Estimating Risk of Chronic Pain and Disability Following Musculoskeletal Trauma in the United Kingdom.

Importance: Serious traumatic injury is a leading cause of death and disability globally, with most survivors known to develop chronic pain. Objective: To describe early variables associated with poor long-term outcome for posttrauma pain and create a clinical screening tool for this purpose. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prospective cohort study at a major trauma center hospital in England. Recruitment commenced in December 2018 and ceased in March 2020. Participants were followed up for 12 months. Patients aged 16 years or older who were hospitalized because of acute musculoskeletal trauma within the preceding 14 days were included. Data were analyzed from March to December 2021. Exposure: Acute musculoskeletal trauma requiring admittance to a major trauma center hospital. Main Outcomes and Measures: A poor outcome was defined as Chronic Pain Grade II or higher and measured at both 6 months (primary time point) and 12 months. A broad range of candidate variables potentially associated with outcomes were used, including surrogates for pain mechanisms, quantitative sensory testing, and psychosocial factors. Univariable models were used to identify the variables most likely to be associated with poor outcome, which were entered into multivariable models. A clinical screening tool (nomogram) was derived from 6-month results. Results: In total, 1590 consecutive patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 772 were deemed eligible and 124 (80 male [64.5%]; mean [SD] age, 48.9 [18.8] years) were recruited. At 6 months, 19 of 82 respondents (23.2%) reported a good outcome, whereas at 12 months 27 of 44 respondents (61.4%) reported a good outcome. At 6 months on univariable analysis, an increase in total posttraumatic stress symptoms (odds ratio [OR], 2.09; 95% CI, 1.33-3.28), pain intensity average (OR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.37-6.00), number of fractures (OR, 2.79; 95% CI, 1.02-7.64), and pain extent (OR, 4.67; 95% CI, 1.57-13.87) were associated with worse outcomes. A multivariable model including those variables had a sensitivity of 0.93, a specificity of 0.54, and C-index of 0.92. Conclusions and Relevance: A poor long-term pain outcome from musculoskeletal traumatic injuries may be estimated by measures recorded within days of injury. These findings suggest that posttraumatic stress symptoms, pain spatial distribution, perceived average pain intensity, and number of fractures are good candidates for a sensitive multivariable model and derived clinical screening tool.

Is exercise/physical activity effective at reducing symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder in adults - A systematic review.

Background: Exercise has been used to manage symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The effect of exercise on PTSD outcomes has been previously explored in several studies. However, it still remains unclear what type of exercise/physical activity, intensity and duration is most effective for reducing symptoms of PTSD. A systematic review was conducted to determine which forms of exercise or physical activity have the greatest effect on PTSD outcome scores including an evaluation of exercise frequency and volume. Methods: The following electronic databases were systematically searched from January 1980 to June 2021: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed and Web of Science. Inclusion criteria were studies investigating adults aged 18 or over, reporting the effect of exercise and physical activities on PTSD symptom outcome scores. Two reviewers independently extracted information on study characteristics, exposure and outcomes. In total of 3,217 articles were screened and 23 full text articles further assessed, with 13 RCT's included in the review, covering seven exercise/physical activity interventions. The study protocol was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42021255131). Results: Thirteen studies from four countries involving a total of 531 patients were selected for inclusion. Individual forms of exercise/physical activity examined showed some effect on reducing PTSD symptoms but combined exercises (resistance training, aerobic, strength and yoga) administered over a 12 week period, three times a week for 30-60 min showed greater effects on PTSD symptoms. Conclusion: The limited evidence suggests that a combined exercise intervention has the best evidence for a having a beneficial effect on PTSD symptoms. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=255131.

Physical prognostic factors predicting outcome following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are common. Many patients undergo ACL reconstruction (ACLR), with rehabilitation key to successful outcome. Understanding physical prognostic factors is integral to clinical decision-making, but factors predicting outcome are inadequately defined. The objective was to establish physical prognostic factors predicting outcome following ACLR. METHODS: A systematic review following a published protocol (CRD42019127732) searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, key journals and grey literature to November 28, 2020. Prospective cohort studies, participants ≥16 years of age who had undergone ACLR were included, with multi-ligament and/or ACL repair surgery, and studies not published in English excluded. Two independent reviewers conducted searches, extracted data, assessed risk of bias (QUIPS) and overall quality of evidence (GRADE). Meta-analysis was not possible, therefore narrative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: 13 studies (16 articles) were included (1 low, 12 high risk of bias). Low-level evidence supports postoperative degenerative changes and poor lower-limb strength predicting poorer outcome long term (KOOS). Very low-level evidence supports greater postoperative quadriceps strength predicting improved functional performance medium term; with lower body mass index predicting improvement of multiple outcome measures. CONCLUSION: Limited evidence of low or very low-level indicates multiple prognostic factors predicting outcome following ACLR. A high-quality prognostic study is required.

Measures of central sensitization and their measurement properties in musculoskeletal trauma: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Chronic pain following musculoskeletal trauma is common, which may partially be attributed to the early presence of central sensitization (CS). Multiple measures are suggested to assess clinical features of CS, yet no systematic review has evaluated the measurement properties of these measures in a musculoskeletal trauma population. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT: This systematic review, which followed a published and PROSPERO registered protocol (CRD42018091531), aimed to establish the scope of CS measures used within a musculoskeletal trauma population and evaluate their measurement properties. Searches were conducted in two stages by two independent reviewers. The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to evaluate risk of bias and overall quality was assessed using the modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. RESULTS: From 86 studies, 30 different CS outcome measures were identified. Nine studies evaluated measurement properties of nine outcome measures; eight evaluated reliability and one evaluated construct validity. Measures included seven quantitative sensory testing methods (pressure, cold and electrical pain thresholds; warm, cold and vibration detection thresholds; vibration perception thresholds), pain drawings and a pinwheel. Risk of bias was assessed as doubtful/inadequate for all but one study, overall quality of evidence was low/very low for all measures. Reliability of measures ranged from poor to excellent. CONCLUSIONS: Many measures are used to evaluate CS but with limited established measurement properties in musculoskeletal trauma. High quality research to establish measurement properties of CS outcome measures is required.

Reliability of temporal summation, thermal and pressure pain thresholds in a healthy cohort and musculoskeletal trauma population.

Traumatic injuries affect approximately 978 million people worldwide with 56.2 million requiring inpatient care. Quantitative sensory testing (QST) can be useful in predicting outcome following trauma, however the reliability of multiple QST including temporal summation (TS), heat and cold pain thresholds (HPT, CPT) and pressure pain thresholds (PPT) is unknown. We assessed intra (between day) and inter-rater (within day) reliability of QST in asymptomatic participants (n = 21), and inter-rater (within day) reliability in participants presenting with acute musculoskeletal trauma (n = 25). Intra-class correlations with 95% confidence intervals (ICC 3,2), standard error of measurement (SEM) and Bland Altman Plots for limits of agreement were calculated. For asymptomatic participants, reliability was good to excellent for HPT (ICC range 0.76-0.95), moderate to good for PPT (ICC range 0.52-0.93), with one site rated poor (ICC 0.41), and poor to excellent for TS scores (ICC range 0.20-0.91). For musculoskeletal trauma participants reliability was good to excellent for HPT and PPT (ICC range 0.76-0.86), and moderate to good reliability for TS (ICC range 0.69-0.91). SEM for HPT for both sets of participants was ~1°C and an average of 7N for asymptomatic participants and less than 8N for acute musculoskeletal trauma participants for PPT. This study demonstrates moderate to excellent intra and inter-rater reliability for HPT and PPT in asymptomatic participants and good to excellent inter-rater reliability for acute musculoskeletal trauma participants, with TS showing more variability for both sets of participants. This study provides foundations for future work evaluating the sensory function over time following acute musculoskeletal trauma.

Physical prognostic factors predicting outcome following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Injuries of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) are a common musculoskeletal complication and can cause significant reduction in patient function and quality of life. Many undergo ACL reconstruction, with high-quality rehabilitation key to successful outcome. Knowledge of physical prognostic factors, such as quadriceps strength, is crucial to inform rehabilitation and has important implications for outcome following ACL reconstruction. However, these factors predicting outcome are poorly defined. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to establish physical prognostic factors predictive of outcome in adults following ACL reconstruction. Outcome will be subdivided into two groups of outcome measures, patient-reported and performance-based. Physical prognostic factors of interest will reflect a range of domains and may be modifiable/non-modifiable. Results will help decide most appropriate management and assist in planning and tailoring preoperative and postoperative rehabilitation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review protocol is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE databases, key journals and grey literature will be searched from inception to July 2019. Prospective cohort studies including participants aged ≥16 years who have undergone ACL reconstruction will be included, with articles focusing on multi-ligament reconstructions and ACL repair surgery, or not published in English excluded. Two independent reviewers will conduct searches, assess study eligibility, extract data, assess risk of bias (Quality in Prognostic Studies tool) and quantify overall quality of evidence (modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines). If possible, a meta-analysis will be conducted, otherwise a narrative synthesis will ensue focusing on prognostic factors, risk of bias of included studies and strength of association with outcomes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at conferences and locally to physiotherapy departments. Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019127732.

Measures of central sensitisation and their measurement properties in the adult musculoskeletal trauma population: a protocol for a systematic review and data synthesis.

INTRODUCTION: Pain following musculoskeletal trauma is common with poor outcomes and disability well documented. Pain is complex in nature and can include the four primary mechanisms of pain: nociceptive, neuropathic, inflammatory and central sensitisation (CS). CS can be measured in multiple ways; however, no systematic review has evaluated the measurement properties of such measures in the musculoskeletal trauma population. This systematic review aims to evaluate the measurement properties of current measures of CS in this population. METHODS/ANALYSIS: This protocol is informed and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis-P. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ZETOC, Web of Science, PubMed and Google Scholar as well as key journals and grey literature will be searched in two stages to (1) identify what measures are being used to assess CS in this population and (2) evaluate the measurement properties of the identified measures. Two independent reviewers will conduct the search, extract the data, assess risk of bias for included studies and assess overall quality. The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of Health Measurement Instruments Risk of Bias Checklist and a modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines will be used. Meta-analysis will be conducted if deemed appropriate. Alternatively, a narrative synthesis will be conducted and summarised per measurement property per outcome measure. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will aid clinicians in using the most appropriate tool for assessing central sensitisation in this population and is the first step towards a more standardised approach in pain assessment. The results of this study will be submitted to a peer reviewed journal and presented at conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATIONNUMBER: CRD42018091531.

Development of a screening tool to predict the risk of chronic pain and disability following musculoskeletal trauma: protocol for a prospective observational study in the United Kingdom.

INTRODUCTION: Pain is an expected and appropriate experience following traumatic musculoskeletal injury. By contrast, chronic pain and disability are unhelpful yet common sequelae of trauma-related injuries. Presently, the mechanisms that underlie the transition from acute to chronic disabling post-traumatic pain are not fully understood. Such knowledge would facilitate the development and implementation of precision rehabilitation approaches that match interventions to projected risk of recovery, with the aim of preventing poor long-term outcomes. The aim of this study is to identify a set of predictive factors to identify patients at risk of developing ongoing post-traumatic pain and disability following acute musculoskeletal trauma. To achieve this, we will use a unique and comprehensive combination of patient-reported outcome measures, psychophysical testing and biomarkers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A prospective observational study will recruit two temporally staggered cohorts (n=250 each cohort; at least 10 cases per candidate predictor) of consecutive patients with acute musculoskeletal trauma aged ≥16 years, who are emergency admissions into a Major Trauma Centre in the United Kingdom, with an episode inception defined as the traumatic event. The first cohort will identify candidate predictors to develop a screening tool to predict development of chronic and disabling pain, and the second will allow evaluation of the predictive performance of the tool (validation). The outcome being predicted is an individual's absolute risk of poor outcome measured at a 6-month follow-up using the Chronic Pain Grade Scale (poor outcome ≥grade II). Candidate predictors encompass the four primary mechanisms of pain: nociceptive (eg, injury location), neuropathic (eg, painDETECT), inflammatory (biomarkers) and nociplastic (eg, quantitative sensory testing). Concurrently, patient-reported outcome measures will assess general health and psychosocial factors (eg, pain self-efficacy). Risk of poor outcome will be calculated using multiple variable regression analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approved by the NHS Research Ethics Committee (17/WA/0421).