Prognostic Factors and Models for Predicting Work Absence in Adults with Musculoskeletal Conditions Consulting a Healthcare Practitioner: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: It is difficult to predict which employees, in particular those with musculoskeletal pain, will return to work quickly without additional vocational advice and support, which employees will require this support and what levels of support are most appropriate. Consequently, there is no way of ensuring the right individuals are directed towards the right services to support their occupational health needs. The aim of this review will be to identify prognostic factors for duration of work absence in those already absent and examine the utility of prognostic models for work absence. METHODS: Eight databases were search using a combination of subject headings and key words focusing on work absence, musculoskeletal pain and prognosis. Two authors independently assessed the eligibility of studies, extracted data from all eligible studies and assessed risk of bias using the QUIPS or PROBAST tools, an adapted GRADE was used to assess the strength of the evidence. To make sense of the data prognostic variables were grouped according to categories from the Disability Prevention Framework and the SWiM framework was utilised to synthesise findings. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies were included in the review, including 13 prognostic models and a total of 110 individual prognostic factors. Overall, the evidence for all prognostic factors was weak, although there was some evidence that older age and better recovery expectations were protective of future absence and that previous absence was likely to predict future absences. There was weak evidence for any of the prognostic models in determining future sickness absence. CONCLUSION: Analysis was difficult due to the wide range of measures of both prognostic factors and outcome and the differing timescales for follow-up. Future research should ensure that consistent measures are employed and where possible these should be in-line with those suggested by Ravinskaya et al. (2023).

Pain assessment and pain treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the current literature on pain assessment and pain treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia. METHOD: A comprehensive systematic search of the literature with narrative synthesis was conducted. Eight major bibliographic databases were searched in October 2018. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were sequentially screened. Standardised data extraction and quality appraisal exercises were conducted. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were included in the review, 11 reporting findings on pain assessment tools or methods and 27 reporting findings on treatments for pain. In regard to pain assessment, a large proportion of people with moderate to severe dementia were unable to complete a self-report pain instrument. Pain was more commonly reported by informal caregivers than the person with dementia themselves. Limited evidence was available for pain-focused behavioural observation assessment. In regard to pain treatment, paracetamol use was more common in community-dwelling people with dementia compared with people without dementia. However, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were used less. For stronger analgesics, community-dwelling people with dementia were more likely to receive strong opioids (eg, fentanyl) than people without dementia. CONCLUSION: This review identifies a dearth of high-quality studies exploring pain assessment and/or treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia, not least into non-pharmacological interventions. The consequences of this lack of evidence, given the current and projected prevalence of the disease, are very serious and require urgent redress. In the meantime, clinicians should adopt a patient- and caregiver-centred, multi-dimensional, longitudinal approach to pain assessment and pain treatment for this population.

Evidence for strategies that improve recruitment and retention of adults aged 65 years and over in randomised trials and observational studies: a systematic review.

Background: adults aged ≥65 years are often excluded from health research studies. Lack of representation reduces generalisability of treatments for this age group. Objective: to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies that improve recruitment and retention of adults aged ≥65 in observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: searches conducted in 10 databases for RCTs of recruitment and retention strategies in RCTs or observational studies. Two reviewers screened abstracts and full-text articles for eligibility and extracted data. Studies without separate data for adults aged ≥65 were discarded. Risk of bias assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results were synthesised narratively. Results: thirty-two studies were included in the review (n = 75,444). Twelve studies had low risk of bias, of which 10 had successful strategies including: Opt-out versus opt-in increased recruitment (13.6% (n = 261)-18.7% (n = 36) difference; two studies); Advance notification increased retention (1.6% difference, OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.01, 2.10, one study (n = 2,686); 9.1% difference at 4 months, 1.44; 1.08, 1.92, one study (n = 753)); Hand-delivered versus postal surveys increased response (25.1% difference; X2 = 11.40, P < 0.01; one study (n = 139)); Open randomised design versus blinded RCT increased recruitment (1.56; 1.05, 2.33) and retention (13.9% difference; 3.1%, 24.6%) in one study (n = 538). Risk of bias was high/unclear for studies in which incentives or shorter length questionnaires increased response. Discussion: in low risk of bias studies, few of the strategies that improved participation in older adults had been tested in ≥1 study. Opt-out and advance notification strategies improved recruitment and retention, respectively, although an opt-out approach may have ethical limitations. Evidence from single studies limits the generalisability of other strategies.

Multidisciplinary approaches to managing osteoarthritis in multiple joint sites: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's Osteoarthritis (OA) guidelines recommended that future research should consider the benefits of combination therapies in people with OA across multiple joint sites. However, the clinical effectiveness of such approaches to OA management is unknown. This systematic review therefore aimed to identify the clinical and cost effectiveness of multidisciplinary approaches targeting multiple joint sites for OA in primary care. METHODS: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Computerised bibliographic databases were searched (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, BNI, HBE, HMIC, AMED, Web of Science and Cochrane). Studies were included if they met the following criteria; a randomised controlled trial (RCT), a primary care population with OA across at least two different peripheral joint sites (multiple joint sites), and interventions undertaken by at least two different health disciplines (multidisciplinary). The Cochrane 'Risk of Bias' tool and PEDro were used for quality assessment of eligible studies. Clinical and cost effectiveness was determined by extracting and examining self-reported outcomes for pain, function, quality of life (QoL) and health care utilisation. The date range for the search was from database inception until August 2015. RESULTS: The search identified 1148 individual titles of which four were included in the review. A narrative review was conducted due to the heterogeneity of the included trials. Each of the four trials used either educational or exercise interventions facilitated by a range of different health disciplines. Moderate clinical benefits on pain, function and QoL were reported across the studies. The beneficial effects of exercise generally decreased over time within all studies. Two studies were able to show a reduction in healthcare utilisation due to a reduction in visits to a physiotherapist or a reduction in x-rays and orthopaedic referrals. The intervention that showed the most promise used educational interventions delivered by GPs with reinforcement by practice nurses. CONCLUSIONS: There are currently very few studies that target multidisciplinary approaches suitable for OA across multiple joint sites, in primary care. A more consistent approach to outcome measurement in future studies of this nature should be considered to allow for better comparison.

Absence from work and return to work in people with back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A considerable proportion of work absence is attributed to back pain, however prospective studies in working populations with back pain are variable in setting and design, and a quantitative summary of current evidence is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the extent to which differences in setting, country, sampling procedures and methods for data collection are responsible for variation in estimates of work absence and return to work. METHODS: Systematic searches of seven bibliographic databases. Inclusion criteria were: adults in paid employment, with back pain, work absence or return to work during follow-up had been reported. Random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis was carried out to provide summary estimates of work absence and return to work rates. RESULTS: 45 studies were identified for inclusion in the review; 34 were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled estimate for the occurrence of work absence in workers with back pain was 15.5% (95% CI 9.8% to 23.6%, n=17 studies, I(2) 98.1%) in studies with follow-up periods of ≤6 months. The pooled estimate for the proportion of people with back pain returning to work was 68.2% (95% CI 54.8% to 79.1%, n=13, I(2) 99.2%), 85.6% (95% CI 78.2% to 90.7%, n=13, I(2) 98.7%) and 93.3% (95% CI 84.0% to 94.7%, n=10, I(2) 99%), at 1 month, 1-6 months and ≥6 months, respectively. Differences in setting, risk of participation bias and method of assessing work absence explained some of the heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: Pooled estimates suggest high return to work rates, with wide variation in estimates of return to work only partly explained by a priori defined study-level variables. The estimated 32% not back at work at 1 month are at a crucial point for intervention to prevent long term work absence.

Exercise for lower limb osteoarthritis: systematic review incorporating trial sequential analysis and network meta-analysis.

STUDY QUESTION: Which types of exercise intervention are most effective in relieving pain and improving function in people with lower limb osteoarthritis? SUMMARY ANSWER: As of 2002 sufficient evidence had accumulated to show significant benefit of exercise over no exercise. An approach combining exercises to increase strength, flexibility, and aerobic capacity is most likely to be effective for relieving pain and improving function. WHAT IS KNOWN AND WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: Current international guidelines recommend therapeutic exercise (land or water based) as "core" and effective management of osteoarthritis. Evidence from this first network meta-analysis, largely based on studies in knee osteoarthritis, indicates that an intervention combining strengthening exercises with flexibility and aerobic exercise is most likely to improve outcomes of pain and function. Further trials of exercise versus no exercise are unlikely to overturn this positive result.

Comparative effectiveness of treatment options for subacromial shoulder conditions: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are currently many treatment options for patients with subacromial shoulder conditions (SSCs). Clinical decision-making regarding the best treatment option is often difficult. This study aims to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of treatment options for relieving pain and improving function in patients with SSCs. METHODS: Eight databases [including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, PEDro, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry] were searched from inception until April 2020. Randomised clinical/controlled trials of adult patients investigating the effects of nonsurgical (e.g. corticosteroid injections, therapeutic exercise, shockwave therapy) and surgical treatment for SSCs, compared with each other, placebo, usual care or no treatment, were retrieved. Pairs of reviewers screened studies independently, quality appraised eligible studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, extracted and checked data for accuracy. Primary outcomes were pain and disability in the short term (⩽3 months) and long term (⩾6 months). Direct and indirect evidence of treatment effectiveness was synthesised using random-effects network meta-analysis. RESULTS: The review identified 177 eligible trials. Summary estimates (based on 99 trials providing suitable data, 6764 patients, 20 treatment options) showed small to moderate effects for several treatments, but no significant differences on pain or function between many active treatment comparisons. The primary analysis indicated that exercise and laser therapy may provide comparative benefit in terms of both pain and function at different follow-up time-points, with larger effects found for laser in the short term at 2-6 weeks, although direct evidence was provided by one trial only, and for exercise in the longer term [standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18, 0.59 at 3-6 months] compared with control. Sensitivity analyses excluding studies at increased risk of bias confirmed only the comparative effects of exercise as being robust for both pain and function up until 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: Current evidence shows small to moderate effect sizes for most treatment options for SSCs. Six treatments had a high probability of being most effective, in the short term, for pain and function [acupuncture, manual therapy, exercise, exercise plus manual therapy, laser therapy and Microcurrent (MENS) (TENS)], but with low certainty for most treatment options. After accounting for risk of bias, there is evidence of moderate certainty for the comparative effects of exercise on function in patients with SSCs. Future large, high-quality pragmatic randomised trials or meta-analyses are needed to better understand whether specific subgroups of patients respond better to some treatments than others.

Interventions to improve adherence to exercise for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults.

BACKGROUND: Chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) is a major health problem, accounting for approximately one-quarter of general practice (GP) consultations in the United Kingdom (UK). Exercise and physical activity is beneficial for the most common types of CMP, such as back and knee pain. However, poor adherence to exercise and physical activity may limit long-term effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions to improve adherence to exercise and physical activity for people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the trials registers of relevant Cochrane Review Groups. In addition, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index and reference lists of articles to October 2007. We consulted experts for unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials evaluating interventions that aimed to improve adherence to exercise and physical activity in adults with pain for three months and over in the axial skeleton or large peripheral joints. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two of the four authors independently assessed the quality of each included trial and extracted data. We contacted study authors for missing information. MAIN RESULTS: We included 42 trials with 8243 participants, mainly with osteoarthritis and spinal pain. Methods used for improving and measuring adherence in the included trials were inconsistent. Two of the 17 trials that compared different types of exercise showed positive effects, suggesting that the type of exercise is not an important factor in improving exercise adherence. Six trials studied different methods of delivering exercise, such as supervising exercise sessions, refresher sessions and audio or videotapes of the exercises to take home. Of these, five trials found interventions improved exercise adherence. Four trials evaluated specific interventions targeting exercise adherence; three of these showed a positive effect on exercise adherence. In eight trials studying self-management programmes, six improved adherence measures. One trial found graded activity was more effective than usual care for improving exercise adherence. Cognitive behavioural therapy was effective in a trial in people with whiplash-associated disorder, but not in trials of people with other CMP. In the trials that showed a positive effect on adherence, association between clinical outcomes and exercise adherence was conflicting. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Interventions such as supervised or individualised exercise therapy and self-management techniques may enhance exercise adherence. However, high-quality, randomised trials with long-term follow up that explicitly address adherence to exercises and physical activity are needed. A standard validated measure of exercise adherence should be used consistently in future studies.

A systematic review and evidence synthesis of non-medical triage, self-referral and direct access services for patients with musculoskeletal pain.

INTRODUCTION: The demand for musculoskeletal (MSK) care is rising, and is a growing challenge for general practice. Direct access to physiotherapy and other healthcare services may offer appropriate care for MSK pain patients but there is uncertainty regarding the effectiveness or efficiency of this approach in practice. This study aimed to review the evidence regarding characteristics, outcomes, barriers and facilitators of MSK triage and direct access services. METHODS: A comprehensive search of eight databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library) up to February 2018 was conducted to identify studies (trials, cohorts and qualitative evidence) on direct access services for MSK in primary care settings. Using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, titles, abstracts, and subsequent full texts were independently screened by reviewers. Methodological quality of eligible studies was assessed using the mixed methods appraisal tool, and extracted data regarding study characteristics and results were independently reviewed. A narrative synthesis and grading of evidence was undertaken. Approaches to MSK triage and direct access were profiled along with their respective outcomes of care relating to patient-oriented and socioeconomic outcomes. Barriers and facilitators of each model of direct access services were also highlighted. RESULTS: 9010 unique citations were screened, of which 26 studies were eligible. Three approaches (open access, combination and service pathway models) to MSK triage and direct access shared similar goals but were heterogeneous in application. MSK patients using direct access showed largely similar characteristics (age, sex and duration of symptoms) compared to GP-led care, although they were often younger, slightly more educated and with better socio-economic status than patients seen through GP-led care. Although many studies showed limitations in design or methods, outcomes of care (patient oriented outcomes of pain, and disability) did not show large differences between direct access and GP-led care. In most studies direct access patients were reported to have lower healthcare utilisation (fewer physiotherapy or GP consultations, analgesics or muscle relaxants prescriptions, or imaging procedures) and less time off work compared to GP-led care. DISCUSSION: This study provides insight into the current state of evidence regarding MSK triage and direct access services and highlights potential implications for future research, healthcare services planning, resource utilisation and organising care for MSK patients in primary care. There is consistent, although limited, evidence to suggest that MSK triage and direct access services lead to comparable clinical outcomes with lower healthcare consumption, and can help to manage GP workload. However, due to the paucity of strong empirical data from methodologically robust studies, a scale up and widespread roll out of direct access services cannot as yet be assumed to result in long term health and socio-economic gains. PROSPERO-ID: CRD42018085978.

Land- and water-based exercise therapies for musculoskeletal conditions.

This chapter summarizes current evidence from recently published systematic reviews of land- and water-based exercise therapies for musculoskeletal conditions. The aim is to present an overview of the evidence and highlight gaps where more research is still needed. This is not a systematic review, but a systematic search of the literature and a summary of results of the best, most recent systematic reviews evaluating interventions for musculoskeletal conditions. There have been two previous summaries of systematic reviews of evidence for exercise therapies in musculoskeletal conditions. We have updated these searches, and additionally considered the evidence for the clinical effectiveness of exercise in fibromyalgia and chronic widespread pain and of hydrotherapy and water-based exercise treatments on pain and disability.

Justifications for using complementary and alternative medicine reported by persons with musculoskeletal conditions: A narrative literature synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is very popular with patients frequently combining it with orthodox health care. The high prevalence of CAM use and satisfaction with CAM reported by patients directly challenges an orthodox system that can only approve such use if it results from the application of biomedical concepts and science. Studies highlighting this as a cultural, sociological and historical phenomenon emphasise the value of choice for consumers of health care. Musculoskeletal conditions typify common problems for which the effectiveness of orthodox care is often unclear. We postulated that the reasons people give for using or not using CAM for musculoskeletal conditions, would therefore indicate the full range of expectations that people have of health care. Furthermore, these reasons would indicate how much people feel orthodox health care is or is not meeting their expectations. Therefore, this study aims to investigate people's reasons for choosing or avoiding CAM for non-traumatic musculoskeletal conditions. METHODS: A systematic search and narrative synthesis was conducted of published qualitative and quantitative studies related to CAM and non-traumatic musculoskeletal conditions. RESULTS: We identified 169 relevant papers detailing 152 separate studies, from which 1486 justifications were extracted concerning CAM use. Content analysis resulted in 11 distinct categories across four themes: practical aspects of care, clinical effectiveness, non-clinical outcomes of care, and a person's philosophy of illness and care. People provided similar rationales for both using and avoiding CAM, emphasising that, whilst CAM is perceived by many patients with musculoskeletal conditions to fill gaps in care (such as practitioner time or quality of the therapeutic relationship), orthodox care also seeks to deliver these aspects of care. However, people who used CAM also highlighted its alignment with their general philosophy and ideas about illness and health care, and often emphasised CAM's capacity to give them control over their condition and its treatment. CONCLUSION: Currently, CAM appears to have a significant role for patients with common painful long-term conditions in providing choices to enable individual needs to be met.

Expressed information needs of patients with osteoporosis and/or fragility fractures: a systematic review.

This systematic review identified patients have unmet information needs about the nature of osteoporosis, medication, self-management and follow-up. Clinician knowledge and attitudes appear to be of key importance in determining whether these needs are met. Unmet information needs appear to have psychosocial consequences and result in poor treatment adherence. PURPOSE: Patient education is an integral component of the management of osteoporosis, yet patients are dissatisfied with the information they receive and see this as an area of research priority. This study aimed to describe and summarise the specific expressed information needs of patients in previously published qualitative research. METHODS: Using terms relating to osteoporosis, fragility fracture and information needs, seven databases were searched. Articles were screened using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Full-text articles selected for inclusion underwent data extraction and quality appraisal. Findings were drawn together using narrative synthesis. RESULTS: The search identified 11,024 articles. Sixteen empirical studies were included in the review. Thematic analysis revealed three overarching themes relating to specific information needs, factors influencing whether information needs are met and the impact of unmet information needs. Specific information needs identified included the following: the nature of osteoporosis/fracture risk; medication; self-management and understanding the role of dual energy x-ray absorptiometry and follow-up. Perceived physician knowledge and attitudes, and the attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of patients were important factors in influencing whether information needs were met, in addition to contextual factors and the format of educational resources. Failure to elicit and address information needs appears to be associated with poor treatment adherence, deterioration of the doctor-patient relationship and important psychosocial consequences. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to describe the information needs of patients with osteoporosis and fracture, the impact of this information gap and possible solutions. Further research is needed to co-design and evaluate educational interventions with patients.

Protocol: a systematic review of studies developing and/or evaluating search strategies to identify prognosis studies.

BACKGROUND: Prognosis research is on the rise, its importance recognised because chronic health conditions and diseases are increasingly common and costly. Prognosis systematic reviews are needed to collate and synthesise these research findings, especially to help inform effective clinical decision-making and healthcare policy. A detailed, comprehensive search strategy is central to any systematic review. However, within prognosis research, this is challenging due to poor reporting and inconsistent use of available indexing terms in electronic databases. Whilst many published search filters exist for finding clinical trials, this is not the case for prognosis studies. This systematic review aims to identify and compare existing methodological filters developed and evaluated to identify prognosis studies of any of the three main types: overall prognosis, prognostic factors, and prognostic [risk prediction] models. METHODS: Primary studies reporting the development and/or evaluation of methodological search filters to retrieve any type of prognosis study will be included in this systematic review. Multiple electronic bibliographic databases will be searched, grey literature will be sought from relevant organisations and websites, experts will be contacted, and citation tracking of key papers and reference list checking of all included papers will be undertaken. Titles will be screened by one person, and abstracts and full articles will be reviewed for inclusion independently by two reviewers. Data extraction and quality assessment will also be undertaken independently by two reviewers with disagreements resolved by discussion or by a third reviewer if necessary. Filters' characteristics and performance metrics reported in the included studies will be extracted and tabulated. To enable comparisons, filters will be grouped according to database, platform, type of prognosis study, and type of filter for which it was intended. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will identify all existing validated prognosis search filters and synthesise evidence about their applicability and performance. These findings will identify if current filters provide a proficient means of searching electronic bibliographic databases or if further prognosis filters are needed and can feasibly be developed for systematic searches of prognosis studies.

Effective treatment options for musculoskeletal pain in primary care: A systematic overview of current evidence.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Musculoskeletal pain, the most common cause of disability globally, is most frequently managed in primary care. People with musculoskeletal pain in different body regions share similar characteristics, prognosis, and may respond to similar treatments. This overview aims to summarise current best evidence on currently available treatment options for the five most common musculoskeletal pain presentations (back, neck, shoulder, knee and multi-site pain) in primary care. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted. Initial searches identified clinical guidelines, clinical pathways and systematic reviews. Additional searches found recently published trials and those addressing gaps in the evidence base. Data on study populations, interventions, and outcomes of intervention on pain and function were extracted. Quality of systematic reviews was assessed using AMSTAR, and strength of evidence rated using a modified GRADE approach. RESULTS: Moderate to strong evidence suggests that exercise therapy and psychosocial interventions are effective for relieving pain and improving function for musculoskeletal pain. NSAIDs and opioids reduce pain in the short-term, but the effect size is modest and the potential for adverse effects need careful consideration. Corticosteroid injections were found to be beneficial for short-term pain relief among patients with knee and shoulder pain. However, current evidence remains equivocal on optimal dose, intensity and frequency, or mode of application for most treatment options. CONCLUSION: This review presents a comprehensive summary and critical assessment of current evidence for the treatment of pain presentations in primary care. The evidence synthesis of interventions for common musculoskeletal pain presentations shows moderate-strong evidence for exercise therapy and psychosocial interventions, with short-term benefits only from pharmacological treatments. Future research into optimal dose and application of the most promising treatments is needed.

Unilateral neglect is not unilateral: evidence for additional neglect of extreme right space.

Six patients with visuospatial neglect following right hemisphere lesions were given three tasks that assessed performance in areas of space ranging from extreme left to extreme right. A line bisection task required the patients to detect and bisect lines of four different lengths at seven left-right spatial locations, a number report task required the patients to name 11 two-digit numbers in a left-right array, and a tiling task required patients to place small black tiles over the black squares of a grid that stretched from 65 degrees left to 65 degrees right. Performance was compared with that of 20 age-matched controls. The patients showed the characteristic signs of left-side neglect in left space, extending to the central midline. Performance was relatively normal in centre-right space but all 6 patients showed signs of neglect of extreme right space (60 degrees to the right of the midline and beyond). We propose that neglect is best characterised as a bilateral, asymmetrical compression of experienced space in which the constriction extends further from the left than from the right but nevertheless affects both sides of space.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of chronic widespread pain in the general population.

Chronic widespread pain (CWP) is common and associated with poor general health. There has been no attempt to derive a robust prevalence estimate of CWP or assess how this is influenced by sociodemographic factors. This study therefore aimed to determine, through a systematic review and meta-analysis, the prevalence of CWP in the adult general population and explore variation in prevalence by age, sex, geographical location, and criteria used to define CWP. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and AMED were searched using a search strategy combining key words and related database-specific subject terms to identify relevant cohort or cross-sectional studies published since 1990. Included articles were assessed for risk of bias. Prevalence figures for CWP (American College of Rheumatology criteria) were stratified according to geographical location, age, and sex. Potential sources of variation were investigated using subgroup analyses and meta-regression. Twenty-five articles met the eligibility criteria. Estimates for CWP prevalence ranged from 0% to 24%, with most estimates between 10% and 15%. The random-effects pooled prevalence was 10.6% (95% confidence intervals: 8.6-12.9). When only studies at low risk of bias were considered pooled, prevalence increased to 11.8% (95% confidence intervals: 10.3-13.3), with reduced but still high heterogeneity. Prevalence was higher in women and in those aged more than 40 years. There was some limited evidence of geographic variation and cultural differences. One in 10 adults in the general population report chronic widespread pain with possible sociocultural variation. The possibility of cultural differences in pain reporting should be considered in future research and the clinical assessment of painful conditions.

Chronic pain and mortality: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is common, often widespread and has a substantial impact on health and quality of life. The relationship between chronic pain and mortality is unclear. This systematic review aimed to identify and evaluate evidence for a relationship between chronic pain and mortality. METHODS: A search of ten electronic databases including EMBASE and MEDLINE was conducted in March 2012, and updated until March 2014. Observational studies investigating the association between chronic or widespread pain (including fibromyalgia) and mortality were included. Risk of bias was assessed and a meta-analysis was undertaken to quantify heterogeneity and pool results. A narrative review was undertaken to explore similarities and differences between the included studies. RESULTS: Ten studies were included in the review. Three reported significant associations between chronic or widespread pain and mortality in unadjusted results. In adjusted analyses, four studies reported a significant association. The remaining studies reported no statistically significant association. A meta-analysis showed statistically significant heterogeneity of results from studies using comparable outcome measures (n = 7)(I2 = 78.8%) and a modest but non-significant pooled estimate (MRR1.14,95%CI 0.95-1.37) for the relationship between chronic pain and all-cause mortality. This association was stronger when analysis was restricted to studies of widespread pain (n = 5,I2 = 82.3%) MRR1.22(95%CI 0.93-1.60). The same pattern was observed with deaths from cancer and cardiovascular diseases. Heterogeneity is likely to be due to differences in study populations, follow-up time, pain phenotype, methods of analysis and use of confounding factors. CONCLUSION: This review showed a mildly increased risk of death in people with chronic pain, particularly from cancer. However, the small number of studies and methodological differences prevented clear conclusions from being drawn. Consistently applied definitions of chronic pain and further investigation of the role of health, lifestyle, social and psychological factors in future studies will improve understanding of the relationship between chronic pain and mortality.

The impact of low back-related leg pain on outcomes as compared with low back pain alone: a systematic review of the literature.

OBJECTIVES: Low back pain (LBP) with leg pain, especially with findings of nerve root involvement, is considered as a poor prognostic indicator although it seems to have a favorable natural resolution. It is unclear whether patients with LBP and leg pain are at the more severe end of the spectrum as compared with patients with LBP alone or whether they are a distinct subgroup that would perhaps benefit from early identification of the condition and more targeted interventions. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of LBP-related leg pain on outcomes and use of health resources as compared with patients with LBP alone. METHODS: Systematic review of studies reporting separate outcomes of patients with LBP and LBP with leg pain and synthesis of available evidence. Literature search of all English language peer-reviewed publications was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL for the years 1994 to 2010. RESULTS: Of the papers retrieved, 9 were included in the review. The heterogeneity of studies allowed only narrative analysis of findings. All studies reported worse health outcomes and increased use of health care with radiation of leg pain distally and with neurological findings, with the exception of psychological outcomes. DISCUSSION: LBP with pain radiating to the leg appears to be associated with increased pain, disability, poor quality of life, and increased use of health resources compared with LBP alone. These findings argue for early identification of these cases by health care professionals and pursuing effective treatments.

Exercise for lower limb osteoarthritis: systematic review incorporating trial sequential analysis and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is sufficient evidence to conclude that exercise interventions are more effective than no exercise control and to compare the effectiveness of different exercise interventions in relieving pain and improving function in patients with lower limb osteoarthritis. DATA SOURCES: Nine electronic databases searched from inception to March 2012. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised controlled trials comparing exercise interventions with each other or with no exercise control for adults with knee or hip osteoarthritis. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers evaluated eligibility and methodological quality. Main outcomes extracted were pain intensity and limitation of function. Trial sequential analysis was used to investigate reliability and conclusiveness of available evidence for exercise interventions. Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to combine both direct (within trial) and indirect (between trial) evidence on treatment effectiveness. RESULTS: 60 trials (44 knee, two hip, 14 mixed) covering 12 exercise interventions and with 8218 patients met inclusion criteria. Sequential analysis showed that as of 2002 sufficient evidence had been accrued to show significant benefit of exercise interventions over no exercise control. For pain relief, strengthening, flexibility plus strengthening, flexibility plus strengthening plus aerobic, aquatic strengthening, and aquatic strengthening plus flexibility, exercises were significantly more effective than no exercise control. A combined intervention of strengthening, flexibility, and aerobic exercise was also significantly more effective than no exercise control for improving limitation in function (standardised mean difference -0.63, 95% credible interval -1.16 to -0.10). CONCLUSIONS: As of 2002 sufficient evidence had accumulated to show significant benefit of exercise over no exercise in patients with osteoarthritis, and further trials are unlikely to overturn this result. An approach combining exercises to increase strength, flexibility, and aerobic capacity is likely to be most effective in the management of lower limb osteoarthritis. The evidence is largely from trials in patients with knee osteoarthritis. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) No CRD42012002267.

Factors associated with the severity and progression of self-reported hand pain and functional difficulty in community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Hand problems are common in older adults and cause significant pain and disruption to everyday living. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize evidence on the factors associated with the severity and progression of self-reported hand pain and functional difficulty in population-based studies of older adults. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAL, BNI, AMED, HMIC, PsycINFO and ISI Web of Knowledge were searched up to January 2011 for relevant articles. The search strategy combined text words for hand, pain, function and epidemiological study. Inclusion criteria were applied and articles in the review assessed for quality using the QUality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) assessment tool. Data extraction included: author, year of publication, study location, participant inclusion criteria, risk factor and outcome measurement, and association with hand pain and/or function. RESULTS: Seven articles from five studies met the inclusion criteria from 5,679 citations. All studies were cross-sectional and provided no information on progression of hand pain and function over time. Factors associated with limited hand function were older age, female gender, manual occupation, neck or shoulder pain, clinical and radiographic osteoarthritis, weaker hand strength, hand pain, history of Parkinson's disease, stroke, diabetes or rheumatoid arthritis, and illness perceptions (namely, frustration, impact and symptom count). Key factors associated with hand pain severity were age, impact, frustration, patient expectation of a long disease time course and self-reported diagnosis of the cause of the hand problem. CONCLUSIONS: Both demographic and clinical factors were found to be related to self-reported hand pain severity and functional difficulty in older adults; however, the results were derived from a small number of studies, with no information on progression of hand pain and functional difficulty over time.