerobic groups (5 studies, 301 participants). Absolute change was 1% fewer withdrawals in the flexibility group (8% fewer to 21% more), and relative change in the flexibility group compared to the aerobic training intervention group was 3% fewer (39% fewer to 55% more). It is uncertain whether flexibility leads to long-term effects (36 weeks after a 12-week intervention), as the evidence was of low certainty and was derived from a single trial.Very low-certainty evidence indicates uncertainty in the risk of adverse events for flexibility exercise training. One adverse effect was described among the 132 participants allocated to flexibility training. One participant had tendinitis of the Achilles tendon (McCain 1988), but it is unclear if the tendinitis was a pre-existing condition.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When compared with aerobic training, it is uncertain whether flexibility improves outcomes such as HRQoL, pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function, as the certainty of the evidence is very low. Flexibility exercise training may lead to little or no difference for all-cause withdrawals. It is also uncertain whether flexibility exercise training has long-term effects due to the very low certainty of the evidence. We downgraded the evidence owing to the small number of trials and participants across trials, as well as due to issues related to unclear and high risk of bias (selection, performance, and detection biases). While flexibility exercise training appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), evidence on adverse events was scarce, therefore its safety is uncertain.

Mixed exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review is one of a series of reviews about exercise training for fibromyalgia that will replace the review titled "Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome", which was first published in 2002.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of mixed exercise training protocols that include two or more types of exercise (aerobic, resistance, flexibility) for adults with fibromyalgia against control (treatment as usual, wait list control), non exercise (e.g. biofeedback), or other exercise (e.g. mixed versus flexibility) interventions.Specific comparisons involving mixed exercise versus other exercises (e.g. resistance, aquatic, aerobic, flexibility, and whole body vibration exercises) were not assessed.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Thesis and Dissertations Abstracts, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), the Physiotherapy Evidence Databese (PEDro), Current Controlled Trials (to 2013), WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2017, unrestricted by language, to identify all potentially relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia that compared mixed exercise interventions with other or no exercise interventions. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and the quality of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 RCTs (2088 participants; 98% female; average age 51 years) that compared mixed exercise interventions (including at least two of the following: aerobic or cardiorespiratory, resistance or muscle strengthening exercise, and flexibility exercise) versus control (e.g. wait list), non-exercise (e.g. biofeedback), and other exercise interventions. Design flaws across studies led to selection, performance, detection, and selective reporting biases. We prioritised the findings of mixed exercise compared to control and present them fully here.Twenty-one trials (1253 participants) provided moderate-quality evidence for all major outcomes but stiffness (low quality). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcome measures were self-reported and expressed on a 0 to 100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs) indicate improvement; we used a clinically important difference between groups of 15% relative difference). Results for mixed exercise versus control show that mean HRQL was 56 and 49 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (13 studies; 610 participants) with absolute improvement of 7% (3% better to 11% better) and relative improvement of 12% (6% better to 18% better). Mean pain was 58.6 and 53 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (15 studies; 832 participants) with absolute improvement of 5% (1% better to 9% better) and relative improvement of 9% (3% better to 15% better). Mean fatigue was 72 and 59 points in the control and exercise groups, respectively (1 study; 493 participants) with absolute improvement of 13% (8% better to 18% better) and relative improvement of 18% (11% better to 24% better). Mean stiffness was 68 and 61 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (5 studies; 261 participants) with absolute improvement of 7% (1% better to 12% better) and relative improvement of 9% (1% better to 17% better). Mean physical function was 49 and 38 in the control and exercise groups, respectively (9 studies; 477 participants) with absolute improvement of 11% (7% better to 15% better) and relative improvement of 22% (14% better to 30% better). Pooled analysis resulted in a moderate-quality risk ratio for all-cause withdrawals with similar rates across groups (11 per 100 and 12 per 100 in the control and intervention groups, respectively) (19 studies; 1065 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 1.51) with an absolute change of 1% (3% fewer to 5% more) and a relative change of 11% (28% fewer to 47% more). Across all 21 studies, no injuries or other adverse events were reported; however some participants experienced increased fibromyalgia symptoms (pain, soreness, or tiredness) during or after exercise. However due to low event rates, we are uncertain of the precise risks with exercise. Mixed exercise may improve HRQL and physical function and may decrease pain and fatigue; all-cause withdrawal was similar across groups, and mixed exercises may slightly reduce stiffness. For fatigue, physical function, HRQL, and stiffness, we cannot rule in or out a clinically relevant change, as the confidence intervals include both clinically important and unimportant effects.We found very low-quality evidence on long-term effects. In eight trials, HRQL, fatigue, and physical function improvement persisted at 6 to 52 or more weeks post intervention but improvements in stiffness and pain did not persist. Withdrawals and adverse events were not measured.It is uncertain whether mixed versus other non-exercise or other exercise interventions improve HRQL and physical function or decrease symptoms because the quality of evidence was very low. The interventions were heterogeneous, and results were often based on small single studies. Adverse events with these interventions were not measured, and thus uncertainty surrounds the risk of adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to control, moderate-quality evidence indicates that mixed exercise probably improves HRQL, physical function, and fatigue, but this improvement may be small and clinically unimportant for some participants; physical function shows improvement in all participants. Withdrawal was similar across groups. Low-quality evidence suggests that mixed exercise may slightly improve stiffness. Very low-quality evidence indicates that we are 'uncertain' whether the long-term effects of mixed exercise are maintained for all outcomes; all-cause withdrawals and adverse events were not measured. Compared to other exercise or non-exercise interventions, we are uncertain about the effects of mixed exercise because we found only very low-quality evidence obtained from small, very heterogeneous trials. Although mixed exercise appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), evidence on adverse events is scarce, so we are uncertain about its safety. We downgraded the evidence from these trials due to imprecision (small trials), selection bias (e.g. allocation), blinding of participants and care providers or outcome assessors, and selective reporting.

Clinical significance of anti-dense fine speckled 70 antibody in patients with fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a common rheumatologic disease characterized by chronic widespread pain, along with various clinical manifestations including atypical autoimmune characteristics. Despite its high prevalence, there remain no approved laboratory tests to identify specific manifestations of FM, or to rule out FM from other rheumatic diseases. Anti-dense fine speckled 70 (anti-DFS70) antibodies were initially identified as a form of anti-nuclear antibodies in a patient with interstitial cystitis. Anti-DFS70 antibodies are found in ≤ 10% of healthy individuals, but have suggestive negative association with autoimmune diseases; however, the clinical significance of these autoantibodies in FM patients remains poorly understood.

METHODS

We examined 39 patients with FM, along with 17 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and 19 healthy individuals (HI). Patients were compared based on physical measurements, disease duration, tender point counts, FM Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) scores, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, somatic symptoms, and anti-DFS70 antibodies.

RESULTS

Levels of anti-DFS70 antibodies were significantly higher in the FM and HI groups than in those with SLE. Both anti-DFS70 antibodies and VAS scores were positively correlated with FM. Within the FM group, patients with arthralgia had higher anti-DFS70 antibody values compared to those without arthralgia (p = 0.024); antibody levels were also higher in patients with sleep disturbances relative to those without sleep issues (p = 0.024). In contrast, there were no correlations between anti-DFS70 antibodies and age, body mass index, disease duration, tender point counts, FIQ, short-form health survey results, or other clinical manifestations.

CONCLUSION

Anti-DFS70 antibodies may represent a useful biomarker for differentiating between FM and other autoimmune diseases. The levels of anti-DFS70 antibodies were also significantly higher among patients with arthralgia and sleep disturbances. Further investigations are necessary to evaluate the relationships between anti-DFS70 antibodies and other cytokines as a predictive marker for pain.

Reliability and Construct Validity of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Instruments in Women with Fibromyalgia

Objective

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was developed to standardize measurement of clinically relevant patient-reported outcomes. This study evaluated the reliability and construct validity of select PROMIS static short-form (SF) instruments in women with fibromyalgia.

Design

Analysis of baseline data from the Fibromyalgia Activity Study with TENS (FAST), a randomized controlled trial of the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.

Setting

Dual site, university-based outpatient clinics.

Subjects

Women aged 20 to 67 years diagnosed with fibromyalgia.

Methods

Participants completed the Revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQR) and 10 PROMIS static SF instruments. Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach alpha. Convergent validity was examined against the FIQR using Pearson correlation and multiple regression analysis.

Results

PROMIS static SF instruments had fair to high internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.58 to 0.94, P  < 0.05). PROMIS 'physical function' domain score was highly correlated with FIQR 'function' score (r = -0.73). The PROMIS 'total' score was highly correlated with the FIQR total score (r = -0.72). Correlations with FIQR total score of each of the three PROMIS domain scores were r = -0.65 for 'physical function,' r = -0.63 for 'global,' and r = -0.57 for 'symptom' domain. PROMIS 'physical function,' 'global,' and 'symptom' scores explained 58% of the FIQR total score variance.

Conclusions

Select PROMIS static SF instruments demonstrate convergent validity with the FIQR, a legacy measure of fibromyalgia disease severity. These results highlight the potential utility of select PROMIS static SFs for assessment and tracking of patient-reported outcomes in fibromyalgia.

Whole body vibration exercise training for fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Exercise training is commonly recommended for adults with fibromyalgia. We defined whole body vibration (WBV) exercise as use of a vertical or rotary oscillating platform as an exercise stimulus while the individual engages in sustained static positioning or dynamic movements. The individual stands on the platform, and oscillations result in vibrations transmitted to the subject through the legs. This review is one of a series of reviews that replaces the first review published in 2002.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate benefits and harms of WBV exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PEDro, Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, AMED, WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 2016, unrestricted by language, to identify potentially relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with the diagnosis of fibromyalgia based on published criteria including a WBV intervention versus control or another intervention. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed risk of bias assessments, and assessed the quality of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. We used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies involving 150 middle-aged female participants from one country. Two studies had two treatment arms (71 participants) that compared WBV plus mixed exercise plus relaxation versus mixed exercise plus relaxation and placebo WBV versus control, and WBV plus mixed exercise versus mixed exercise and control; two studies had three treatment arms (79 participants) that compared WBV plus mixed exercise versus control and mixed relaxation placebo WBV. We judged the overall risk of bias as low for selection (random sequence generation), detection (objectively measured outcomes), attrition, and other biases; as unclear for selection bias (allocation concealment); and as high for performance, detection (self-report outcomes), and selective reporting biases.The WBV versus control comparison reported on three major outcomes assessed at 12 weeks post intervention based on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) (0 to 100 scale, lower score is better). Results for HRQL in the control group at end of treatment (59.13) showed a mean difference (MD) of -3.73 (95% confidence interval [CI] -10.81 to 3.35) for absolute HRQL, or improvement of 4% (11% better to 3% worse) and relative improvement of 6.7% (19.6% better to 6.1% worse). Results for withdrawals indicate that 14 per 100 and 10 per 100 in the intervention and control groups, respectively, withdrew from the intervention (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.27 to 7.67; absolute change 4%, 95% CI 16% fewer to 24% more; relative change 43% more, 95% CI 73% fewer to 667% more). The only adverse event reported was acute pain in the legs, for which one participant dropped out of the program. We judged the quality of evidence for all outcomes as very low. This study did not measure pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, or physical function. No outcomes in this comparison met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance.The WBV plus mixed exercise (aerobic, strength, flexibility, and relaxation) versus control study (N = 21) evaluated symptoms at six weeks post intervention using the FIQ. Results for HRQL at end of treatment (59.64) showed an MD of -16.02 (95% CI -31.57 to -0.47) for absolute HRQL, with improvement of 16% (0.5% to 32%) and relative change in HRQL of 24% (0.7% to 47%). Data showed a pain intensity MD of -28.22 (95% CI -43.26 to -13.18) for an absolute difference of 28% (13% to 43%) and a relative change of 39% improvement (18% to 60%); as well as a fatigue MD of -33 (95% CI -49 to -16) for an absolute difference of 33% (16% to 49%) and relative difference of 47% (95% CI 23% to 60%); and a stiffness MD of -26.27 (95% CI -42.96 to -9.58) for an absolute difference of 26% (10% to 43%) and a relative difference of 36.5% (23% to 60%). All-cause withdrawals occurred in 8 per 100 and 33 per 100 withdrawals in the intervention and control groups, respectively (two studies, N = 46; RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.06 to 1.12) for an absolute risk difference of 24% (3% to 51%). One participant exhibited a mild anxiety attack at the first session of WBV. No studies in this comparison reported on physical function. Several outcomes (based on the findings of one study) in this comparison met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance: HRQL, pain intensity, fatigue, and stiffness, which improved by 16%, 39%, 46%, and 36%, respectively. We found evidence of very low quality for all outcomes.The WBV plus mixed exercise versus other exercise provided very low quality evidence for all outcomes. Investigators evaluated outcomes on a 0 to 100 scale (lower score is better) for pain intensity (one study, N = 23; MD -16.36, 95% CI -29.49 to -3.23), HRQL (two studies, N = 49; MD -6.67, 95% CI -14.65 to 1.31), fatigue (one study, N = 23; MD -14.41, 95% CI -29.47 to 0.65), stiffness (one study, N = 23; MD -12.72, 95% CI -26.90 to 1.46), and all-cause withdrawal (three studies, N = 77; RR 0.72, 95% CI -0.17 to 3.11). Adverse events reported for the three studies included one anxiety attack at the first session of WBV and one dropout from the comparison group ("other exercise group") due to an injury that was not related to the program. No studies reported on physical function.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Whether WBV or WBV in addition to mixed exercise is superior to control or another intervention for women with fibromyalgia remains uncertain. The quality of evidence is very low owing to imprecision (few study participants and wide confidence intervals) and issues related to risk of bias. These trials did not measure major outcomes such as pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, and physical function. Overall, studies were few and were very small, which prevented meaningful estimates of harms and definitive conclusions about WBV safety.

Concurrent validation of a pressure pain threshold scale for individuals with myofascial pain syndrome and fibromyalgia

Background

Manual pressure palpation is an examination technique used in the classification of myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) and fibromyalgia (FM). Currently, there are no validated systems for classifying results. A valid and reliable pressure pain threshold scale (PPTS) may provide a means for clinicians to grade, document, and report findings. The purpose of this investigation was to validate a PPTS in individuals diagnosed with MPS and FM. Intra-rater reliability, concurrent validity, minimum cut-off value, and patient responses were evaluated.

Methods

Eighty-four participants who met the inclusion criteria were placed into three groups of 28 (N = 84): MPS, FM, and asymptomatic controls. All participants underwent a two-part testing session using the American College of Rheumatology criteria for classifying FM. Part-1 consisted of manual palpation with a digital pressure sensor for pressure consistency and part 2 consisted of algometry. For each tender point (18 total), participants graded tenderness using the visual analog scale (VAS) while the examiner concurrently graded response using a five-point PPTS.

Results

The PPTS had good intra-rater reliability (ICC ≥ .88). A moderate to excellent relationship was found between the PPTS and VAS for all groups with the digital pressure sensor and algometer (ρ ≥ .61). A minimum cut-off value of 2 on the PPTS differentiated participants with MPS and FM from asymptomatic controls.

Discussion

The results provide preliminary evidence validating the PPTS for individuals with MPS and FM. Future research should further study the clinimetric properties of the PPTS with other chronic pain and orthopedic conditions.

Levels of Evidence

2c.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov registration No. NCT02802202.

Aerobic exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review is one of a series of reviews about exercise training for people with fibromyalgia that will replace the "Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome" review first published in 2002.

OBJECTIVES

• To evaluate the benefits and harms of aerobic exercise training for adults with fibromyalgia• To assess the following specific comparisons ० Aerobic versus control conditions (eg, treatment as usual, wait list control, physical activity as usual) ० Aerobic versus aerobic interventions (eg, running vs brisk walking) ० Aerobic versus non-exercise interventions (eg, medications, education) We did not assess specific comparisons involving aerobic exercise versus other exercise interventions (eg, resistance exercise, aquatic exercise, flexibility exercise, mixed exercise). Other systematic reviews have examined or will examine these comparisons (Bidonde 2014; Busch 2013).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Thesis and Dissertation Abstracts, the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry up to June 2016, unrestricted by language, and we reviewed the reference lists of retrieved trials to identify potentially relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with a diagnosis of fibromyalgia that compared aerobic training interventions (dynamic physical activity that increases breathing and heart rate to submaximal levels for a prolonged period) versus no exercise or another intervention. Major outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQL), pain intensity, stiffness, fatigue, physical function, withdrawals, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, performed a risk of bias assessment, and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for major outcomes using the GRADE approach. We used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences between groups.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 RCTs (839 people). Studies were at risk of selection, performance, and detection bias (owing to lack of blinding for self-reported outcomes) and had low risk of attrition and reporting bias. We prioritized the findings when aerobic exercise was compared with no exercise control and present them fully here.Eight trials (with 456 participants) provided low-quality evidence for pain intensity, fatigue, stiffness, and physical function; and moderate-quality evidence for withdrawals and HRQL at completion of the intervention (6 to 24 weeks). With the exception of withdrawals and adverse events, major outcome measures were self-reported and were expressed on a 0 to 100 scale (lower values are best, negative mean differences (MDs)/standardized mean differences (SMDs) indicate improvement). Effects for aerobic exercise versus control were as follows: HRQL: mean 56.08; five studies; N = 372; MD -7.89, 95% CI -13.23 to -2.55; absolute improvement of 8% (3% to 13%) and relative improvement of 15% (5% to 24%); pain intensity: mean 65.31; six studies; N = 351; MD -11.06, 95% CI -18.34 to -3.77; absolute improvement of 11% (95% CI 4% to 18%) and relative improvement of 18% (7% to 30%); stiffness: mean 69; one study; N = 143; MD -7.96, 95% CI -14.95 to -0.97; absolute difference in improvement of 8% (1% to 15%) and relative change in improvement of 11.4% (21.4% to 1.4%); physical function: mean 38.32; three studies; N = 246; MD -10.16, 95% CI -15.39 to -4.94; absolute change in improvement of 10% (15% to 5%) and relative change in improvement of 21.9% (33% to 11%); and fatigue: mean 68; three studies; N = 286; MD -6.48, 95% CI -14.33 to 1.38; absolute change in improvement of 6% (12% improvement to 0.3% worse) and relative change in improvement of 8% (16% improvement to 0.4% worse). Pooled analysis resulted in a risk ratio (RR) of moderate quality for withdrawals (17 per 100 and 20 per 100 in control and intervention groups, respectively; eight studies; N = 456; RR 1.25, 95%CI 0.89 to 1.77; absolute change of 5% more withdrawals with exercise (3% fewer to 12% more).Three trials provided low-quality evidence on long-term effects (24 to 208 weeks post intervention) and reported that benefits for pain and function persisted but did not for HRQL or fatigue. Withdrawals were similar, and investigators did not assess stiffness and adverse events.We are uncertain about the effects of one aerobic intervention versus another, as the evidence was of low to very low quality and was derived from single trials only, precluding meta-analyses. Similarly, we are uncertain of the effects of aerobic exercise over active controls (ie, education, three studies; stress management training, one study; medication, one study) owing to evidence of low to very low quality provided by single trials. Most studies did not measure adverse events; thus we are uncertain about the risk of adverse events associated with aerobic exercise.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When compared with control, moderate-quality evidence indicates that aerobic exercise probably improves HRQL and all-cause withdrawal, and low-quality evidence suggests that aerobic exercise may slightly decrease pain intensity, may slightly improve physical function, and may lead to little difference in fatigue and stiffness. Three of the reported outcomes reached clinical significance (HRQL, physical function, and pain). Long-term effects of aerobic exercise may include little or no difference in pain, physical function, and all-cause withdrawal, and we are uncertain about long-term effects on remaining outcomes. We downgraded the evidence owing to the small number of included trials and participants across trials, and because of issues related to unclear and high risks of bias (performance, selection, and detection biases). Aerobic exercise appears to be well tolerated (similar withdrawal rates across groups), although evidence on adverse events is scarce, so we are uncertain about its safety.

Cost-utility and biological underpinnings of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) versus a psychoeducational programme (FibroQoL) for fibromyalgia: a 12-month randomised controlled trial (EUDAIMON study)

BACKGROUND

The EUDAIMON study focuses on fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS), a prevalent chronic condition characterized by pain, fatigue, cognitive problems and distress. According to recent reviews and meta-analyses, Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) is a promising therapeutic approach for patients with FMS. The measurement of biomarkers as part of the analysis of MBSR effects would help to identify the neurobiological underpinnings of MBSR and increase our knowledge of FMS pathophysiology. The main objectives of this 12-month RCT are: firstly, to examine the effectiveness and cost-utility for FMS patients of MBSR as an add-on to treatment as usual (TAU) versus TAU + the psychoeducational programme FibroQoL, and versus TAU only; secondly, to examine pre-post differences in brain structure and function, as well as levels of specific inflammatory markers in the three study arms and; thirdly, to analyse the role of some psychological variables as mediators of 12-month clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Effectiveness, cost-utility, and neurobiological analyses performed alongside a 12-month RCT. The participants will be 180 adult patients with FMS recruited at the Sant Joan de Déu hospital (St. Boi de Llobregat, Spain), randomly allocated to one of the three study arms: TAU + MBSR vs. TAU + FibroQol vs. TAU. A comprehensive assessment to collect functional, quality of life, distress, costs, and psychological variables will be conducted pre-, post-intervention, and at 12-month post-intervention. Fifty per cent of study participants will be evaluated at pre- and post-treatment using Voxel-Based Morphometry, Diffusion Tensor Imaging, pseudo-continuous Arterial Spin Labeling, and resting state fMRI. A cytokine multiplex kit of high-sensitivity will be applied (cytokines IL-6, IL-8, IL-10 + high-sensitivity CRP test).

DISCUSSION

The findings obtained from this RCT will indicate whether MBSR is potentially cost-effective for FMS and contribute to knowledge of any brain and inflammatory changes associated with MBSR in FMS patients. Specifically, we will determine whether there are morphometric and functional changes associated with participation in MBSR in brain regions related to meta-awareness, body awareness, memory consolidation-reconsolidation, emotion regulation and in networks postulated to underpin the sensory-discriminative, cognitive-evaluative and affective-motivational aspects of the pain experience.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02561416 . Registered 23 September 2015.

Neurocognitive complaints and functional status among patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to conduct a longitudinal examination of cognitive complaints and functional status in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) alone and those who also had fibromyalgia (CFS/FM).

METHODS

A total of 93 patients from a tertiary care fatigue clinic were evaluated on four occasions, each 6 months apart. Each evaluation included a tender point assessment, and self-reported functional status and cognitive complaints.

RESULTS

Patients with CFS/FM reported significantly worse physical functioning, more bodily pain, and more cognitive difficulties (visuo-perceptual ability and verbal memory) than patients with CFS alone. Over time, bodily pain decreased only for participants with CFS alone. Verbal memory problems were associated with more bodily pain for both patient groups, whereas visuo-perceptual problems were associated with worse functional status for patients with CFS alone.

CONCLUSIONS

This study adds to the literature on functional status, longitudinal course, and cognitive difficulties among patients with CFS and those with CFS and FM. The results suggest that patients with CFS/FM are more disabled, have more cognitive complaints, and improve more slowly over time than patients with CFS alone. Specific cognitive difficulties are related to worse functional status, which supports the addition of cognitive difficulties to the FM case criteria.

The Use of Polysymptomatic Distress Categories in the Evaluation of Fibromyalgia (FM) and FM Severity

OBJECTIVE

The polysymptomatic distress (PSD) scale is derived from variables used in the 2010 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) fibromyalgia (FM) criteria modified for survey and clinical research. The scale is useful in measuring the effect of PSD over the full range of pain-related clinical symptoms, not just in those who are FM criteria-positive. However, no PSD scale categories have been defined to distinguish severity of illness in FM or in those who do not satisfy the FM criteria. We analyzed the scale and multiple covariates to develop clinical categories and to further validate the scale.

METHODS

FM was diagnosed according to the research criteria modification of the 2010 ACR FM criteria. We investigated categories in a large database of patients with pain (2732 with rheumatoid arthritis) and developed categories by using germane clinic variables that had been previously studied for severity groupings. By definition, FM cannot be diagnosed unless PSD is at least 12.

RESULTS

Based on population categories, regression analysis, and inspections of curvilinear relationships, we established PSD severity categories of none (0-3), mild (4-7), moderate (8-11), severe (12-19), and very severe (20-31). Categories were statistically distinct, and a generally linear relationship between PSD categories and covariate severity was noted.

CONCLUSION

PSD categories are clinically relevant and demonstrate FM type symptoms over the full range of clinical illness. Although FM criteria can be clinically useful, there is no clear-cut symptom distinction between FM (+) and FM (-), and PSD categories can aid in more effectively classifying patients.

Aquatic exercise training for fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Exercise training is commonly recommended for individuals with fibromyalgia. This review examined the effects of supervised group aquatic training programs (led by an instructor). We defined aquatic training as exercising in a pool while standing at waist, chest, or shoulder depth. This review is part of the update of the 'Exercise for treating fibromyalgia syndrome' review first published in 2002, and previously updated in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the benefits and harms of aquatic exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 2 (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Health Technology Assessment Database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, Dissertation Abstracts, WHO international Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and AMED, as well as other sources (i.e., reference lists from key journals, identified articles, meta-analyses, and reviews of all types of treatment for fibromyalgia) from inception to October 2013. Using Cochrane methods, we screened citations, abstracts, and full-text articles. Subsequently, we identified aquatic exercise training studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Selection criteria were: a) full-text publication of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in adults diagnosed with fibromyalgia based on published criteria, and b) between-group data for an aquatic intervention and a control or other intervention. We excluded studies if exercise in water was less than 50% of the full intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data (24 outcomes), of which we designated seven as major outcomes: multidimensional function, self reported physical function, pain, stiffness, muscle strength, submaximal cardiorespiratory function, withdrawal rates and adverse effects. We resolved discordance through discussion. We evaluated interventions using mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Where two or more studies provided data for an outcome, we carried out meta-analysis. In addition, we set and used a 15% threshold for calculation of clinically relevant differences.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 aquatic exercise training studies (N = 881; 866 women and 15 men). Nine studies compared aquatic exercise to control, five studies compared aquatic to land-based exercise, and two compared aquatic exercise to a different aquatic exercise program.We rated the risk of bias related to random sequence generation (selection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), selective reporting (reporting bias), blinding of outcome assessors (detection bias), and other bias as low. We rated blinding of participants and personnel (selection and performance bias) and allocation concealment (selection bias) as low risk and unclear. The assessment of the evidence showed limitations related to imprecision, high statistical heterogeneity, and wide confidence intervals. Aquatic versus controlWe found statistically significant improvements (P value < 0.05) in all of the major outcomes. Based on a 100-point scale, multidimensional function improved by six units (MD -5.97, 95% CI -9.06 to -2.88; number needed to treat (NNT) 5, 95% CI 3 to 9), self reported physical function by four units (MD -4.35, 95% CI -7.77 to -0.94; NNT 6, 95% CI 3 to 22), pain by seven units (MD -6.59, 95% CI -10.71 to -2.48; NNT 5, 95% CI 3 to 8), and stiffness by 18 units (MD -18.34, 95% CI -35.75 to -0.93; NNT 3, 95% CI 2 to 24) more in the aquatic than the control groups. The SMD for muscle strength as measured by knee extension and hand grip was 0.63 standard deviations higher compared to the control group (SMD 0.63, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.05; NNT 4, 95% CI 3 to 12) and cardiovascular submaximal function improved by 37 meters on six-minute walk test (95% CI 4.14 to 69.92). Only two major outcomes, stiffness and muscle strength, met the 15% threshold for clinical relevance (improved by 27% and 37% respectively). Withdrawals were similar in the aquatic and control groups and adverse effects were poorly reported, with no serious adverse effects reported. Aquatic versus land-basedThere were no statistically significant differences between interventions for multidimensional function, self reported physical function, pain or stiffness: 0.91 units (95% CI -4.01 to 5.83), -5.85 units (95% CI -12.33 to 0.63), -0.75 units (95% CI -10.72 to 9.23), and two units (95% CI -8.88 to 1.28) respectively (all based on a 100-point scale), or in submaximal cardiorespiratory function (three seconds on a 100-meter walk test, 95% CI -1.77 to 7.77). We found a statistically significant difference between interventions for strength, favoring land-based training (2.40 kilo pascals grip strength, 95% CI 4.52 to 0.28). None of the outcomes in the aquatic versus land comparison reached clinically relevant differences of 15%. Withdrawals were similar in the aquatic and land groups and adverse effects were poorly reported, with no serious adverse effects in either group. Aquatic versus aquatic (Ai Chi versus stretching in the water, exercise in pool water versus exercise in sea water)Among the major outcomes the only statistically significant difference between interventions was for stiffness, favoring Ai Chi (1.00 on a 100-point scale, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.69).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low to moderate quality evidence relative to control suggests that aquatic training is beneficial for improving wellness, symptoms, and fitness in adults with fibromyalgia. Very low to low quality evidence suggests that there are benefits of aquatic and land-based exercise, except in muscle strength (very low quality evidence favoring land). No serious adverse effects were reported.

Profiles in fibromyalgia: algometry, auditory evoked potentials and clinical characterization of different subtypes

The heterogeneity found in fibromyalgia (FM) patients has led to the investigation of disease subgroups, mainly based on clinical features. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that clinical FM subgroups are associated with different underlying pathophysiological mechanisms. Sixty-three FM patients were classified in type I or type II, according to the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), and in mild/moderate versus severe FM, according to the severity of three cardinal symptoms considered in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2010 criteria (unrefreshed sleep, cognitive problems and fatigue). To validate the subgroups obtained by these two classifications, we calculated the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for various clinical variables and for two potential biomarkers of FM: Response to experimental pressure pain (algometry) and the amplitude/intensity slopes of the auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) obtained to stimuli of increasing intensity. The variables that best discriminated type I versus type II were those related to depression, while the indices of clinical or experimental pain (threshold or tolerance) did not significantly differ between them. The variables that best discriminated the mild/moderate versus severe subgroups were those related to the algometry. The AEPs did not allow discrimination among the generated subsets. The FIQ-based classification allows the identification of subgroups that differ in psychological distress, while the index based on the ACR 2010 criteria seems to be useful to characterize the severity of FM mainly based on hyperalgesia. The incorporation of potential biomarkers to generate or validate classification criteria is crucial to advance in the knowledge of FM and in the understanding of pathophysiological pathways.

Endobiogeny: a global approach to systems biology (part 1 of 2)

Endobiogeny is a global systems approach to human biology that may offer an advancement in clinical medicine based in scientific principles of rigor and experimentation and the humanistic principles of individualization of care and alleviation of suffering with minimization of harm. Endobiogeny is neither a movement away from modern science nor an uncritical embracing of pre-rational methods of inquiry but a synthesis of quantitative and qualitative relationships reflected in a systems-approach to life and based on new mathematical paradigms of pattern recognition.

A cross-sectional survey assessing sources of movement-related fear among people with fibromyalgia syndrome

Fear of movement may contribute to functional limitations and loss of well-being among individuals with fibromyalgia (FM). The objectives of this study were to assess factors contributing to movement-related fear and to explore relationships among these factors, function and wellness, in a widespread population of people with FM. This was an internet survey of individuals with FM. Respondents completed a battery of surveys including the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire--Revised (FIQR), Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK), Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC), Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder screen (PC-PTSD), Vertigo Symptom Scale (VSS-SF), a joint hypermobility syndrome screen (JHS), and screening questions related to obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD), physical activity, work status, and demographics. Analysis included descriptive statistics, Pearson product-moment correlations, and linear regression. Over a 2-year period, 1,125 people (97.6 % female) completed the survey battery. Kinesiophobia was present in 72.9 % of the respondents, balance confidence was compromised in 74.8 %, PTSD likely in 60.4 %, joint hypermobility syndrome likely in 46.6 %, and OCPD tendencies in 26.8 %. The total FIQR and FIQR perceived function subscores were highly correlated (p < 0.0005, r > 0.4) with pain, kinesiophobia, balance confidence, and vertigo. Reported activity level had poor correlation (r < 0.25) with all measured variables. Pain, ABC, VSS, and TSK predicted FIQR and FIQR-pf, explaining 65 and 48 % of the variance, respectively. Kinesiophobia, balance complaints, vertigo, PTSD, and joint hypermobility were common in this population of people with FM. Sources of movement-related fear correlated to overall wellness and perceived function as measured by the FIQR and FIQR-pf.

Resistance exercise training for fibromyalgia

BACKGROUND

Fibromyalgia is characterized by chronic widespread pain that leads to reduced physical function. Exercise training is commonly recommended as a treatment for management of symptoms. We examined the literature on resistance training for individuals with fibromyalgia. Resistance training is exercise performed against a progressive resistance with the intention of improving muscle strength, muscle endurance, muscle power, or a combination of these.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of resistance exercise training in adults with fibromyalgia. We compared resistance training versus control and versus other types of exercise training.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched nine electronic databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, Dissertation Abstracts, Current Controlled Trials, World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, AMED) and other sources for published full-text articles. The date of the last search was 5 March 2013. Two review authors independently screened 1856 citations, 766 abstracts and 156 full-text articles. We included five studies that met our inclusion criteria.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Selection criteria included: a) randomized clinical trial, b) diagnosis of fibromyalgia based on published criteria, c) adult sample, d) full-text publication, and e) inclusion of between-group data comparing resistance training versus a control or other physical activity intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted intervention and outcome data. We resolved disagreements between the two review authors and questions regarding interpretation of study methods by discussion within the pairs or when necessary the issue was taken to the full team of 11 members. We extracted 21 outcomes of which seven were designated as major outcomes: multidimensional function, self reported physical function, pain, tenderness, muscle strength, attrition rates, and adverse effects. We evaluated benefits and harms of the interventions using standardized mean differences (SMD) or mean differences (MD) or risk ratios or Peto odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where two or more studies provided data for an outcome, we carried out a meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

The literature search yielded 1865 citations with five studies meeting the selection criteria. One of the studies that had three arms contributed data for two comparisons. In the included studies, there were 219 women participants with fibromyalgia, 95 of whom were assigned to resistance training programs. Three randomized trials compared 16 to 21 weeks of moderate- to high-intensity resistance training versus a control group. Two studies compared eight weeks of progressive resistance training (intensity as tolerated) using free weights or body weight resistance exercise versus aerobic training (ie, progressive treadmill walking, indoor and outdoor walking), and one study compared 12 weeks of low-intensity resistance training using hand weights (1 to 3 lbs (0.45 to 1.36 kg)) and elastic tubing versus flexibility exercise (static stretches to major muscle groups).Statistically significant differences (MD; 95% CI) favoring the resistance training interventions over control group(s) were found in multidimensional function (Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) total decreased 16.75 units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -23.31 to -10.19), self reported physical function (-6.29 units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -10.45 to -2.13), pain (-3.3 cm on a 10-cm scale; 95% CI -6.35 to -0.26), tenderness (-1.84 out of 18 tender points; 95% CI -2.6 to -1.08), and muscle strength (27.32 kg force on bilateral concentric leg extension; 95% CI 18.28 to 36.36).Differences between the resistance training group(s) and the aerobic training groups were not statistically significant for multidimensional function (5.48 on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -0.92 to 11.88), self reported physical function (-1.48 units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -6.69 to 3.74) or tenderness (SMD -0.13; 95% CI -0.55 to 0.30). There was a statistically significant reduction in pain (0.99 cm on a 10-cm scale; 95% CI 0.31 to 1.67) favoring the aerobic groups.Statistically significant differences were found between a resistance training group and a flexibility group favoring the resistance training group for multidimensional function (-6.49 FIQ units on a 100-point scale; 95% CI -12.57 to -0.41) and pain (-0.88 cm on a 10-cm scale; 95% CI -1.57 to -0.19), but not for tenderness (-0.46 out of 18 tender points; 95% CI -1.56 to 0.64) or strength (4.77 foot pounds torque on concentric knee extension; 95% CI -2.40 to 11.94). This evidence was classified low quality due to the low number of studies and risk of bias assessment. There were no statistically significant differences in attrition rates between the interventions. In general, adverse effects were poorly recorded, but no serious adverse effects were reported. Assessment of risk of bias was hampered by poor written descriptions (eg, allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessors). The lack of a priori protocols and lack of care provider blinding were also identified as methodologic concerns.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence (rated as low quality) suggested that moderate- and moderate- to high-intensity resistance training improves multidimensional function, pain, tenderness, and muscle strength in women with fibromyalgia. The evidence (rated as low quality) also suggested that eight weeks of aerobic exercise was superior to moderate-intensity resistance training for improving pain in women with fibromyalgia. There was low-quality evidence that 12 weeks of low-intensity resistance training was superior to flexibility exercise training in women with fibromyalgia for improvements in pain and multidimensional function. There was low-quality evidence that women with fibromyalgia can safely perform moderate- to high-resistance training.

Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) in patients with fibromyalgia

Background

Mindful-based interventions improve functioning and quality of life in fibromyalgia (FM) patients. The aim of the study is to perform a psychometric analysis of the Spanish version of the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) in a sample of patients diagnosed with FM.

Methods

The following measures were administered to 251 Spanish patients with FM: the Spanish version of MAAS, the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire, the Pain Catastrophising Scale, the Injustice Experience Questionnaire, the Psychological Inflexibility in Pain Scale, the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire and the Euroqol. Factorial structure was analysed using Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFA). Cronbach's α coefficient was calculated to examine internal consistency, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to assess the test-retest reliability of the measures. Pearson’s correlation tests were run to evaluate univariate relationships between scores on the MAAS and criterion variables.

Results

The MAAS scores in our sample were low (M = 56.7; SD = 17.5). CFA confirmed a two-factor structure, with the following fit indices [sbX2 = 172.34 (p < 0.001), CFI = 0.95, GFI = 0.90, SRMR = 0.05, RMSEA = 0.06. MAAS was found to have high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.90) and adequate test-retest reliability at a 1–2 week interval (ICC = 0.90). It showed significant and expected correlations with the criterion measures with the exception of the Euroqol (Pearson = 0.15).

Conclusion

Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the MAAS in patients with FM are adequate. The dimensionality of the MAAS found in this sample and directions for future research are discussed.