How back pain intensity relates to clinical and psychosocial factors in patients with idiopathic scoliosis.

OBJECTIVE: A pain intensity of 3 can reliably distinguish idiopathic scoliosis (IS) patients with acceptable pain or not. This research aims to analyze psychosocial, family and quality of life differences in patients according to their pain status. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with IS, without previous surgery, Cobb ≥ 30° and age (12-40) were included in the study. They completed the questionnaires Numerical Rate Scale (NRS), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK)-11, SRS22r, Hospital Anxiety-Depression Scale (HADS), COMI item 7 (work/school absenteeism) and family APGAR. Comorbidities and family health history were collected. Analysis of covariance was performed to compare means between the PAIN (NRS > 3), (NRS < = 3) groups controlling for the effect of age and the magnitude of the curve. RESULTS: In total, 272 patients were included. 37.1% belonged to the PAIN group (PG). The PG showed a significantly higher Cobb grade and age than the NO-PAIN group. After controlling for these variables, the PG had worse pain, mental health and SRS22-subtotal values. However, they did not differ in function or self-image. PG showed higher levels of kinesiophobia, anxiety, depression, absenteeism from work/school and impact on social/family environment. PG patients reported a higher prevalence of comorbidities and family history of nonspecific spinal pain. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with IS and unacceptable pain constitute a group with a different incidence of psychological, social, family and comorbidities factors than those with acceptable pain. In contrast, the severity of IS was not substantially different between the groups. This profile is similar to that observed in patients with nonspecific spinal pain.

The Relationship of Kinesiophobia with Pain and Quality of Life in Idiopathic Scoliosis.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, multi-centric, cross-sectional study. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the construct validity of the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK) in a cohort of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). SUMMARY OF THE BACKGROUND DATA: Back pain is not uncommon in AIS. The fear of movement (kinesiophobia) in response to pain is related to back pain. TSK psychometric properties in AIS patients have not been properly analyzed. METHODS: Patients with AIS and no prior spine surgery were prospectively included. They fulfilled the Spanish version of the TSK-11 questionnaire, a pain intensity numerical rating scale (NRS), refined SRS-22 (SRS-22r), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and item 7 of the Core Outcome Measurement Index (COMI). The sample was split into two groups for the statistical analysis: adolescents and young adults. Cronbach alpha was used to assess internal consistency. Discriminant and concurrent validity were obtained by computing Pearson correlation coefficients between the TSK score and several criterion measures. RESULTS: A total of 275 patients were included-198 adolescents (mean age of 14.6 yrs) and 77 young adults (mean age of 26.9 yrs). The Cobb of largest curve means were 44.9° and 48.9°, respectively. In the adolescent group, the TSK mean (±SD) was 21.5 (±5.93), with a floor effect of 2.5%. In the adult group, the TSK mean was 24.2 (±6.63), with a floor effect of 3.9%. The ceiling effect was 0% in both groups. Cronbach alphas for the adolescent and adult groups were 0.76 and 0.79, respectively. No correlation was found in any group between the TSK score and the curve magnitude or pattern (Lenke classification). The TSK was significantly correlated with HAD depression and SRS-22r in both groups. However, these correlations were weaker in adolescents. In adults, the TSK also significantly correlates with NRS and work/school absenteeism. CONCLUSION: The Spanish version of TSK-11 is a reliable and valid instrument to analyze kinesiophobia in AIS. However, the weak correlation between kinesiophobia and pain intensity, disability, and emotional condition in adolescents requires further study.Level of Evidence: 4.