Beyond the study of pain: the evolving role of the International Association for the Study of Pain in global advocacy.

ABSTRACT: Although founded on the basis of the study of pain, the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) has actively advocated for improving pain relief and access to pain management in a variety of ways. The Global Year was launched in 2004 and has continued with a different theme each year, and "Pain Awareness Month" is held every September. The Declaration of Montreal (2010) emphasized that access to pain management is a fundamental human right as a result from the IASP-hosted International Pain Summit. The IASP has continued to publish timely statements related to pain and pain management. The work of IASP on the 11th version of the International Classification of Disease has ensured that chronic pain is recognized as a disease in its own right, and the establishment of the Global Alliance of Partners for Pain Advocacy Task Force recognizes the importance of engaging people with lived experience of pain in accomplishing IASP's mission. The Working Group on Global Advocacy now spearheads IASP's global efforts in capacity building to ensure that pain advocacy activities will continue to grow.

One step at a time. Shaping consensus on research priorities and terminology in telehealth in musculoskeletal pain: an international modified e-Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth has emerged as an alternative model for treatment delivery and has become an important component of health service delivery. However, there is inconsistency in the use of terminologies and a lack of research priorities in telehealth in musculoskeletal pain. The purpose of this international, multidisciplinary expert panel assembled in a modified three-round e-Delphi survey is to achieve a consensus on research priorities and for the standard terminology for musculoskeletal pain telehealth practice. METHODS: In this international modified e-Delphi survey, we invited an expert panel consisting of researchers, clinicians, consumer representatives, industry partners, healthcare managers, and policymakers to participate in a three-round e-Delphi. Expert panels were identified through the Expertscape website, PubMed database, social media, and a snowball approach. In Round 1, potential research priorities and terminologies were presented to panel members. Panel members rated the agreement of each research priority on a 5-point Likert scale and an 11-point numerical scale, and each terminology on a 5-point Likert scale for the "telehealth in musculoskeletal pain " field over rounds. At least 80% of the panel members were required to agree to be deemed a consensus. We analyzed the data descriptively and assessed the stability of the results using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test. RESULTS: We performed an international e-Delphi survey from February to August 2022. Of 694 invited people, 160 panel members participated in the first round, 133 in the second round (83% retention), and 134 in the third round (84% retention). Most of the panel members were researchers 76 (47%), clinicians 57 (36%), and consumer representatives 9 (6%) of both genders especially from Brazil 31 (19%), India 22 (14%), and Australia 19 (12%) in the first round. The panel identified fourteen telehealth research priorities spanned topics including the development of strategies using information and communication technology, telehealth implementation services, the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telehealth interventions, equity of telehealth interventions, qualitative research and eHealth literacy in musculoskeletal pain conditions from an initial list of 20 research priorities. The consensus was reached for "digital health" and "telehealth" as standard terminologies from an initial list of 37 terminologies. CONCLUSION: An international, multidisciplinary expert consensus recommends that future research should consider the 14 research priorities for telehealth musculoskeletal pain reached. Additionally, the terms digital health and telehealth as the most appropriate terminologies to be used in musculoskeletal telehealth research. REGISTER: Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/tqmz2/ ).

Harnessing People's Lived Experience to Strengthen Health Systems and Support Equitable Musculoskeletal Health Care.

BACKGROUND: Despite the rising burden of musculoskeletal (MSK) problems (MSK conditions, MSK pain, and MSK injury and trauma) in most countries, actions to improve (strengthen) systems for supporting MSK health are often low on the priority list, relative to other noncommunicable diseases. Delivering effective, person-centered and equitable MSK health care requires strengthening systems for health, for example, through policy, financing, service delivery, and workforce initiatives. A critical, but often overlooked component is genuine integration of lived experience perspectives to cocreate care and systems that are responsive to people's needs and contexts. CLINICAL QUESTION: How can cocreation approaches support effective, person-centered and equitable MSK health care? What principles can stakeholders adopt to build responsive health systems? KEY RESULTS: Lived experience perspectives are not systematically integrated in initiatives to strengthen health systems. However, such integration is critical to creating equitable and person-centered health systems that provide care and support healthy populations. Cocreation principles and frameworks can guide processes to strengthen health systems, which must include historically marginalized groups and consider social and environmental contexts as they relate to health. CLINICAL APPLICATION: Clinicians, educators, and policy-makers play a critical role in creating equitable health systems and environments, and driving system reform with people who have lived experience. Genuine cocreation approaches capture diverse economic development (in particular, low-resource settings where health inequities are more prevalent), span the life course and diagnostic categories, are appropriate and/or adapted for the context and setting, and reflect evolving standards and opportunities for MSK health. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(4):1-10. Epub: 12 December 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11427.

Patient-centered consultations for persons with musculoskeletal conditions.

Consultations between practitioners and patients are more than a hypothesis-chasing exploration, especially when uncertainty about etiology and prognosis are high. In this article we describe a single individual's account of their lived experience of pain and long journey of consultations. This personal account includes challenges as well as opportunities, and ultimately led to self-awareness, clarity, and living well with pain. We follow each section of this narrative with a short description of the emerging scientific evidence informing on specific aspects of the consultation. Using this novel structure, we portray a framework for understanding consultations for persistent musculoskeletal pain from a position of patient-centered research to inform practice.

Public and patient perceptions of diagnostic labels for non-specific low back pain: a content analysis.

PURPOSE: An online randomised experiment found that the labels lumbar sprain, non-specific low back pain (LBP), and episode of back pain reduced perceived need for imaging, surgery and second opinions compared to disc bulge, degeneration, and arthritis among 1447 participants with and without LBP. They also reduced perceived seriousness of LBP and increased recovery expectations. METHODS: In this study we report the results of a content analysis of free-text data collected in our experiment. We used two questions: 1. When you hear the term [one of the six labels], what words or feelings does this make you think of? and 2. What treatment (s) (if any) do you think a person with [one of the six labels] needs? Two independent reviewers analysed 2546 responses. RESULTS: Ten themes emerged for Question1. Poor prognosis emerged for disc bulge, degeneration, and arthritis, while good prognosis emerged for lumbar sprain, non-specific LBP, and episode of back pain. Thoughts of tissue damage were less common for non-specific LBP and episode of back pain. Feelings of uncertainty frequently emerged for non-specific LBP. Twenty-eight treatments emerged for Question2. Surgery emerged for disc bulge, degeneration, and arthritis compared to lumbar sprain, non-specific LBP, and episode of back pain. Surgery did not emerge for non-specific LBP and episode of back pain. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that clinicians should consider avoiding the labels disc bulge, degeneration and arthritis and opt for labels that are associated with positive beliefs and less preference for surgery, when communicating with patients with LBP.

Effect of diagnostic labelling on management intentions for non-specific low back pain: A randomized scenario-based experiment.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic labels may influence treatment intentions. We examined the effect of labelling low back pain (LBP) on beliefs about imaging, surgery, second opinion, seriousness, recovery, work, and physical activities. METHODS: Six-arm online randomized experiment with blinded participants with and without LBP. Participants received one of six labels: 'disc bulge', 'degeneration', 'arthritis', 'lumbar sprain', 'non-specific LBP', 'episode of back pain'. The primary outcome was the belief about the need for imaging. RESULTS: A total of 1375 participants (mean [SD] age, 41.7 years [18.4 years]; 748 women [54.4%]) were included. The need for imaging was rated lower with the labels 'episode of back pain' (4.2 [2.9]), 'lumbar sprain' (4.2 [2.9]) and 'non-specific LBP' (4.4 [3.0]) compared to the labels 'arthritis' (6.0 [2.9]), 'degeneration' (5.7 [3.2]) and 'disc bulge' (5.7 [3.1]). The same labels led to higher recovery expectations and lower ratings of need for a second opinion, surgery and perceived seriousness compared to 'disc bulge', 'degeneration' and 'arthritis'. Differences were larger amongst participants with current LBP who had a history of seeking care. No differences were found in beliefs about physical activity and work between the six labels. CONCLUSIONS: 'Episode of back pain', 'lumbar sprain' and 'non-specific LBP' reduced need for imaging, surgery and second opinion compared to 'arthritis', 'degeneration' and 'disc bulge' amongst public and patients with LBP as well as reducing the perceived seriousness of LBP and enhancing recovery expectations. The impact of labels appears most relevant amongst those at risk of poor outcomes (participants with current LBP who had a history of seeking care).

International Association for the Study of Pain Presidential Task Force on Cannabis and Cannabinoid Analgesia: research agenda on the use of cannabinoids, cannabis, and cannabis-based medicines for pain management.

ABSTRACT: The President of the International Association for the Study of Pain established a task force on cannabis and cannabinoid analgesia to systematically examine the evidence on (1) analgesic pharmacology of cannabinoids and preclinical evidence on their efficacy in animal models of injury-related or pathological persistent pain; (2) the clinical efficacy of cannabis, cannabinoids, and cannabis-based medicines for pain; (3) harms related to long-term use of cannabinoids; as well as (4) societal issues and policy implications related to the use of these compounds for pain management. Here, we summarize key knowledge gaps identified in the task force outputs and propose a research agenda for generating high-quality evidence on the topic. The systematic assessment of preclinical and clinical literature identified gaps in rigor of study design and reporting across the translational spectrum. We provide recommendations to improve the quality, rigor, transparency, and reproducibility of preclinical and clinical research on cannabis and cannabinoids for pain, as well as for the conduct of systematic reviews on the topic. Gaps related to comprehensive understanding of the endocannabinoid system and cannabinoid pharmacology, including pharmacokinetics and drug formulation aspects, are discussed. We outline key areas where high-quality clinical trials with cannabinoids are needed. Remaining important questions about long-term and short-term safety of cannabis and cannabinoids are emphasized. Finally, regulatory, societal, and policy challenges associated with medicinal and nonmedicinal use of cannabis are highlighted, with recommendations for improving patient safety and reducing societal harms in the context of pain management.

A Healing Journey with Chronic Pain: A Meta-Ethnography Synthesizing 195 Qualitative Studies.

OBJECTIVE: There is a large body of research exploring what it means for a person to live with chronic pain. However, existing research does not help us understand what it means to recover. We aimed to identify qualitative research that explored the experience of living with chronic pain published since 2012 and to understand the process of recovery. DESIGN: A synthesis of qualitative research using meta-ethnography. METHODS: We used the seven stages of meta-ethnography. We systematically searched for qualitative research, published since 2012, that explored adults' experiences of living with, and being treated for, chronic pain. We used constant comparison to distill the essence of ideas into themes and developed a conceptual model. RESULTS: We screened 1,328 titles and included 195 studies. Our conceptual model indicates that validation and reconnection can empower a person with chronic pain to embark on a journey of healing. To embark on this journey requires commitment, energy, and support. CONCLUSIONS: The innovation of our study is to conceptualize healing as an ongoing and iterating journey rather than a destination. Health interventions for chronic pain would usefully focus on validating pain through meaningful and acceptable explanations; validating patients by listening to and valuing their stories; encouraging patients to connect with a meaningful sense of self, to be kind to themselves, and to explore new possibilities for the future; and facilitating safe reconnection with the social world. This could make a real difference to people living with chronic pain who are on their own healing journeys.

Health systems strengthening to arrest the global disability burden: empirical development of prioritised components for a global strategy for improving musculoskeletal health.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the profound burden of disease, a strategic global response to optimise musculoskeletal (MSK) health and guide national-level health systems strengthening priorities remains absent. Auspiced by the Global Alliance for Musculoskeletal Health (G-MUSC), we aimed to empirically derive requisite priorities and components of a strategic response to guide global and national-level action on MSK health. METHODS: Design: mixed-methods, three-phase design.Phase 1: qualitative study with international key informants (KIs), including patient representatives and people with lived experience. KIs characterised the contemporary landscape for MSK health and priorities for a global strategic response.Phase 2: scoping review of national health policies to identify contemporary MSK policy trends and foci.Phase 3: informed by phases 1-2, was a global eDelphi where multisectoral panellists rated and iterated a framework of priorities and detailed components/actions. RESULTS: Phase 1: 31 KIs representing 25 organisations were sampled from 20 countries (40% low and middle income (LMIC)). Inductively derived themes were used to construct a logic model to underpin latter phases, consisting of five guiding principles, eight strategic priority areas and seven accelerators for action.Phase 2: of the 165 documents identified, 41 (24.8%) from 22 countries (88% high-income countries) and 2 regions met the inclusion criteria. Eight overarching policy themes, supported by 47 subthemes, were derived, aligning closely with the logic model.Phase 3: 674 panellists from 72 countries (46% LMICs) participated in round 1 and 439 (65%) in round 2 of the eDelphi. Fifty-nine components were retained with 10 (17%) identified as essential for health systems. 97.6% and 94.8% agreed or strongly agreed the framework was valuable and credible, respectively, for health systems strengthening. CONCLUSION: An empirically derived framework, co-designed and strongly supported by multisectoral stakeholders, can now be used as a blueprint for global and country-level responses to improve MSK health and prioritise system strengthening initiatives.

The sociocultural context of pediatric pain: an examination of the portrayal of pain in children's popular media.

ABSTRACT: Pain (eg, needle injections, injuries, and chronic pain) is highly prevalent in childhood and occurs in social contexts. Nevertheless, broader sociocultural influences on pediatric pain, such as popular media, have not been empirically examined. This study examined how pain is portrayed and gendered in children's popular media. A cross-section of children's media targeted towards 4- to 6-year-old children was selected based on popularity, including 10 movies and the first season of 6 television shows. Pain instances were extracted and coded using 2 established observational coding systems assessing sufferer pain characteristics and observer responses (eg, empathic responses). Findings identified 454 instances of pain across the selected media. Violent pain (ie, intentionally inflicted) and injuries were most commonly represented, whereas everyday, chronic-type, and procedural pains were infrequently portrayed. Pain instances were more commonly experienced by boy characters, who also expressed greater distress; yet, observers were more responsive (eg, expressed greater concern) towards girl characters' pain. Overall, observer responses to pain were infrequent, with observers witnessing but not responding to nearly half of pain instances. Observers who did respond expressed an overall lack of empathy towards sufferers. These findings reveal a very narrow depiction of pain presented in children's popular media, with an overall underrepresentation of pain, numerous maladaptive portrayals of pain, and gender differences in both sufferer and observer responses. This study underscores the need for further research to inform how children's popular media is perceived by parents and children and how media may be transformed and harnessed for effective pain education in childhood.

Pain management programmes via video conferencing: a rapid review.

OBJECTIVES: During the current COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare has been transformed by the rapid switch from in person care to use of remote consulting, including video conferencing technology. Whilst much has been published on one-to-one video consultations, little literature exists on use of this technology to facilitate group interventions. Group pain management programmes are a core treatment provided by many pain services. This rapid review aimed to identify the extent of use of video conferencing technology for delivery of group pain management programmes and provide an overview of its use. METHODS: A rapid review of the literature published up to April 2020 (PubMed, PsycINFO and PEDro) was performed. The search string consisted of three domains: pain/CP (MeSH term) AND Peer group[MeSH] AND Videoconferencing[MeSH]/Telemedicine[MeSH]/Remote Consultation[MeSH]. The studies were of poor methodological quality and study design, and interventions and chronic pain conditions were varied. RESULTS: Literature searching yielded three eligible papers for this review. All studies had low methodological quality and risk of bias. Heterogeneity and variability in outcome reporting did not allow any pooling of data. The results demonstrated that videoconferencing for delivery of group programmes is possible, yet there is little extant literature on how to develop, deliver and measure outcomes of such programmes. CONCLUSIONS: This review demonstrates that there is little evidence to support or guide the use of synchronous videoconferencing to deliver pain management programmes. We present issues to consider, informed by this review and our experience, when implementing video conferencing. Study quality of existing work is variable, and extensive future research is necessary.

Patients as Partners in Research: There Is Plenty of Help for Researchers.

If including patients as equal partners in health care research is increasingly regarded as "the right thing to do," then it is important that researchers and patients "do it right." The research community should be aware of, use, and share resources that support best practices in this domain. The first editorial in the series focused on why researchers should engage patient partners on research teams. In this, the second editorial in the series, we concentrate on how to engage patient partners and highlight a selection of resources to help researchers and to demystify patient partnerships in research. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2020;50(5):219-221. doi:10.2519/jospt.2020.0104.

Patients as Partners in Research: It's the Right Thing to Do.

The health research landscape is changing, and it is time for the Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy (JOSPT) community to foster authentic opportunities for patient engagement in musculoskeletal research and practice. Although authentic engagement has challenges, the benefits are well worth the investment of time and energy to overcome these challenges and improve the quality of physical therapy research. In this editorial, the authors outline 3 steps JOSPT is taking to promote and support patient partnership in musculoskeletal research. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(9):623-626. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.0106.