Prevalence of diagnosed and undiagnosed osteoarthrosis and associated factors in the adult general Spanish population.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence and related factors of diagnosed osteoarthrosis (DO) and undiagnosed osteoarthrosis (UO) in the general Spanish adult population. SETTING: Cross-sectional study with data from the Spanish National Health Survey 2017. PARTICIPANTS: N=23,089 adults. Three groups of people were defined: DO, UO, and no osteoarthrosis (NO). MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Sociodemographic information, lifestyle (tobacco, alcohol, physical activity, body mass index) and health factors (intensity of pain, pain drug consumption, mental health, self-perceived health status, pain involvement in daily living) were collected. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were performed, and a multinomial logistic regression model for the factors associated with each group. RESULTS: The prevalence of DO was 22.4% (95%CI=21.8;22.9) and 0.9% (95%CI=0.8;1) of UO. With respect to NO, risk factors for DO and UO included higher pain levels and pain drug consumption. Better self-perceived health status was inversely related with both. More pain involvement in daily living was associated with increased risk of DO, but reduced risk of UO. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of DO and UO was similar to that reported in Europe, but slightly higher than in low/middle-income countries. It was more prevalent in females, older people, people with worse perceived health status and worse mental health. Higher pain levels and pain drug consumption were risk factors for DO and UO. Better self-perceived health status was protective. Pain involvement in daily living was a risk factor for DO, but protective for UO. Different public health strategies should be considered in view of this.

Smartphone-based exercise intervention for chronic pain: PainReApp randomized clinical trial protocol.

AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of PainReApp, an mHealth system, based on physical exercise recommendations for patients with chronic pain (low back pain, fibromyalgia and diabetic neuropathic pain) based on pain intensity, quality of life, anxiety and/or depression, and sleep quality. DESIGN: Single-blinded randomized controlled trial. METHODS: One hundred patients from three different chronic conditions (low back pain, fibromyalgia and neuropathic diabetic pain) will be recruited and randomized into two groups to receive the intervention with a physical activity program guided by the PainReApp system (experimental group) or with the program information in paper format (control group). All patients will attend a first face-to-face session in which the smartphone application usage (experimental group) and exercise execution will be explained (both groups). Data will be collected at baseline, 4, 12 and 24 weeks. Nevertheless, the users of the application will have a daily registry of the exercise performed and the self-perceived difficulty. The primary outcomes of the trial will be the intensity of pain and quality of life. Anxiety and/or depression and sleep quality will be also assessed to evaluate the influence of the physical activity at multiple levels. DISCUSSION: Physical exercise is becoming one of the leading evidence-based interventions to treat chronic pain. It needs to be adapted to the necessities of each pain condition. One of the major problems is the low adherence to the proposed program. New strategies that empower the patients, such as the m-Health, are reliable and useful tools to ease this end. IMPACT: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first long-term randomized controlled trial researching the impact of an m-health system on chronic pain from different origin. The intervention is based on international physical exercise recommendations and can be performed without specific material, allowing the home-based practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621000783820).

Prevalence of Therapeutic use of Opioids in Chronic non-Cancer Pain Patients and Associated Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objectives: To determine the prevalence and factors associated with the use of opioids among patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Comprehensive literature searches in Medline-PubMed, Embase and SCOPUS databases. Original studies published between 2009 and 2019 with a cross-sectional design were included. The quality of the studies was assessed with Critical Appraisal Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Protocol registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews with reference number: CRD42019137990. Results: Out of the 1,310 potential studies found, 25 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Most of the studies were of high quality. High levels of heterogeneity were found in the studies included. In the general population, the prevalence of long-term opioid use was 2.3% (95% CI: 1.5-3.6%), the prevalence of short-term opioid use was 8.1% (95% CI: 5.6-11.6%), and among people with chronic low back pain it was 5.8% (95% CI: 0.5-45.5%). The prevalence of opioid use among patients from the health records or medical surveys was 41% (95% CI: 23.3-61.3%). Finally, in patients with musculoskeletal pain, the prevalence was 20.5% (95% CI: 12.9-30.9%) and in patients with fibromyalgia, 24.5% (95% CI: 22.9-26.2%). A higher prevalence of opioid use was observed among men, younger people, patients receiving prescriptions of different types of drugs, smokers and patients without insurance or with noncommercial insurance. In addition, non-white and Asian patients were less likely to receive opioids than non-Hispanic white patients. Conclusions: The prevalence of opioid use among patients with CNCP was higher in subjects with short or occasional use compared to those with long-term use. Men, younger people, more chronic pain conditions, and patients without insurance or with noncommercial insurance were most related to opioid use. However, non-white and Asian patients, and those treated by a physician trained in complementary medicine were less likely to use opioids.

Living with opioids: A qualitative study with patients with chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are one of the most prescribed treatments for chronic pain (CP). However, their long-term use (>3 months) has been surrounded by controversy, due to loss of beneficial effects. OBJECTIVE: To explore the experiences of people with chronic non-malignant low back pain in Spain undergoing long-term treatment with opioids. DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted 15 semi-structured interviews at the Pain Clinic with persons taking opioid treatment. METHODS: The interviews were analysed by qualitative content analysis as described by Graneheim and Lundman, and developed categories and themes discussed in light of a biomedicalization framework. MAIN RESULTS: We developed one overarching theme-Living with opioids: dependence and autonomy while seeking relief-and three categories: The long pathway to opioids due to the invisibility of pain; Opioids: from blind date to a long-term relationship; and What opioids cannot fix. DISCUSSION: The long and difficult road to find effective treatments was a fundamental part of coping with pain, involving long-term relationships with the health system. This study reflects the benefits, and drawbacks of opioids, along with struggles to maintain autonomy and make decisions while undergoing long-term treatment with opioids. The paper also highlights the consequences of pain in the economy, family and social life of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' experiences should be considered to a greater extent by health-care professionals when giving information about opioids and setting treatment goals. Greater consideration of the social determinants of health that affect CP experiences might lead to more effective solutions to CP.

Relationship Between Using Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pain Treatment and Physicians' Training and Attitudes Toward Patients and the Effects on Patient Care.

AIMS: To determine the use of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for chronic pain (CP) management; analyze the effects of training in pain and the attitudes of physicians toward pain and CP patients on the adherence to these CPGs; and assess the impact of adherence to CPGs on patient care. METHOD: This was a cross-sectional study in a sample of physicians involved in CP patient management. Information on the use of CPGs for CP management, their training in pain, and their attitudes toward pain, patients, and patient care was collected. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were performed, and a multinomial logistic regression model was constructed to analyze factors associated with the use of CPGs. RESULTS: Of the 257 physicians surveyed, 46.6% were physiatrists, 26.7% were general practitioners, and 26.7% were medical oncologists. Although 96.5% claimed to have received training in pain, only 10.1% had received college training, and 76.3% expressed having gaps in their knowledge; 53.9% stated they applied CPGs often/always, and 12.5% rarely/never. Limited knowledge on pain, reduced involvement in training activities, more negative attitudes toward patients, and having experienced CP were the factors related to reduced adherence to CPGs, especially among the youngest respondents. The greater the use of CPGs, the better the patient care was. CONCLUSIONS: Access to scientific information and specialized training are factors related to the use of CPGs for pain treatment. Therefore, the inclusion of CP training in university and during medical specialty training will be essential measures to improve adherence to CPG, thereby improving patient care and pain control.