Surgical treatment of refractory low back pain using implanted BurstDR spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in a cohort of patients without options for corrective surgery: Findings and results from the DISTINCT study, a prospective randomized multi-center-controlled trial.

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is a highly prevalent, disabling condition affecting millions of people. Patients with an identifiable anatomic pain generator and resulting neuropathic lower extremity symptoms often undergo spine surgery, but many patients lack identifiable and/or surgically corrective pathology. Nonoperative treatment options often fail to provide sustained relief. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is sometimes used to treat these patients, but the lack of level 1 evidence limits its widespread use and insurance coverage. The DISTINCT RCT study evaluates the efficacy of passive recharge burst SCS compared to conventional medical treatment (CMM) in alleviating chronic, refractory axial low back pain. Methods: This prospective, multicenter, randomized, study with an optional 6-month crossover involved patients who were not candidates for lumbar spine surgery. The primary and secondary endpoints evaluated improvements in low back pain intensity (NRS), back pain-related disability (ODI), pain catastrophizing (PCS), and healthcare utilization. Patients were randomized to SCS therapy or CMM at 30 US study sites. Results: The SCS arm reported an 85.3% NRS responder rate (≥ 50% reduction) compared to 6.2% (5/81) in the CMM arm. After the 6M primary endpoint, SCS patients elected to remain on assigned therapy and 66.2% (49/74) of CMM patients chose to trial SCS (crossover). At the 12M follow-up, SCS and crossover patients reported 78.6% and 71.4% NRS responder rates. Secondary outcomes indicated significant improvements in ODI, PCS, and reduced healthcare utilization. Six serious adverse events were reported and resolved without sequelae. Conclusion: DISTINCT chronic low back pain patients with no indication for corrective surgery experienced a significant and sustained response to burst SCS therapy for up to 12 months. CMM patients who crossed over to the SCS arm reported profound improvements after 6 months. This data advocates for a timely consideration of SCS therapy in patients unresponsive to conservative therapy.

Attitudes and Beliefs Regarding Pain Medicine: Results of a National Palliative Physician Survey.

CONTEXT: Pain is a prevalent symptom in patients with serious illness and often requires interventional approaches for adequate treatment. Little is known about referral patterns and collaborative attitudes of palliative physicians regarding pain management specialists. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate referral rates, co-management strategies, and beliefs of palliative physicians about the value of Pain Medicine specialists in patients with serious illness. METHODS: A 30-question survey with demographic, referral/practice, and attitudes/belief questions was mailed to 1000 AAHPM physician members. Responses were characterized with descriptive statistics and further analyzed for associations between training experiences, practice environment, and educational activities with collaborative practice patterns and beliefs. RESULTS: The response rate was 52.6%. Most survey respondents had initial board certification primarily in internal medicine (n = 286, 56%) or family medicine (n = 144, 28%). A minority of respondents had completed a formal ABMS Hospice and Palliative Medicine fellowship (n = 178, 34%). Respondents had been in practice for a median of nine years, (range 1-38 years) primarily in community hospitals (n = 249, 47%) or academic hospitals (n = 202, 38%). The variables best associated with collaborative practices and attitudes was practice in an academic hospital setting and participation in regular joint academic conferences with pain medicine clinicians. CONCLUSION: This study shows that Palliative Care physicians have highly positive attitudes toward Pain Medicine specialists, but referrals remain low. Facilitating professional collaboration via joint educational/clinical sessions is one possible solution to drive ongoing interprofessional care in patients with complex pain.

Treatment of Refractory Low Back Pain Using Passive Recharge Burst in Patients Without Options for Corrective Surgery: Findings and Results From the DISTINCT Study, a Prospective Randomized Multicenter Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is effective for relieving chronic intractable pain conditions. The Dorsal spInal cord STImulatioN vs mediCal management for the Treatment of low back pain study evaluates the effectiveness of SCS compared with conventional medical management (CMM) in the treatment of chronic low back pain in patients who had not undergone and were not candidates for lumbar spine surgery. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients were randomized to passive recharge burst therapy (n = 162) or CMM (n = 107). They reported severe pain and disability for more than a decade and had failed a multitude of therapies. Common diagnoses included degenerative disc disease, spondylosis, stenosis, and scoliosis-yet not to a degree amenable to surgery. The six-month primary end point compared responder rates, defined by a 50% reduction in pain. Hierarchical analyses of seven secondary end points were performed in the following order: composite responder rate (numerical rating scale [NRS] or Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), NRS, ODI, Pain Catastrophizing Scale responder rate, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) responder rate, and Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Information System-29 in pain interference and physical function. RESULTS: Intention-to-treat analysis showed a significant difference in pain responders on NRS between SCS (72.6%) and CMM (7.1%) arms (p < 0.0001). Of note, 85.2% of those who received six months of therapy responded on NRS compared with 6.2% of those with CMM (p < 0.0001). All secondary end points indicated the superiority of burst therapy over CMM. A composite measure on function or pain relief showed 91% of subjects with SCS improved, compared with 16% of subjects with CMM. A substantial improvement of 30 points was observed on ODI compared with a

Beyond Revision Surgery: Work-Up and Interventional Treatments for the Painful Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Total knee arthroplasty is a common and successful treatment modality for knee arthritis that is refractory to conservative management strategies. Over 600,000 arthroplasties are performed per year in the United States, and this number is expected to increase in the coming years. Unfortunately, 8% to 34% of patients experience chronic pain after having a total knee arthroplasty. These patients should undergo an appropriate work-up by the orthopedic surgeon, but many times a surgical problem is not uncovered. In these situations, a thorough and specific plan for pain management should be sought. In this article, we outline the work-up of a painful total knee arthroplasty. Then we provide a thorough review of interventional pain management strategies and highlight the pertinent literature. Lastly, we hypothesize future developments in the field that may provide better outcomes for patients suffering from painful total knee arthroplasty.

Spinal Stimulation for the Treatment of Intractable Spine and Limb Pain: A Systematic Review of RCTs and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesize the evidence regarding the effect of spinal stimulation (SS) vs medical therapy (MT) and the effect of newer SS technologies vs conventional SS on pain reduction in patients with intractable spine or limb pain. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted by a reference librarian. The literature search encompassed January 1, 1995 - December 31, 2017. Reviewers worked independently to select and appraise trials. Random-effect meta-analysis and frequentist indirect comparison methods were used to compare the three interventions. Results were expressed as odds ratio (OR) or weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% CIs. RESULTS: We identified 12 trials enrolling 980 patients. Compared with MT, SS significantly increased the odds of reducing pain by 50% or more in three trials (OR, 13.01; 95% CI, 4.96-34.17) and significantly reduced pain as measured by visual analogue scale scores in three trials (WMD, 1.43 scale points; 95% CI, 0.16-2.71). Using the common comparator of MT, newer stimulation technology (eg, high-frequency 10 kilohertz spinal stimulation, Burst, dorsal root ganglion) was associated with increased odds of pain relief compared with conventional SS (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.35-3.19). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with intractable spine/limb pain, SS was associated with better pain reduction than MT. New stimulation technology was likely associated with better pain reduction than conventional stimulation.

Curing Opioid Toxicity with Intrathecal Targeted Drug Delivery.

Pain is one of the most feared symptoms that concern cancer patients and their families. Despite well-established guidelines set forth by the World Health Organization (WHO) on the treatment of cancer pain, nearly half of cancer patients report poorly controlled pain. One of the most serious side effects of systemic oral opioid use is neurotoxicity, which is characterized by altered mental status and systemic neurologic impairments. Treatment strategies are supportive in nature and focused on reducing or changing the offending opioid and correcting any metabolic deficiencies. Herein, we discuss a case of opioid-induced neurotoxicity treated with intrathecal targeted drug delivery (TDD). The timing and implementation of advanced therapies such as intrathecal TDD is not well delineated. More importantly, patients and their oncologic providers are often unaware of this useful tool in treating challenging cancer-associated pain and significantly minimizing systemic opioid side effects. To ensure that patients have comprehensive oncologic care, best-practice guidelines suggest involvement of an interdisciplinary team and coordinated care. Early referral to a pain and palliative specialist may allow for improved patient outcomes and removal of unnecessary barriers to optimal patient care.

Attitudes of Hospice Providers Regarding Intrathecal Targeted Drug Delivery for Patients With Cancer.

Pain is one of the most commonly experienced and feared symptoms faced by patients with a serious illness. For these patients, intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDSs) provide greater potency and/or few systemic side effects. However, despite these benefits, the integration and management of IDDS for patients receiving hospice care has not been previous studied. An electronic, 18-question survey was sent to 200 hospice practitioners (physicians, nurse practitioners and nurses) in the state of Minnesota to explore their experience, confidence, and the perceived barriers to caring for patients with IDDS while being cared for on hospice. Providers were identified though mailing lists from the Minnesota Network of Hospice and Palliative Care organization. The survey was administered by the Mayo Clinic Survey Research Center with institutional review board approval. Slightly more than 50% of respondents have ever cared for a patient with an intrathecal pump. If a patient had a pump in place, only 28% of providers expressed confidence in managing their pain. Additionally, only 3 of 10 respondents felt that adjusting an intrathecal pump should be the first option when a patient with an IDDS in place had increased pain. Indeed, the vast majority (over 80%) of respondents preferred the use of systemic therapies for primary pain management. Access to IDDS vendors for changes/refills in the home is identified as another barrier with over 50% of respondents either unaware of an available vendor or reporting no vendor available. There are numerous self-reported barriers to ongoing use of IDDS with patients receiving hospice care.

Refractory Pain Management in Amyloid-Associated Peripheral Neuropathy.

OBJECTIVE: Systemic amyloidosis is a disease that often involves multiple organ systems, including the peripheral nervous system. Patients may present with severe, refractory neuropathic pain; however, the optimal treatment approach for pain for these patients remains unclear. CASE REPORT: A man with severe, refractory neuropathic pain in his bilateral upper and lower extremities and the trunk secondary to amyloid neuropathy is presented. Multiple medication trials, including neuropathic and opioid agents, produced considerable adverse effects and minimal relief. Scrambler therapy, a novel electrical stimulation modality, was used and was associated with substantial short-term but nonsustained benefit. Spinal cord stimulation was considered, but given his diffuse symptoms, it was deemed a less-than-optimal approach. Ultimately, an intrathecal drug delivery system was placed with infusion of hydromorphone, resulting in substantial pain reduction in all involved areas and with an improved adverse effect profile. This intervention resulted in immense improvement in the patient's quality of life, despite progression of his systemic amyloidosis. CONCLUSIONS: Severe pain in the setting of amyloid neuropathy is often difficult to treat. To our knowledge, this represents the first report of Scrambler therapy or an implanted intrathecal drug delivery system used for a patient with refractory amyloidosis-related neuropathic pain, resulting in substantial analgesic benefit and improved quality of life.

Utilization of Leads After Permanent Implant in Spinal Cord Stimulator Systems.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine the frequency and clinical indications associated with implantation of single vs. dual percutaneous lead spinal cord stimulator (SCS) systems and to look further into how these leads are utilized for treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of all patients undergoing SCS implantation between January 2001 and December 2013 with a minimum of 2 years of clinical follow-up was performed. Number of trial leads and implanted leads was recorded. For patients with dual-lead systems, it was noted if and when the second lead was used, along with the clinical indication for lead activation. RESULTS: In the 259-patient cohort, 15.8% (n = 41) patients underwent placement of a single-lead system, 83.0% (n = 215) underwent placement of a dual-lead system, and 1.2% (n = 3) underwent placement of 3-lead systems. Placement of dual-lead systems was similar among all indication groups. Of those patients with a dual-lead system in place, 88.1% utilized both leads and average time to programming of the second lead was 2.3 months. The most common reason to activate the second lead was inadequate stimulation coverage. Five of the 41 patients with single-lead systems underwent an additional surgery to implant a second lead due to inadequate stimulation with 1 lead. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the first descriptive analysis of the frequency of single- and dual-lead SCS systems. This report indicates that dual-lead systems are most often placed and both leads are required for optimal patient therapy.

Spinal Cord Stimulator Implant Infection Rates and Risk Factors: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVES: Spinal cord stimulation is an evidence-based treatment for a number of chronic pain conditions. While this therapy offers improvement in pain and function it is not without potential complications. These complications include device failure, migration, loss of therapeutic paresthesia, and infection. This article looked to establish a modern infection rate for spinal cord stimulators, assess the impact of known risk factors for surgical site infections and to determine the impact of certain preventative measures on the rate of infection. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, a multisite, retrospective review was conducted on 2737 unique implants or revisions of SCS systems. Patient demographics, risk factors including diabetes, tobacco use, obesity, revision surgery, trial length, implant location, implant type, surgeon background, prophylactic antibiotic use, utilization of a occlusive dressing, and post-operative antibiotic use were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: The overall infection rate was 2.45% (n = 67). Diabetes, tobacco use, and obesity did not independently increase the rate of infection. Revision surgeries had a trend toward higher infection rate; however, this did not meet statistical significance. There was no difference in the rate of infection between implants performed by physicians of different base specialties, cylinder leads vs. paddle leads, or between different prophylactic antibiotics. Implants performed at academic centers had a higher rate of infection when compared to implants performed in nonacademic settings. When patients received an occlusive dressing or post-operative antibiotics they had a lower rate of infection. CONCLUSIONS: The infection rate (2.45%) reported in this study is lower than the previously reported rates (3-6%) and are on par with other surgical specialties. This study did not show an increased rate of infection for patients that used tobacco, had diabetes or were obese. It's possible that given the low overall infection rate a larger study is needed to establish the true impact of these factors on infection. In addition, this study did not address the impact of poorly controlled diabetes mellitus (elevated hemoglobin A1c) vs. well-controlled diabetes. It can be concluded from this study that utilizing an occlusive dressing over the incision in the post-operative period decreases the rate of infection and should become the standard of care. This study also demonstrated the positive impact of post-operative antibiotics in decreasing the rate of infection. Studies in other surgical specialties have not shown this impact which would suggest that further research is needed.

Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Intrathecal Drug Delivery System Implantation.

INTRODUCTION: Intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDSs) have dramatically improved analgesia and the functional status of cancer patients and those with chronic pain states. However, given the close proximity to the neuraxis and frequent concomitant use of antiplatelet or anticoagulant medications, this intervention is not without risk. The goal of this investigation was to determine the incidence of bleeding complications following IDDS placement. METHODS: This is a retrospective review from 2005 through 2014 of adult patients undergoing IDDS implantation or revision at a tertiary care center. The primary outcome was a bleeding-related neurological complication requiring emergency medicine, neurology, or neurosurgical evaluation within 31 days. RESULTS: A total of 247 procedures were performed on 216 unique patients. Patients received aspirin or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) within seven days of needle placement for 64 procedures (25.9%). A preprocedural platelet count or international normalized ratio (INR) was available within 30 days for 138 procedures (55.9%). Of these, two patients had a platelet count lower than 100 x 109/L and one patient had an INR of 1.5 or higher at the time of the procedure. One neurological complication was identified (0.4%) that was not related to procedural bleeding. Similarly, three patients (1.2%) received a periprocedural red blood cell transfusion, none of which were related to procedural bleeding. CONCLUSION: No cases of bleeding-related neurological complications were identified following IDDS placement or revision, including in those receiving aspirin or NSAIDs. Future investigations with larger numbers are needed to further explore the safety of antithrombotic therapy continuation or discontinuation periprocedurally.

Surgical Site Infections in Cancer Patients with Intrathecal Drug Delivery Devices.

Objectives: Our purpose was to determine the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) in cancer patients receiving an intrathecal drug delivery system (IDDS) and compare that rate with the incidence of SSI in the general population receiving an IDDS or spinal cord stimulator. We attempted to describe risk factors for SSIs in cancer patients treated with IDDS in terms of exposure to cancer treatments. Design: Retrospective review. Setting: Large tertiary care center. Patients: Cancer patients receiving an IDDS in 2006-2013. Methods: The incidence of SSI was determined according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition. Medication regimens and current cancer treatment were investigated to identify immunocompromised patients during IDDS placement. Microbacteriology, treatment, and overall outcomes were investigated. Results: Sixty-four patients had an IDDS implanted in 2006-2013. SSI developed in four patients (6.2%). All four patients had received chemotherapy or radiotherapy within three months before implantation. Three of the three were receiving dexamethasone, and three of the four required explantation of the IDDS. Conclusion: The incidence of SSI was at the upper end of the published infection rates for IDDS. The risk of SSI may be increased in this population because of factors that alter the patient's immune status, including concomitant corticosteroid use, radiotherapy near the SSI, and presence of immunomodulators. The identification and mitigation of certain risk factors for this population may prevent infection in future patients.

Palliative Sedation and What Constitutes Active Dying: A Case of Severe Progressive Dystonia and Intractable Pain.

We present the case of a 34-year-old woman with Klippel-Feil syndrome who developed progressive generalized dystonia of unclear etiology, resulting in intractable pain despite aggressive medical and surgical interventions. Ultimately, palliative sedation was required to relieve suffering. Herein, we describe ethical considerations including defining sedation, determining prognosis in the setting of an undefined neurodegenerative condition, and use of treatments that concurrently might prolong or alter end-of-life trajectory. We highlight pertinent literature and how it may be applied in challenging and unique clinical situations. Finally, we discuss the need for expert multidisciplinary involvement when implementing palliative sedation and illustrate that procedures and rules need to be interpreted to deliver optimal patient-centered plan of care.

Patient Outcomes and Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Retrospective Case Series Evaluating Patient Satisfaction, Pain Scores, and Opioid Requirements.

INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulators (SCS) are used to treat various chronic pain states. Establishing patient outcomes in terms of pain control, opioid medication use, and overall satisfaction is vital in maintaining SCS's role in clinical practice. METHODS: All patients who underwent SCS implantation between January 2001 and December 2011 at a tertiary academic pain medicine center were included if he or she underwent permanent cervical or thoracolumbar dorsal column SCS implantation and age was 18 or greater. For the 199 patients who met inclusion criteria, data were collected retrospectively. Preimplant information included indication for implantation, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score, and dose in oral morphine equivalents (OME). Postimplant NRS score was recorded at 6 months and 1 year. OME requirement and patient satisfaction were determined at 1 year postimplantation. RESULTS: This data set showed an overall decrease in OME requirements and NRS scores at both 6 months and 1 year. These differences were statistically significant (P < 0.01) compared to preimplantation values. Additionally, 84.27% of patients were satisfied with their implants at 1 year. Patient outcomes were analyzed further in respect to implant indication; groups included failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), angina, and other. For all groups, there were statistically significant (P < 0.01) decreases in NRS scores at 6 months and 1 year. In the FBSS and CRPS groups, statistically significant (P < 0.02) decreases in OME usage existed. CONCLUSION: Retrospective review of patients with spinal cord stimulators revealed OME reduction at 1 year for those patients in the FBSS and CRPS groups; patient satisfaction at 1 year and NRS score reduction at 6 months and 1 year were statistically significant for all groups.

Using simulation and standardized patients to teach vital skills to pain medicine fellows.

INTRODUCTION: Simulation is an evolving aspect of medical education. The role of simulation in training programs is variable, however, in technical specialties such as surgery and anesthesiology its role is quickly becoming a standard part of training programs. Pain fellowship programs must teach clinical diagnostic skills, pharmacology and pathophysiology, in addition to interventional skills to fellows with varying residency backgrounds. METHODS: The implementation of a hybrid simulation course into the pain fellowship curriculum allows for active learning as fellows experience challenging patient scenarios, stressful periprocedural events, and cases gone awry that require emergency algorithm recall and action. CONCLUSION: This report describes the incorporation of simulation and crucial conversations into a pain fellowship curriculum.

Spinal cord stimulator explantation for magnetic resonance imaging: a case series.

INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulator (SCS) systems are implanted to treat pain conditions such as neuropathic, radicular, and ischemic pain syndromes. Prior to July 2013, SCS systems were not magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compatible due to the risk of thermal injury at the site of the leads and generator. Although there are some case reports of patients undergoing MRI studies with SCS systems in place, these stimulators are frequently explanted when clinical care has necessitated an MRI. The purpose of this case series is to discuss the role of SCS explantation in order to acquire an MRI. METHODS: This study was performed at a tertiary academic pain medicine clinic. After exempt status was obtained via the institutional review board, patients were identified via the use of Common Procedural Terminology codes for implantable devices. A chart review was performed to identify all patients >18 years of age who had a lumbar or thoracic dorsal column SCS implanted during January 2001-December 2011. The charts were then followed to identify any patients who underwent a surgery for explantation of the device. Data collection included the total number of patients undergoing permanent SCS implantation, the total number of explantation of these devices, patient demographic factors, indication for SCS implantation, incidence of revisions and the indication, duration between implantation and explant of the device, and indication for explantation. RESULTS: During the time between 2001 and 2011, 199 patients were identified who underwent a thoracic or lumbar SCS implant after a successful trial. Among 199 implants, 33 devices were explanted, and of these, four were explanted due to the primary need for an MRI scan.

Interventional modalities to treat cancer-related pain.

Cancer-related pain is a significant cause of morbidity in those affected by both primary and metastatic disease. Although oral, transdermal, and parenteral opioid medications are an integral part of the World Health Organization's analgesic ladder, their use may be limited by side effects. Fortunately, there are advanced interventional pain management strategies effective in reducing pain in the cancer patient while mitigating the aforementioned side effects. Celiac plexus blocks and neurolysis have been proven effective in treating cancers of the abdominal viscera (ie, pancreas). Transversus abdominis plane blocks, neurolysis, and catheter placement can be used to treat cancer pain associated with the abdominal wall. Peripheral nerve blocks and catheter placement at the brachial and lumbosacral plexus or peripheral nerves treat cancer pain associated with the upper and lower limbs, whereas paravertebral and intercostal blocks treat cancer pain associated with the chest wall and ribs. Finally, alternate drug delivery methods such as intrathecal drug delivery systems concentrate medication at central opioid receptors without affecting the peripheral receptors implicated in unwanted side effects. This article provides an overview of these interventions, including indications, contraindications, and potential complications of advanced interventional pain management options available for the treatment of intractable cancer-related pain.

Pain severity is associated with muscle strength and peak oxygen uptake in adults with fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: The associations between pain, lower extremity strength, and aerobic conditioning have not been widely investigated in adults with fibromyalgia (FM). The principle objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between pain severity and knee strength in patients seeking treatment for FM. A secondary objective was to investigate the relationship between pain scores and aerobic conditioning. METHODS: Three measures of knee strength (isokinetic extensor, isokinetic flexor, isometric extensor) were quantified in the dominant leg of 69 adults with FM using a dynamometer at speeds of 60 degrees per second (60°/s) and 180°/s. Peak oxygen uptake (VO2) was assessed using a cycle ergometer, and pain was assessed using the pain severity subscale of the Multidimensional Pain Inventory. RESULTS: In univariable linear regression analyses using pain severity as the dependent variable, lesser values of isokinetic knee extensor strength at 60°/s (P=0.041) and 180°/s (P=0.010), isokinetic knee flexor strength at 60°/s (P=0.028) and 180°/s (P=0.003), and peak VO2 uptake (P=0.031) were predictive of greater pain severity scores. In multiple variable linear regression models adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, and opioid use, the following associations retained statistical significance; isokinetic knee extensor strength at 60°/s (P=0.020) and 180°/s (P=0.003), isokinetic knee flexor strength at 60°/s (P=0.015) and 180°/s (P=0.001), and peak VO2 uptake (P=0.014). However, no significant associations were found between pain severity and isometric knee extensor strength. CONCLUSION: The main findings from this study were that lesser values of isokinetic knee strength and peak VO2 uptake were predictive of greater pain severity scores. These results build on the findings of previous investigations, but ongoing research is needed to further characterize the effects of strength and peak VO2 uptake on the pathophysiology of FM.