Baseline pain characteristics predict pain reduction after physical therapy in women with chronic pelvic pain. Secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial.

Background and aims Women with chronic pelvic pain represent a heterogeneous group, and it is suggested that the existence of sub-groups can explain varying results and inconclusiveness in clinical trials. Some predictors of treatment outcome are suggested, but the evidence is limited. The primary aim of this study was to explore if selected pre-treatment characteristics of the participants in a recently conducted randomized controlled trial were associated with treatment outcome. Methods In this study secondary analysis of data collected in a randomized trial were conducted. The participants were women with chronic pelvic pain randomized to two different physical therapy treatments. Analyses in this study were performed for the whole group as a cohort. The primary outcome measure was change in pain intensity from baseline to 12 months, measured with the numeric rating scale (0-10). The women were asked to rate their mean pelvic pain intensity during the last 7 days. Based on previous research and on available variables from the randomized controlled trial four potential predictive factors were derived from the baseline data and assessed one by one in a linear regression model, adjusted for age and treatment group. The variables with strongest association (p < 0.10) with the primary outcome were further included in a multivariable linear regression model with backward selection, adjusted for age and treatment group. Results Fifty women (mean age 38.1, SD = 12.2) were included in the analysis. For these women the mean change in pain intensity was -1.2 points (95% CI -1.8 to -0.7) from baseline to 12 months. The multivariable regression model showed that pelvic pain duration of 6 years or more was associated with less decrease in pain intensity with a regression coefficient of 1.3 (95% CI 0.3-2.4). Baseline pain intensity was associated with higher pain reduction after PT treatment with a regression coefficient per SD increase in baseline pain of -0.6 (95% CI -1.1 to -0.1). None of the women with main pain site other places than in the pelvis reported any pain reduction after physical therapy treatment, but due to the small numbers the predictor was not included in the regression analysis. Conclusions We identified that pelvic pain duration of 6 years or more was associated with less pain reduction, and that higher baseline pain intensity was associated with higher pain reduction after physical therapy treatment in this sample of women with chronic pelvic pain. For the variable main pain site other places than the pelvis the results are unsure due to small numbers. Implications Based on our finding of long pain duration as a negative predictor for pain reduction, we emphasize that early intervention is important. Many of the participants in our RCT reported pelvic surgeries or other treatments prior to referral for PT, and we suggest that referral to a non-invasive intervention such as PT should be considered at an earlier stage. In order to tailor interventions to the individual women's needs, thorough baseline assessments, preferably in a multidisciplinary setting, should be performed.

Group-based multimodal physical therapy in women with chronic pelvic pain: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic pelvic pain in women is a complex condition, and physical therapy is recommended as part of a broader treatment approach. The objective of this study was to compare structured group-based multimodal physical therapy in a hospital setting (intervention group) with primary-care physical therapy (comparator group) for women with chronic pelvic pain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Women aged 20-65 years with pelvic pain ≥6 months and referred for physical therapy were eligible. The primary outcome measure was change in the mean pelvic pain intensity from baseline to 12 months, measured using the numeric rating scale (0-10). Secondary outcomes were changes in scores of "worst" and "least" pain intensity, health-related quality of life, movement patterns, pain-related fear of movements, anxiety and depression, subjective health complaints, sexual function, incontinence, and obstructed defecation. The differences between the groups regarding change in scores were analyzed using the independent t test and Mann-Whitney U test. Sensitivity analysis of the primary outcome was performed with a linear regression model adjusted for the baseline value. A P value <.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Of the 62 women included, 26 in the intervention group and 25 in the comparator group were available after 12 months for data collection and analysis. The difference between the groups for change in the mean pain intensity score was -1.2 (95% CI -2.3 to -0.2; P = .027), favoring the intervention group. The intervention group showed greater improvements in respiratory patterns (mean difference 0.9; 95% CI 0.2-1.6; P = .015) and pain-related fear of movements (mean difference 2.9; 95% CI -5.5 to -0.3; P = .032), and no significant differences were observed between the groups for the other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although the reduction in the mean pelvic pain intensity with group-based multimodal physical therapy was significantly more than with primary-care physical therapy, the difference in the change between the groups was less than expected and the clinical relevance is uncertain.

"No one wants you" - a qualitative study on the experiences of receiving rejection from tertiary care pain centres.

Background and aims Four out of 10 referrals to tertiary care pain centres in Norway are not granted pain centre treatment, confirming earlier research on that this group of patients struggle to access the highest standard of care. Still, no study investigating how people with chronic pain experience rejections from pain centres was found. The aim of the study was therefore to investigate how people with chronic pain experience receiving a rejection from tertiary care pain centres after being referred by their general practitioners (GPs). Methods This was a qualitative study with semi-structured individual interviews with 12 persons, seven men and five women, rejected from the four different pain centres in Norway. The data were analysed thematically using systematic text condensation. Results The pain centre rejection created strong reactions, partly because the rejection was perceived as a refusal from the health care system as a whole. This was especially so because the pain centre was regarded as the last remaining treatment option, and given the rejection, they were now declined help by the experts in the field. Even though some informants had received an explanation for why they had not been granted pain centre treatment, a prominent experience was that the informants found it difficult to understand why their referral had been rejected given the severity of their pain. The incomprehensibility of the rejection together with a feeling of lack of future treatment options, increased the hopelessness and frustration of their situation and made it challenging to move on and search for help elsewhere. Conclusions The experiences with the pain centre rejections indicate that the rejection can have grave consequences for each individual in the following months. An improved system for how to handle expectations towards referrals, including prepare for the possibility of rejection and how to follow up a rejection, seems warranted. Implications Because a pain centre rejection most likely is received by persons in a vulnerable position, there should be available health care services to help them understand the rejections. And furthermore, help them to move from disappointment and hopelessness, towards an experience of empowerment and reorientation, by for instance planning further actions and interventions, and thereby, acknowledge their need for help.

Pre-consultation biopsychosocial data from patients admitted for management at pain centers in Norway.

Background and aims A bio-psycho-social approach has been recommended in multidisciplinary pain clinics, and in Norway patients with severe chronic nonmalignant pain (CNMP, defined as pain that has persisted for more than 3 months) might be treated at a regional multidisciplinary pain center. The specific aims of this study were (1) to describe characteristics of a sample of outpatients referred and accepted for treatment/management to three regional multidisciplinary pain centers in Norway, (2) to examine patient differences between the centers and (3) to study associations between symptom scores (insomnia, fatigue, depression, anxiety) and patient characteristics. Methods Patients, aged 17 years or older with CNMP admitted to and given a date for first consultation at one of three tertiary, multidisciplinary pain centers: St. Olavs Hospital Trondheim University Hospital (STO), Haukeland University Hospital (HUS) and University Hospital of North Norway (UNN), were included in the study. Data on demographics, physical activity, characteristics of pain, previous traumatic events, social network, Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire (CFQ), Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25) and SF-36v2® were retrieved from the local quality registry at each pain center. Results Data from 1563 patients [mean age 42 (SD 15) years and 63% females] were available for analyses. Average years with pain were 9.3 (SD 9.1). Primary education as highest level of education was reported by 20%, being actively working/student/military by 32%, and no physical activity by 31%. Further, 48% reported widespread pain, 61% reported being exposed to serious life event(s), and 77% reported having a close friend to talk to. Non-worker status, no physical activity, lack of social network, reports of being exposed to serious life event(s) and widespread pain were all characteristics repeatedly associated with clinically high symptom scores. No significant differences between the centers were found in the proportions of patients reporting fatigue nor mean levels of insomnia symptoms. However, the proportion of patients reporting symptoms of anxiety and depression was a little lower at UNN compared with STO and HUS. Conclusions Analyses of registry data from three tertiary multidisciplinary pain centers in Norway support previous findings from other registry studies regarding patient characterized: A large proportion being women, many years of pain, low employment rate, low physical activity rate, and a large proportion reporting previous traumatic event(s). Characteristics such as non-work participation, no physical activity, lack of social network, have been exposed to serious life event(s), and chronic widespread pain were all associated with high clinical score levels of insomnia, fatigue, and mental distress. Health related quality of life was low compared to what has been reported for a general population and a range of other patient groups. Implications The findings of this study indicate that physical activity and work participation might be two important factors to address in the rehabilitation of patients with chronic non-malignant pain. Future studies should also explore whether pre consultation self-reported data might give direction to rehabilitation modalities.

Rights assessment and quality of referrals - rate of agreement between four pain management centres. / Rettighetsvurdering og kvalitet på henvisninger ­ grad av samsvar mellom fire smertesentre.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a widespread health problem. The four regional interdisciplinary pain management centres in Norway receive approximately 5 000 referrals from GPs and the specialist health service annually. Equality in service provision requires referrals to be identically assessed. The objective of the study was to evaluate the degree of correspondence between the admission teams in the pain management centres in their assessment of the quality of the referrals received and in their assessment of the patients' right to necessary health care. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Each admission team assessed 40 referrals. They undertook a 'primary assessment' of 10 referrals received in the regular manner and a 'secondary assessment' of 30 referrals sent in the regular manner to the other centres. Each referral was assessed for quality and rights in each centre. The proportion of agreement and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to assess correspondence between the admission teams. RESULTS: The quality of the referrals was deemed 'not good' in 45 % of the primary assessments and 43 % of the secondary assessments. The degree of correspondence varied from low (ICC = 0.19) to moderate (ICC = 0.74). The primary and secondary assessments both granted 63 % of the patients 'the legal right to health care'. The overall degree of correspondence was 69 %, i.e. lower than what is considered 'acceptable agreement' (75 %). INTERPRETATION: The study shows that there is a need for structured referrals, and for the admission teams to harmonise their assessments to a greater degree in order to ensure equality in service provision across the health regions.

Characteristics of women with chronic pelvic pain referred to physiotherapy treatment after multidisciplinary assessment: a cross-sectional study.

Background and aims Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) in women is a complex condition that can seriously impact health and quality of life. Clinical guidelines for CPP place great demands on healthcare professionals, as they require both specialized knowledge about the pelvic area and knowledge of the mechanisms of chronic pain. To ensure best possible assessment and treatment of these women it is important to bring about more knowledge of the special CPP features. The purpose of this paper is to describe the characteristics of women with CPP evaluated at the University Hospital of North Norway, and further referred to physiotherapy. The frequency of having a history of abuse or previous pelvic surgery will also be reported, and analyses performed to investigate if subjective health status differs between women with and without these experiences. Methods We collected cross-sectional data from 62 women with CPP aged 20-65 (mean age 38.0), referred to physiotherapy after assessment by medical specialists. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews for demographic variables and medical history, and self-administered questionnaires on pain intensity, sexual function, urinary incontinence (UI), anal incontinence (AI), obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS), subjective health complaints (SHC) and symptoms of anxiety and depression. Results Pain duration of more than 10 years was reported by 42%, mean pain score was 4.7/10, and analgesics were used weekly by 48%. Previous pelvic or abdominal surgery was reported by 71%, and sick leave >12 weeks the last year by 34%. Reduced sexual desire was reported by 78%, dyspareunia by 73%, UI by 54%, AI by 23%, and obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) by 34%. More than 90% reported musculoskeletal or pseudoneurologic complaints. Anxiety and depression scores defined as requiring treatment were reported by 40%. Abuse was reported by 50%, and associated with significantly more reports of ODS (p=0.02), more SHC (p=0.02) and higher anxiety scores (p=0.009). Analgesic use and sick leave were significantly higher both among women with a history of abuse (p=0.04 and p=0.005) and among those with previous surgery (p=0.04 and p=0.02). Women with previous surgery reported significantly lower pain intensity during intercourse than those without previous surgery (p=0.008). Conclusions Women with CPP have complex symptoms and high scores for both physical and psychological complaints. Women exposed to abuse have especially high scores related to analgesic use, sick leave, ODS, anxiety and SHC. Women with previous surgery report more analgesic use and sick leave, and lower pain intensity during intercourse, than those without previous surgery. Implications This study illustrates the complexity of CPP and highlights the need for health professionals to have specialized knowledge of the possible features of the condition. Previous abuse seems to be more associated with poor scores on several health outcomes than surgery, but this needs to be investigated further.

Anal incontinence, urinary incontinence and sexual problems in primiparous women - a comparison between women with episiotomy only and women with episiotomy and obstetric anal sphincter injury.

BACKGROUND: Obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) might cause anal incontinence (AI) and sexual dysfunction, and might be associated with urinary incontinence (UI). Episiotomy has been identified both as a risk and a protective factor of OASIS. Lately, episiotomies with specific characteristics have shown to be protective against the risk of OASIS. However, little is known about episiotomy characteristics and pelvic floor dysfunction. This study investigates AI, UI, and sexual problems in primiparous women with episiotomy, comparing women with and without OASIS. Associations between episiotomy characteristics and AI, UI, and sexual problems were assessed. METHODS: This is a matched case-control study investigating 74 women with one vaginal birth, all with an episiotomy. Among these, 37 women sustained OASIS and were compared to 37 women without OASIS. The two groups were matched for vacuum/forceps. AI, UI and sexual problem symptoms were obtained from St. Mark's scoring-tool and self-administered questionnaires. The episiotomy characteristics were investigated and results assessed for the whole group. RESULTS: The mean time from birth was 34.5 months (range1.3-78.2) for those with OASIS and 25.9 months (range 7.0-57.4) for those without OASIS, respectively. More women with OASIS reported AI: 14 (38%) vs. 3 (8%) p = 0.05 (OR 4.66, 95% CI 1.34-16.33) as well as more problem with sexual desire p = 0.02 (OR 7.62, 95% CI 1.30-44.64) compared to women without OASIS. We found no association between episiotomy with protective characteristics and dysfunctions. CONCLUSION: Women with OASIS had more AI and sexual problems than those without OASIS. Episiotomy characteristics varied greatly between the women. Episiotomy with protective characteristics was not associated with increased dysfunctions. OASIS should be avoided, and correct episiotomy used if indicated.