The use of nonpharmacological interventions for chronic pain treatment in community-dwelling older adults with a certified need for care.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a major health issue and rapid population ageing exacerbates the burden to health systems in countries like Germany. Nonpharmacological interventions (NPIs) are essential in pain care and the prioritization of active NPIs is emphasized in guidelines. This paper examines the utilization of NPIs for chronic pain management in community-dwelling older adults with a certified need of care in Berlin, Germany. METHODS: Cross-sectional data was collected through standardized face-to-face surveys with older adults (≥65 years), using validated instruments (e.g., Brief Pain Inventory), and structured lists for NPI utilization. Categorization into active and passive NPIs was performed through a literature-based, iterative process by an interdisciplinary team. For not normally distributed data, non-parametric tests were used as appropriate. Logistic regression was conducted for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: In total, 250 participants were included in this analysis (aged 65-104, x̅ = 81.8, 68.8% female). Most (92%) use NPIs for chronic pain management: 85.6% use active NPIs, 50.4% active movement and only 5.6% use solely passive approaches. Most common NPIs are distraction, thermotherapy/compresses, and physiotherapy. The odds of utilizing physiotherapy are three times higher for those with high educational status when compared to those with low education while those with low educational status had higher odds of using thermotherapy/compresses. CONCLUSIONS: In our sample, most community-dwelling older adults with a certified need of care use active NPIs for chronic pain management with about half using active movement approaches. Considering the high vulnerability of this population, physiotherapy (in the form of therapeutic exercise) is a particularly appropriate intervention, and it was the third most frequent NPI in our sample. However, there is a social gradient in the utilization of physiotherapy for chronic pain management which might be rooted in issues around awareness, appeal, and access to such measures. It is important to take socioeconomic differences into account when planning the care for older chronic pain patients but also when designing research or user-friendly guidelines for this target group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Ethical approval from the Ethics Committee of Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (EA1/368/14) and study registration with the Central Study Register (ZSR no. 20009093).

Representations of Ultra-Processed Foods: A Global Analysis of How Dietary Guidelines Refer to Levels of Food Processing.

BACKGROUND: As evidence grows about negative health impacts of ultra-processed foods (UPFs), nutrient-centred advice is contested, and food-based dietary guidelines are increasingly utilised. Previous analyses of dietary guidelines evaluated their potential impact on health and sustainability, but little research has been conducted to examine how the concept of UPFs is reflected in dietary advice for consumers. This paper systematically analyses whether and how UPFs are represented in dietary guidelines internationally. METHODS: Based on a systematic online search, the consumer-targeted key messages of 106 dietary guidelines were identified and a qualitative content analysis was conducted. A coding framework was developed to classify messages as 'eat more' or 'eat less' according to the language used (eg, 'choose' vs 'avoid') and to differentiate between a focus on nutrients or food processing. Specific foods mentioned in 'eat less' guidelines were classified according to their level of processing using the NOVA framework. RESULTS: 99% of guidelines utilised some type of nutrient-based message, either promoting 'positive' nutrients (eg, vitamins) or discouraging the consumption of 'negative' nutrients (mainly salt, sugar and fat). Explicit references to food processing were present in 45% of 'eat less' guidelines and 5% of 'eat more' guidelines. Implicit references (eg, promoting 'raw' or discouraging 'packaged' foods) were found in 43% of 'eat less' and 75% of 'eat more' guidelines. 53% of the specific foods referred to in 'eat less' advice were UPFs. CONCLUSION: Overall, nutrient-based messages were more common than messages about processing levels. The majority of discouraged foods were UPFs, however some minimally processed foods were discouraged, which points to tensions and contradictions between nutrient- and processing-based dietary advice. As dietary guidelines begin to include advice about food processing, it is important to consider both consumer understanding of the terms used and their capacity to act on the advice.