Disrupted Candidacy: A Longitudinal Examination of the Constrained Healthcare-Access Journeys of National Health Service Workers in Scotland Seeking Supports for Long COVID Illness.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence examines how persons experiencing Long COVID (LC) struggle to secure healthcare for symptoms. However, few studies examine healthcare workers experiencing LC, nor the complex and multiple difficulties faced when seeking and receiving healthcare. METHODS: This study is based on two phases of longitudinally conducted qualitative interviews, 6 months apart, with National Health Service (NHS) workers experiencing LC, from different occupational roles at NHS locales in Scotland (first interviews, n = 50; second interviews, n = 44). RESULTS: Multiple factors restricted healthcare access, including worries about pressuring the NHS and concerns over LC being legitimised. When healthcare was sought, workers struggled to secure support, referrals and treatment. The following reasons were included: (1) context: the restrictive pandemic healthcare context; (2) illness climate: low GP knowledge surrounding LC and how this could be treated, trends for ascribing symptoms to other causes and reluctance to diagnose LC; (3) sense-making of LC: healthcare availability linked to occupational role identity. To visualise and examine healthcare barriers, candidacy theory is applied, drawing inferences between healthcare context, illness climate, sense-making and identities. CONCLUSION: NHS workers' complex journeys represent Disrupted Candidacy, intersecting challenges across candidacy domains, restricting the seeking and receiving of LC healthcare. Findings provide insights into why NHS workers resisted and withdrew from healthcare-seeking, and the barriers they faced when attempting to secure LC support. This study presents a pathway for future LC illness research to use a modified candidacy theory framework. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This research focuses on amplifying and learning from lived experiences, and the voices of NHS workers in Scotland experiencing LC. Interviews represent primary data for this study; thus, participants and their healthcare journeys are centred in this research and all aspects of production, reporting and output. Explicit discussions of stakeholder group involvement are highlighted in the methods section.

No Backstage: The Relentless Emotional Management of Acute Nursing Through the COVID-19 Pandemic.

AIM(S): To explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on nurse's well-being, experiences of delivering healthcare within acute settings and their emotional management. DESIGN: Sequential mixed methods. METHODS: February to July 2021 an online well-being survey was disseminated to nurses working in acute settings within one Scottish health board. In-depth interviews with a purposive sample of respondents were conducted. Survey data were analysed descriptively, and interview data using Framework analysis and emotional management as the theoretical framework. RESULTS: Well-being was poor overall. Infection control measures impeded interactions, with loss of connection between patients, families and nurses. Emotional work was extended in caring for patients and families when visits were forbidden or restricted. Disconnect between colleagues was intensely felt. On COVID and non-COVID wards, nurses were caring for patients with a significantly reduced workforce and often outside their clinical speciality. Nurses masked their own anxieties, fears, moral distress and exhaustion on the ward. Communal 'backstage' spaces, were reduced to enable more infection-control space but reduced opportunity for collegial support. Formal psychological intervention required access after shift, and/or nurses feared they could not contain their emotions afterwards. CONCLUSION: Working during the pandemic was emotionally and physically demanding for those in COVID a.nd non-COVID wards. Unintended consequences of infection control measures significantly extended nurses' emotional management, by caring for isolated patients and families but impeding opportunities to care for each other, compounding their emotions. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION: There is a need to value emotional work in nursing to better support mental well-being. IMPACT: We advance the nursing emotional management literature by addressing the gap of exploration in challenging conditions. The importance of emotional management on nurses' mental well-being has been overlooked but focusing on this in the next crisis could improve nurse's well-being. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution. REPORTING METHOD: GRAMMS.

Abdominal cancer symptoms: Evaluation of the impact of a regional public awareness campaign.

OBJECTIVE: A regional 'Be Clear on Cancer' (BCoC) campaign developed by Public Health England aimed to promote public awareness of key abdominal cancer symptoms in people aged 50 years and over. METHODS: Data were analysed for metrics at different stages in the patient care pathway including public awareness, GP attendance and referrals, to cancer diagnosis. RESULTS: There was significantly higher recognition of the BCoC abdominal campaign in the campaign region compared to the control area (Post Campaign/Control, n = 401/406; 35% vs. 24%, p < 0.05). The campaign significantly improved knowledge of 'bloating' as a symptom (p = 0.03) compared to pre-campaign levels. GP attendances for abdominal symptoms increased significantly by 5.8% (p = 0. 03), although the actual increase per practice was small (average 16.8 visits per week in 2016 to 17.7 in 2017). Urgent GP referrals for suspected abdominal cancer increased by 7.6%, compared to a non-significant change (0.05%) in the control area. For specific abdominal cancers, the number diagnosed were similar to or higher than the median in the campaign area but not in the control area in people aged 50 and over: colorectal (additional n = 61 cancers), pancreatic (additional n = 102) and stomach cancers (additional n = 17). CONCLUSIONS: This campaign had a modest impact on public awareness of abdominal cancer symptoms, GP attendances and cancers diagnosed.

Trends in gabapentinoid prescribing, co-prescribing of opioids and benzodiazepines, and associated deaths in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: Gabapentinoid drugs (gabapentin and pregabalin) are effective in neuropathic pain, which has a prevalence of ∼7%. Concerns about increased prescribing have implications for patient safety, misuse, and diversion. Drug-related deaths (DRDs) have increased and toxicology often implicates gabapentinoids. We studied national and regional prescribing rates (2006-2016) and identified associated sociodemographic factors, co-prescriptions and mortality, including DRDs. METHODS: National data from the Information Service Division, NHS Scotland were analysed for prescribing, sociodemographic, and mortality data from the Health Informatics Centre, University of Dundee. DRDs in which gabapentinoids were implicated were identified from National Records of Scotland and Tayside Drug Death Databases. RESULTS: From 2006 to 2016, the number of gabapentin prescriptions in Scotland increased 4-fold (164 630 to 694 293), and pregabalin 16-fold (27 094 to 435 490). In 2016 'recurrent users' (three or more prescriptions) had mean age 58.1 yr, were mostly females (62.5%), and were more likely to live in deprived areas. Of these, 60% were co-prescribed an opioid, benzodiazepine, or both (opioid 49.9%, benzodiazepine 26.8%, both 17.1%). The age-standardised death rate in those prescribed gabapentinoids was double that in the Scottish population (relative risk 2.16, 95% confidence interval 2.08-2.25). Increases in gabapentinoids contributing to cause of DRDs were reported regionally and nationally (gabapentin 23% vs 15%; pregabalin 21% vs 7%). In Tayside, gabapentinoids were implicated in 22 (39%) of DRDs, 17 (77%) of whom had not received a prescription. CONCLUSIONS: Gabapentinoid prescribing has increased dramatically since 2006, as have dangerous co-prescribing and death (including DRDs). Older people, women, and those living in deprived areas were particularly likely to receive prescriptions. Their contribution to DRDs may be more related to illegal use with diversion of prescribed medication.

Identification and Management of Chronic Pain in Primary Care: a Review.

Chronic pain is a common, complex, and challenging condition, where understanding the biological, social, physical and psychological contexts is vital to successful outcomes in primary care. In managing chronic pain the focus is often on promoting rehabilitation and maximizing quality of life rather than achieving cure. Recent screening tools and brief intervention techniques can be effective in helping clinicians identify, stratify and manage both patients already living with chronic pain and those who are at risk of developing chronic pain from acute pain. Frequent assessment and re-assessment are key to ensuring treatment is appropriate and safe, as well as minimizing and addressing side effects. Primary care management should be holistic and evidence-based (where possible) and incorporates both pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches, including psychology, self-management, physiotherapy, peripheral nervous system stimulation, complementary therapies and comprehensive pain-management programmes. These may either be based wholly in primary care or supported by appropriate specialist referral.

What do we mean by "older adults' persistent pain self-management"? A concept analysis.

BACKGROUND: No standard definition exists for the concept "persistent pain self-management" or how it should be defined in relation to older adults. Poorly defined concepts can result in misunderstandings in the clinical setting and can hinder research through difficulties identifying or measuring the concept. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain attributes, referents, antecedents, and consequences of the concept older adults' persistent pain self-management and develop a theoretical definition. DESIGN: Rodgers evolutionary model of concept analysis was used to systematically analyze articles from the academic and grey literature (N = 45). Data were extracted using standardized extraction forms and analyzed using thematic analysis. FINDINGS: This concept was discussed in three ways: as an intervention, in reference to everyday behaviors, and as an outcome. Five defining attributes were identified: multidimensional process, personal development, active individuals, symptom response, and symptom control. Patients' perceived need and ability to manage pain with support from others is necessary for pain self-management to occur. Numerous physical, psychological, and social health consequences were identified. A theoretical definition is discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings have clarified existing use and understanding regarding the concept of older adults' persistent pain self-management. We have identified three areas for future development: refinement of the attributes of this concept within the context of older adults, an exploration of how providers can overcome difficulties supporting older adults' persistent pain self-management, and a clarification of the overall theoretical framework of older adults' persistent pain self-management.

Is age discrimination a risk factor for frailty progression and frailty development among older adults? A prospective cohort analysis of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.

BACKGROUND: With the increasing global burden of frailty on healthcare resources, it is important to understand the modifiable risk factors of frailty. This study examined perceived age discrimination as a potential risk factor for frailty progression and frailty development among older adults. METHODS: Prospective cohort study using data from Waves 5 to 9 of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). Data on perceived age discrimination was collected only in Wave 5 of ELSA and analysed as baseline data in this study. Frailty was defined using the Frailty Index (FI) scores (0 to 1), calculated using the multidimensional deficits (scores ≥ 0.25 were considered frail). Binomial generalised estimating equation models (GEE) were fitted in R studio using perceived age discrimination as the main predictor with age, gender, long-standing illness, cognition, subjective social status status (SSS) and psychological wellbeing as covariates. Odd ratios were reported with 95 % confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: A total sample of 2,385 ELSA participants were included in the analysis. 55.8 % (n = 1312) were female, mean age 71.9 (SD ± 5.27) years and baseline frailty prevalence was 12.1 % (n = 288). Perceived age discrimination was reported by 38.4 % (n = 916) of the participants. Both frailty progression (OR 1.50, CI [1.26- 1.70]) and frailty development (OR 1.39, CI [1.14-1.62]) were significantly associated with perceived age discrimination in the fully adjusted models. Age (80+ years) (OR 3.72, CI [2.84-4.86]) and long-standing illness (OR 5.45, CI [4.43-6.67]) had the strongest association with respondents' frailty progression. CONCLUSION: Perceived age discrimination significantly increased the risk of frailty progression and frailty development among ELSA participants.

What is the impact of long-term COVID-19 on workers in healthcare settings? A rapid systematic review of current evidence.

BACKGROUND: Long COVID is a devastating, long-term, debilitating illness which disproportionately affects healthcare workers, due to the nature of their work. There is currently limited evidence specific to healthcare workers about the experience of living with Long COVID, or its prevalence, pattern of recovery or impact on healthcare. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to assess the effects of Long COVID among healthcare workers and its impact on health status, working lives, personal circumstances, and use of health service resources. METHODS: We conducted a systematic rapid review according to current methodological standards and reported it in adherence to the PRISMA 2020 and ENTREQ statements. RESULTS: We searched relevant electronic databases and identified 3770 articles of which two studies providing qualitative evidence and 28 survey studies providing quantitative evidence were eligible. Thematic analysis of the two qualitative studies identified five themes: uncertainty about symptoms, difficulty accessing services, importance of being listened to and supported, patient versus professional identity and suggestions to improve communication and services for people with Long COVID. Common long-term symptoms in the survey studies included fatigue, headache, loss of taste and/or smell, breathlessness, dyspnoea, difficulty concentrating, depression and anxiety. CONCLUSION: Healthcare workers struggled with their dual identity (patient/doctor) and felt dismissed or not taken seriously by their doctors. Our findings are in line with those in the literature showing that there are barriers to healthcare professionals accessing healthcare and highlighting the challenges of receiving care due to their professional role. A more representative approach in Long COVID research is needed to reflect the diverse nature of healthcare staff and their occupations. This rapid review was conducted using robust methods with the codicil that the pace of research into Long COVID may mean relevant evidence was not identified.

Towards a definition of refractory neuropathic pain for epidemiological research. An international Delphi survey of experts.

BACKGROUND: Best current estimates of neuropathic pain (NeuP) prevalence come from studies using various screening detecting pain with probable neuropathic features; the proportion experiencing significant, long-term NeuP, and the proportion not responding to standard treatment are unknown. These "refractory" cases are the most clinically important to detect, being the most severe, requiring specialist treatment. METHODS: We report an international Delphi survey of experts in NeuP, aiming for consensus on the features required to define, for epidemiological research: (1) neuropathic pain; and (2) when NeuP is "refractory". A web-based questionnaire was developed and data collected from three rounds of questionnaires from nineteen experts. RESULTS: There was good consensus on essential inclusion of six items to identify NeuP ("prickling, tingling, pins & needles", "pain evoked by light touch", "electric shocks or shooting pain", "hot or burning" pain, "brush allodynia on self-examination", and "relevant history") and on some items that were non-essential. Consensus was also reached on components of a "refractory NeuP" definition: minimum duration (one year); number of trials of drugs of known effectiveness (four); adequate duration of these trials (three months / maximum tolerated); outcomes of treatment (pain severity, quality of life). Further work needs to validate these proposed criteria in general population research. CONCLUSIONS: This paper presents an international consensus on measuring the epidemiology of refractory neuropathic pain. This will be valuable in reaching an agreed estimate of the prevalence of neuropathic pain, and the first estimate of refractory neuropathic pain prevalence.

Epidemiology of neuropathic pain and its impact on quality of life.

Epidemiology is an important clinical tool in designing and evaluating management and prevention strategies, and is particularly relevant to neuropathic pain. However, there is a relative lack of accurate information available. In one sense, neuropathic pain describes a symptom or a mechanism, rather than a specific disease; on the other hand, there are sufficient similarities in the effects and response to treatment between different causes to make it worthwhile to consider neuropathic pain as a distinct condition. However, there are important specific disease-based factors that need to be considered separately. Estimates of prevalence that are based on specific causes of neuropathic pain tend to be lower (1-2%) than those that are based on reports of the classic symptoms (6-8%), and further methodological research is needed. All neuropathic pain is associated with poor general health, comparable with other severe chronic diseases. The importance of newly proposed risk factors, including genetic factors, still needs to be assessed at a population level.

Assessing the impact of a national clinical guideline for the management of chronic pain on opioid prescribing rates: a controlled interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Opioids can be effective analgesics, but long-term use may be associated with harms. In 2013, the first national, comprehensive, evidence-based pain management guideline was published, from the Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network (SIGN 136: Management of Chronic Pain) with key recommendations on analgesic prescribing. This study aimed to examine the potential impact on national opioid prescribing rates in Scotland. METHODS: Trends in national and regional community opioid prescribing data for Scotland were analysed from quarter one (Q1) 2005 to Q2 2020. Interrupted time series regression examined the association of SIGN 136 publication with prescribing rates for opioid-containing drugs. Gabapentinoid prescribing was used as a comparison drug. RESULTS: After a positive prescribing trend pre-publication, the timing of SIGN 136 publication was associated with a negative change in the trend of opioid prescribing rates (-2.82 items per 1000 population per quarter [PTPPQ]; P < 0.01). By Q2 2020, the relative reduction in the opioid prescribing rate was -20.67% (95% CI: -23.61, -17.76). This persisted after correcting for gabapentinoid prescribing and was mainly driven by the reduction in weak opioids, whereas strong opioid prescribing rates continued to rise. Gabapentinoid prescribing showed a significant rise in level (8.00 items per 1000 population; P = 0.01) and trend (0.27 items PTPPQ; P = 0.01) following SIGN 136 publication. CONCLUSIONS: The publication of SIGN 136 was associated with a reduction in opioid prescribing rates. This suggests that changes in clinical policy through evidence-based national clinical guidelines may affect community opioid prescribing, though this may be partially replaced by gabapentinoids, and other factors may also contribute.

Potential Pain Management Programmes in primary care. A UK-wide questionnaire and Delphi survey of experts.

BACKGROUND: Most chronic pain patients are treated in primary care and their management is often challenging. Secondary care- or private sector-based Pain Management Programmes (PMPs) offering intensive multidisciplinary approaches have been found to improve participants' physical performance and psychological well-being. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify the components and perceived outcomes of multidisciplinary PMPs in the UK and to explore expert health care providers' opinions about important characteristics of an ideal yet practical PMP for delivery in primary care. METHODS: All PMPs in the UK (n = 77), identified through the British Pain Society, were invited to participate. Each PMP was sent a postal questionnaire. We then conducted a modified Delphi survey with 18 pain management experts from a range of professional backgrounds. RESULTS: A representative from 54 (response rate 70.1%) PMPs completed a questionnaire. Most PMPs were delivered in National Health Service outpatient secondary care by physiotherapists (98%), psychologists (94%), pain specialists (61%), nurses (54%) and occupational therapists (52%). There was evidence of reasonably prolonged follow-up of participants and use of a range of clinical outcome measures. Consensus was reached on most components and outcomes of a potential primary care-based PMP. 'Necessary' components included training in, and information about, self-management, general fitness, posture and mobility. Input from a physiotherapist and clinical or health psychologist was identified as key to the PMP. Preferred patient outcome measures were related to emotional well-being, self-efficacy and coping and quality of life. CONCLUSION: Future research should look to design, deliver and evaluate a primary care-based intervention based on these findings.

Clinical governance and research ethics as barriers to UK low-risk population-based health research?

BACKGROUND: Since the Helsinki Declaration was introduced in 1964 as a code of practice for clinical research, it has generally been agreed that research governance is also needed in the field of public health and health promotion research. Recently, a range of factors led to the development of more stringent bureaucratic procedures, governing the conduct of low-risk population-based health research in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Our paper highlights a case study of the application process to medical research ethics committees in the United Kingdom for a study of the promotion of physical activity by health care providers. The case study presented here is an illustration of the challenges in conducting low-risk population-based health research. RESULTS: Our mixed-methods approach involved a questionnaire survey of and semi-structured interviews with health professionals (who were all healthy volunteers). Since our study does not involve the participation of either patients or the general population, one would expect the application to the relevant research ethics committees to be a formality. This proved not to be the case! CONCLUSION: Research ethics committees could be counter-productive, rather than protecting the vulnerable in the research process, they can stifle low-risk population-based health research. Research ethics in health services research is first and foremost the responsibility of the researcher(s), and we need to learn to trust health service researchers again. The burden of current research governance regulation to address the perceived ethical problems is neither appropriate nor adequate. Senior researchers/academics need to educate and train students and junior researchers in the area of research ethics, whilst at the same time reducing pressures on them that lead to unethical research, such as commercial funding, inappropriate government interference and the pressure to publish. We propose that non-invasive low-risk population-based health studies such as face-to-face interviews with health and social care professionals or postal questionnaire studies with patients on non-sensitive topics are given a waiver or a light touch review. We suggest that this can be achieved through a two-staged ethics application process. The first stage starts with a one or two-page outline application which ethics committees can use as the basis to grant a waiver or request a full application.

Health and quality of life associated with chronic pain of predominantly neuropathic origin in the community.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the health and quality of life associated with chronic pain of predominantly neuropathic origin (POPNO) on health and daily activity in the general population. METHODS: The Self-complete Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-LANSS) questionnaire, recently validated for identifying pain of predominantly neuropathic origin, was sent to 6000 adults identified from general practices in the United Kingdom, along with chronic pain identification and severity questions, the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the Neuropathic Pain Scale, and the SF-36 general health questionnaire. RESULTS: With a corrected response rate of 52%, 3 groups of respondents were identified: those without chronic pain ("No Chronic Pain" group, n=1537); those with chronic pain who were S-LANSS positive indicating the presence of POPNO ("Chronic POPNO" group, n =241); and those with chronic pain who were S-LANSS negative ["Chronic Pain (non-POPNO)" group, n=1179]. The chronic POPNO group reported higher pain severity and had significantly poorer scores for all interference items of the BPI than those with chronic pain (non-POPNO). Mean scores from the Neuropathic Pain Scale were also significantly higher for the Chronic POPNO group. There were significant differences between the groups in all domains of the SF-36, with the Chronic POPNO group reporting the worst health. After adjusting for pain severity, age, and sex, the chronic POPNO group was still found to have poorer scores than the other Chronic Pain (non-POPNO) group in all domains of the SF-36 and all interference items in the BPI, indicating poorer health and greater disability. DISCUSSION: This study confirms the importance of identifying neuropathic pain in the community, and the need for multidimensional management strategies that address all aspects of health.

Chronic pain, depression and cardiovascular disease linked through a shared genetic predisposition: Analysis of a family-based cohort and twin study.

BACKGROUND: Depression and chronic pain are the two most important causes of disability (Global Burden of Disease Study 2013). They occur together more frequently than expected and both conditions have been shown to be co-morbid with cardiovascular disease. Although shared socio-demographic risk factors (e.g. gender, deprivation) might explain the co-morbidity of these three conditions, we hypothesised that these three long-term, highly prevalent conditions co-occur and may be due to shared familial risk, and/or genetic factors. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We employed three different study designs in two independent cohorts, namely Generation Scotland and TwinsUK, having standardised, validated questionnaire data on the three traits of interest. First, we estimated the prevalence and co-occurrence of chronic pain, depression and angina among 24,024 participants of a population-based cohort of extended families (Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study), adjusting for age, gender, education, smoking status, and deprivation. Secondly, we compared the odds of co-morbidity in sibling-pairs with the odds in unrelated individuals for the three conditions in the same cohort. Lastly, examination of similar traits in a sample of female twins (TwinsUK, n = 2,902), adjusting for age and BMI, allowed independent replication of the findings and exploration of the influence of additive genetic (A) factors and shared (C) and non-shared (E) environmental factors predisposing to co-occurring chronic widespread pain (CWP) and cardiovascular disease (hypertension, angina, stroke, heart attack, elevated cholesterol, angioplasty or bypass surgery). In the Generation Scotland cohort, individuals with depression were more than twice as likely to have chronic pain as those without depression (adjusted OR 2·64 [95% CI 2·34-2·97]); those with angina were four times more likely to have chronic pain (OR 4·19 [3·64-4·82]); those with depression were twice as likely to have angina (OR 2·20 [1·90-2·54]). Similar odds were obtained when the outcomes and predictors were reversed and similar effects seen among sibling pairs; depression in one sibling predicted chronic pain in the other (OR 1·34 [1·05-1·71]), angina predicted chronic pain in the other (OR 2·19 [1·63-2·95]), and depression, angina (OR 1·98 [1·49-2·65]). Individuals with chronic pain and angina showed almost four-fold greater odds of depression compared with those manifesting neither trait (OR 3·78 [2·99-4·78]); angina showed seven-fold increased odds in the presence of chronic pain and depression (OR 7·76 [6·05-9·95]) and chronic pain nine-fold in the presence of depression and angina (OR 9·43 [6·85-12·98]). In TwinsUK, the relationship between CWP and depression has been published (R = 0.34, p<0.01). Considering the CWP-cardiovascular relationship, the most suitable model to describe the observed data was a combination of A, C and E, with a small but significant genetic predisposition, shared between the two traits (2·2% [95% CI 0·06-0·23]). CONCLUSION: We found an increased co-occurrence of chronic pain, depression and cardiovascular disease in two independent cohorts (general population-based cohort, twins cohort) suggesting a shared genetic contribution. Adjustment for known environmental influences, particularly those relating to socio-economic status (Generation Scotland: age, gender, deprivation, smoking, education; Twins UK: age,BMI) did not explain the relationship observed between chronic pain, depression and cardiovascular disease. Our findings from two independent cohorts challenge the concept of traditional disease boundaries and warrant further investigation of shared biological mechanisms.

The epidemiology of chronic pain of predominantly neuropathic origin. Results from a general population survey.

UNLABELLED: Progress in the understanding of chronic pain with neuropathic features has been hindered by a lack of epidemiologic research in the general population. The Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs score (S-LANSS) was recently validated for use in postal surveys, making the identification of pain of predominantly neuropathic origin possible. Six family practices in 3 UK cities (Aberdeen, Leeds, and London) generated a total random sample of 6,000 adults. The mailed questionnaire included demographic items, chronic pain identification, and intensity questions, the S-LANSS, the Level of Expressed Needs questionnaire, and the Neuropathic Pain Scale. With a corrected response rate of 52%, the prevalence of any chronic pain was 48% and the prevalence of pain of predominantly neuropathic origin was 8%. Respondents with this chronic neuropathic pain were significantly more likely to be female, slightly older, no longer married, living in council rented accommodation, unable to work, have no educational qualifications, and be smokers than all other respondents. Multiple logistic regression modeling found that pain of predominantly neuropathic origin was independently associated with older age, gender, employment (being unable to work), and lower educational attainment. Respondents with this pain type also reported significantly greater pain intensity, higher scores on the NPS, higher levels of expressed need, and longer duration of pain. This is the first estimate of the prevalence and distribution of pain of predominantly neuropathic origin in the general population, using a previously validated and reliable data collection instrument. PERSPECTIVE: Chronic pain with neuropathic features appears to be more common in the general population than previously suggested. This type of pain is more severe than other chronic pain but distributed similarly throughout sociodemographic groups.

Primary care staff's views and experiences related to routinely advising patients about physical activity. A questionnaire survey.

BACKGROUND: United Kingdom public health policy has recently re-emphasised the role of primary health care professionals in tackling increasing levels of physical inactivity within the general population. However, little is known about the impact that this has had in practice. This study explores Scottish primary care staff's knowledge, attitudes and experiences associated with advising patients about physical activity during routine consultations. METHODS: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey of general practitioners (or family physicians), practice nurses and health visitors based in four health regions was conducted during 2004. The main outcome measures included: (i) health professionals' knowledge of the current physical activity recommendations; (ii) practice related to routine physical activity advising; and (iii) associated attitudes. RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned by 757 primary care staff (response rate 54%). Confidence and enthusiasm for giving advice was generally high, but knowledge of current physical activity recommendations was low. In general, respondents indicated that they routinely discuss and advise patients about physical activity regardless of the presenting condition. Health visitors and practice nurses were more likely than general practitioners to offer routine advice. Lack of time and resources were more likely to be reported as barriers to routine advising by general practitioners than other professional groups. However, health visitors and practice nurses were also more likely than general practitioners to believe that patients would follow their physical activity advice giving. CONCLUSION: If primary health care staff are to be fully motivated and effective in encouraging and supporting the general population to become more physically active, policymakers and health professionals need to engage in efforts to: (1) improve knowledge of current physical activity recommendations and population trends amongst frontline primary care staff; and (2) consider the development of tools to support individual assessment and advice giving to suit individual circumstances. Despite the fact that this study found that system barriers to routine advising were less of a problem than other previous research has indicated, this issue still remains a challenge.

An Epidemiological Study of Neuropathic Pain Symptoms in Canadian Adults.

The reported prevalence of neuropathic pain ranges from 6.9% to 10%; however the only Canadian study reported 17.9%. The objective of this study was to describe the epidemiology of neuropathic pain in Canada. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in a random sample of Canadian adults. The response rate was 21.1% (1504/7134). Likely or possible neuropathic pain was defined using a neuropathic pain-related diagnosis and a positive outcome on the Self-Report Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs pain scale (S-LANSS) or the Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4) Questions. The prevalence of likely neuropathic pain was 1.9% (S-LANSS) and 3.4% (DN4) and that of possible neuropathic pain was 5.8% (S-LANSS) and 8.1% (DN4). Neuropathic pain was highest in economically disadvantaged males. There is a significant burden of neuropathic pain in Canada. The low response rate and a slightly older and less educated sample than the Canadian population may have led to an overestimate of neuropathic pain. Population prevalence varies by screening tool used, indicating more work is needed to develop reliable measures. Population level screening targeted towards high risk groups should improve the sensitivity and specificity of screening, while clinical examination of those with positive screening results will further refine the estimate of prevalence.

The S-LANSS score for identifying pain of predominantly neuropathic origin: validation for use in clinical and postal research.

This article describes the development and validation of the S-LANSS score, a self-report version of the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs pain scale. The S-LANSS aims to identify pain of predominantly neuropathic origin, as distinct from nociceptive pain, without the need for clinical examination. Two hundred patients with chronic pain were asked to complete the S-LANSS unaided. A researcher then administered the S-LANSS scale and the Neuropathic Pain Scale (NPS) in interview format. An independent clinician determined the pain type (neuropathic versus nociceptive) and rated his or her certainty about diagnosis. The S-LANSS scale was also incorporated into a chronic pain questionnaire that was sent to 160 community patients and 150 newly referred patients waiting for pain clinic assessment. The S-LANSS scale correctly identified 75% of pain types when self-completed and 80% when used in interview format. Sensitivity for self-completed S-LANSS scores ranged from 74% to 78%, depending on the cutoff score. There were significant associations between NPS items and total score with S-LANSS score. In the postal survey, completed questionnaires were returned by 57% of patients (n = 174). Internal consistency and convergent validity of the survey S-LANSS scores were confirmed. The findings support the S-LANSS scale as a valid and reliable self-report instrument for identifying neuropathic pain and it is also acceptable for use in postal survey research. Establishing valid measures of symptoms and signs in neuropathic pain will allow standardized comparisons with other investigational measures. This might lead to new insights into the relationship between pathophysiologic mechanisms and clinical manifestations of pain.

A Genome-wide Association Study Provides Evidence of Sex-specific Involvement of Chr1p35.1 (ZSCAN20-TLR12P) and Chr8p23.1 (HMGB1P46) With Diabetic Neuropathic Pain.

Neuropathic pain is defined as pain arising as a direct consequence of a lesion or a disease affecting the somatosensory system and it affects around 1 in 4 diabetic patients in the UK. The purpose of this genome-wide association study (GWAS) was to identify genetic contributors to this disorder. Cases of neuropathic pain were defined as diabetic patients with a multiple prescription history of at least one of five drugs specifically indicated for the treatment of neuropathic pain. Controls were diabetic individuals who were not prescribed any of these drugs, nor amitriptyline, carbamazepine, or nortriptyline. Overall, 961 diabetic neuropathic pain cases and 3260 diabetic controls in the Genetics of Diabetes Audit and Research Tayside (GoDARTS) cohort were identified. We found a cluster in the Chr1p35.1 (ZSCAN20-TLR12P) with a lowest P value of 2.74 × 10(- 7) at rs71647933 in females and a cluster in the Chr8p23.1, next to HMGB1P46 with a lowest P value of 8.02 × 10(- 7) at rs6986153 in males. Sex-specific narrow sense heritability was higher in males (30.0%) than in females (14.7%). This GWAS on diabetic neuropathic pain provides evidence for the sex-specific involvement of Chr1p35.1 (ZSCAN20-TLR12P) and Chr8p23.1 (HMGB1P46) with the disorder, indicating the need for further research.