Pain Intensity And Attribution Mediate The Impact Of Patient Weight And Gender On Activity Recommendations For Chronic Pain

Exercise and Dietary Recommendations for Women with Chronic Pain: What's Weight and Race Got To Do with It?

Exercise and diet are beneficial for pain, yet many patients do not receive such recommendations from providers. This may be due to biases related to gender, race, and weight. We recruited medical students (N = 90) to view videos of women with chronic back pain performing a functional task; patients varied by weight (overweight/obese) and race (Black/White). For each woman patient, providers rated their likelihood of recommending exercises or dietary changes. Ratings significantly differed across recommendations (F(2.75, 244.72) = 6.19, P < .01) in that providers were more likely to recommend flexibility exercises than aerobic exercises and dietary changes and were more likely to recommend strength exercises than dietary changes. Results also indicated that women with obesity were more likely to receive aerobic (F(1,89) = 17.20, P < .01), strength (F(1,89) = 6.08, P = .02), and dietary recommendations (F(1,89) = 37.56, P < .01) than were women with overweight. Additionally, White women were more likely to receive a recommendation for flexibility exercises (F(1,89) = 4.92, P = .03) than Black women. Collectively, these findings suggest that providers' exercise and dietary recommendations for women with chronic pain are influenced by the weight status and racial identity of the patient. Future studies are needed to identify the reasons underlying these systematic differences, including the stereotypes and attitudes that may be driving these effects. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents results on how patient weight and race impact providers' exercise and diet recommendations for women with chronic back pain. Provider recommendations for these modalities may be systematically biased in a way that impedes care and impacts patient functioning.

What do people believe to be the cause of low back pain? A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To explore how causal beliefs regarding non-specific low back pain (LBP) have been quantitatively investigated.

METHODS

A scoping review based on the guidelines by the JBI (former Joanna Briggs Institute) was conducted. We searched Medline, Embase, Psychinfo, and CINAHL for relevant studies and included peer-reviewed original articles that measured causal beliefs about non-specific LBP among adults and reported results separate from other belief domains.

RESULTS

A total of 81 studies were included, of which 62 (77%) had cross sectional designs, 11 (14%) were cohort studies, 3 (4%) randomized controlled trials, 4 (5%) non-randomized controlled trials, and 1 (1%) case control. Only 15 studies explicitly mentioned cause, triggers, or etiology in the study aim. We identified the use of 6 questionnaires from which a measure of causal beliefs could be obtained. The most frequently used questionnaire was the Illness Perception Questionnaire which was used in 8 of the included studies. The studies covered 308 unique causal belief items which we categorized into 15 categories, the most frequently investigated being causal beliefs related to "structural injury or impairment", which was investigated in 45 (56%) of the studies. The second and third most prevalent categories were related to "lifting and bending" (26 studies [32%]) and "mental or psychological" (24 studies [30%]).

CONCLUSION

There is a large variation in how causal beliefs are measured and a lack of studies designed to investigate causal beliefs, and of studies determining a longitudinal association between such beliefs and patient outcomes. This scoping review identified an evidence gap and can inspire future research in this field.

The Negative Effect of Social Discrimination on Pain Tolerance and the Moderating Role of Pain Catastrophizing

This study examined the negative impact of social discrimination on the time to pain tolerance during experimentally induced cold pressor pain among healthy individuals. It was hypothesized that the degree to which one catastrophized about pain would exacerbate the negative impact of a history discriminatory experiences on pain tolerance, and that this interaction would be different between individuals of a racial and ethnic minority and non-Hispanic white individuals (thus testing catastrophizing as a moderated moderator). Higher levels of discrimination were positively related to catastrophic thinking about pain, and there was a significant negative relationship between the level of experienced discrimination and time to pain tolerance. Pain catastrophizing emerged as a significant moderator in that when pain catastrophizing levels were high, there was no association between social discrimination and pain tolerance. A history of social discrimination was significantly associated with reduced pain tolerance at low and moderate levels of pain catastrophizing. Racial minority status did not significantly alter this moderating relationship. Implications for the importance of assessing sociocultural variables, such as experiencing social discrimination in the clinical assessment of the individual with pain are outlined.

Racial and weight discrimination associations with pain intensity and pain interference in an ethnically diverse sample of adults with obesity: a baseline analysis of the clustered randomized-controlled clinical trial the goals for eating and moving (GEM) study

BACKGROUND

Everyday experiences with racial (RD) and weight discrimination (WD) are risk factors for chronic pain in ethnically diverse adults with obesity. However, the individual or combined effects of RD and WD on pain in adults with obesity is not well understood. There are gender differences and sexual dimorphisms in nociception and pain, but the effect of gender on relationships between RD, WD, and pain outcomes in ethnically diverse adults with obesity is unclear. Thus, the purposes of this study were to: 1) examine whether RD and WD are associated with pain intensity and interference, and 2) explore gender as a moderator of the associations between RD, WD, and pain.

METHODS

This is a baseline data analysis from a randomized, controlled clinical trial of a lifestyle weight-management intervention. Eligible participants were English or Spanish-speaking (ages 18-69 years) and had either a body mass index of ≥30 kg/m2 or ≥ 25 kg/m2 with weight-related comorbidity. RD and WD were measured using questions derived from the Experiences of Discrimination questionnaire (EOD). Pain interference and intensity were measured using the PROMIS 29 adult profile V2.1. Linear regression models were performed to determine the associations between WD, RD, gender, and pain outcomes.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 483) reported mild pain interference (T-score: 52.65 ± 10.29) and moderate pain intensity (4.23 ± 3.15). RD was more strongly associated with pain interference in women (b = .47, SE = .08, p < 001), compared to men (b = .14, SE = .07, p = .06). Also, there were no significant interaction effects between RD and gender on pain intensity, or between WD and gender on pain interference or pain intensity.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain is highly prevalent in adults with obesity, and is impacted by the frequencies of experiences with RD and WD. Further, discrimination against adults with obesity and chronic pain could exacerbate existing racial disparities in pain and weight management. Asking ethnically diverse adults with obesity about their pain and their experiences of RD and WD could help clinicians make culturally informed assessment and intervention decisions that address barriers to pain relief and weight loss.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03006328.