Interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation for patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and hypermobility spectrum disorders.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic pain is a common manifestation of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and hypermobility spectrum disorders; thus it is often suggested that patients undergo generic interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation, despite there being little evidence to support this decision. The aim of this study is to examine the effectiveness of standard rehabilitation programmes for chronic pain on patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and hypermobility spectrum disorders, compared with patients with other chronic pain disorders. SUBJECTS: Data, collected between 2008 and 2016, were extracted from a Swedish national registry. The patient data comprised of 406 cases with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome or hypermobility spectrum disorders, 784 cases with a whiplash-related diagnosis, 3713 cases with diagnoses relating to spinal pain, and 2880 cases of fibromyalgia. METHODS: The differences between groups on key outcome measures from pre- to 1-year follow-up after interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation were analysed using linear mixed effects models. Sensitivity analysis in the form of pattern-mixture modelling was conducted to discern the impact of missing data. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in improvements from pre- to 1-year follow-up for patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome or hypermobility spectrum disorder compared with other diagnostic groups regarding measures of health-related quality of life, mental health, or fatigue. At follow-up, differences in pain interference (d = -0.34 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.5 to -0.18)), average pain (d = 0.22 (95% CI 0.11-0.62)) and physical functioning (d = 2.19 (95% CI 1.61-2.77)) were detected for the group with spinal-related diagnoses in relation to those with EDS/HSD, largely due to pre-treatment group differences. Sensitivity analysis found little evidence for missing data influencing the results. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome/hypermobility spectrum disorders may benefit from inclusion in an interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation programme.

Catastrophizing and acceptance are mediators between insomnia and pain intensity-an SQRP study of more than 6,400 patients with non-malignant chronic pain conditions.

Background: Sleep problems (insomnia) and chronic pain are associated. Chronic pain and insomnia/insufficient sleep quality share similar symptoms and features. Although they have a bidirectional relationship, more research is needed to understand how they interact via mediators and how moderators influence this relationship. Aims: In this large clinical registry-based cohort study (N = 6,497), we investigate important mediators between insomnia and pain intensity in a cross-sectional sample of chronic pain patients using advanced path analysis. In addition, we investigate whether some background variables were moderators of the identified important paths or not and the correlation patterns between insomnia and pain intensity in relation to the mediators. Methods: This study includes a cohort of adult patients with chronic non-cancer pain from the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation (SQRP) with data on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) (2008-2016). The PROMs cover the background, pain aspects, psychological distress, pain-related cognitions, activity/participation, and health-related quality of life variables of the patients. Partial least squares structural equation modeling was used to explore the direct and indirect (via mediators) relationships between insomnia and pain intensity at baseline. Results: In this cohort study, insomnia was prevalent at 62.3%, and both direct and indirect mediating paths were present for the insomnia-pain intensity relationship. All of the mediating effects combined were weaker than the direct effect between insomnia and pain intensity. The mediating effects via catastrophizing and acceptance showed the strongest and equal mediating paths, and mediating effects via fear avoidance were the second strongest. Insomnia showed stronger direct significant correlations with psychological distress, catastrophizing, and acceptance compared with those of pain intensity. Sex, age, education level, spatial extent of pain, or body mass index did not moderate the mediating paths. Discussion and conclusion: This study confirms the existence of significant direct and mediating paths between reported insomnia and pain intensity. Future studies should focus on illuminating how sleep interventions influence pain intensity and other important key factors that contribute to the distress of chronic pain patients.

Effects of interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation programs on neuropathic and non-neuropathic chronic pain conditions - a registry-based cohort study from Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation (SQRP).

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Neuropathic pain arises as a direct consequence of a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system. Pharmacological treatments for neuropathic pain often fail despite following guidelines. Interdisciplinary Pain Rehabilitation Programs (IPRP) are an effective intervention for chronic pain conditions. Little research has investigated whether IPRP can benefit patients with chronic neuropathic pain compared to other chronic pain conditions. This study assesses the real-world effects of IPRP on patients with chronic neuropathic pain compared to non-neuropathic patients using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) available in the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation (SQRP). METHODS: A neuropathic group of patients (n = 1,654) were identified in two steps. This group was compared to a non-neuropathic group (n = 14,355) composed of common diagnoses (low back pain, fibromyalgia, whiplash associated disorders, and Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome) in relation to background variables, three overall outcome variables, and mandatory outcome variables (pain intensity, psychological distress symptoms, activity/participation aspects and health-related quality of life variables). Of these patients 43-44% participated in IPRP. RESULTS: At assessment, the neuropathic group reported significantly (with small effect sizes (ES)) more physician visits the previous year, older age, shorter pain durations, and less spatial extent of the pain (moderate ES). Moreover, for the 22 mandatory outcome variables, we found only clinically insignificant differences according to ESs between the groups. For patients participating in IPRP, the neuropathic group displayed equal or in some cases slightly superior results compared to the non-neuropathic group. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: After assessing the real-world effects of IPRP, this large study found that neuropathic pain patients can benefit from the IPRP intervention. Both registry studies and RCTs are needed to better understand which patients with neuropathic pain are most suitable for IPRP and to what extent special considerations need to be made for these patients within the framework of IPRP.

Prevalence of Long-Term Opioid Therapy in a Chronic Non-Cancer Pain Population Attending a University-Based Tertiary Pain Clinic in Sweden: A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Opioid therapy is a common treatment for chronic pain, despite accumulating evidence regarding harm and a lack of data to support the efficacy of long-term treatment. The prevalence of opioid therapy in Swedish patients with chronic non-cancer pain is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess a short-term period prevalence of prescribed opioid-use and long-term opioid therapy in a population with complex chronic non-cancer pain. METHODS: The study population comprised 1,613 patients with chronic non-cancer pain referred to a university-based tertiary pain clinic in Sweden during 2015-17. Data from a 360-day period prior to consultation were extracted from the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation (SQRP) and Swedish Prescribed Drug Register (SPDR). Milligram morphine equivalents per day (MME/day) for dispensed opioids were analysed for a 90-day period preceding consultation, and long-term opioid therapy was determined for the entire 360-day period. RESULTS: The 90-day prevalence was 38% (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 36.0-40.8%) and 360-day prevalence was 22.3% (n=360, 95% CI 20.4-24.4%). CONCLUSION: Prescribing rates of opioids in a Swedish population with complex non-cancer chronic pain were high; 2 in 5 patients were dispensed an opioid within a 90-day period prior to consultation.