Assessment of neuropathic pain following cancer treatment.

Neuropathic cancer pain (NCP) is prevalent affecting up to 58% of those with persistent pain following cancer treatment. Neuropathic pain can develop from malignancy, after neural tissue insult during surgery and/or exposure to radiation or neurotoxic agents used as part of cancer treatment regimens. Pain following cancer treatment is commonly under-treated and one barrier identified is poor recognition of pain and inadequate assessment. Recognition of the presence of NCP is important to inform pain management, which is challenging to treat and warrants the use of specific treatments to target neuropathic mechanisms. In this review, approaches for screening and classifying NCP are described. These include screening questionnaires and the application of the updated neuropathic pain grading system in a cancer context. The evidence from neuropathic pain related assessments in cancer populations is provided and highlighted under different neuropathic pain grades. Recommendations for assessment in practice are provided.

Who crashes their car following wrist fracture?

BACKGROUND: Wrist fractures are common injuries associated with high disability in the early recovery period. The impact of wrist fractures on safe return to drive is not understood. PURPOSE: (1) To compare the proportion of adults who were drivers in car crashes before and after wrist fracture; (2) To examine potential factors (demographic and/or clinical) associated with increased odds of being a driver in a car crash following wrist fracture. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Three state-wide government datasets (MainRoads Western Australia [WA], Hospital Morbidity Data Collection and the Emergency Department Data Collection) were used to obtain and link demographic, clinical and car crash information relating to adults with a wrist fracture sustained between 2008 and 2017. McNemar's tests were used to compare the proportion of drivers in a car crash within the 2 years prior to and following the fracture date. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify if any variables were associated with increased odds of crashing in the post-fracture period. RESULTS: Data relating to 37,107 adults revealed a 3.3% (95% CI 3.0%-3.6%, p < 0.05) decrease in the proportion of drivers in a car crash following wrist fracture, persisting for the entire 2 years post-fracture, when compared to the proportion who crashed before their fracture. Those with more severe wrist fracture injury patterns had 79%(95% CI 1.07-3.0, p = 0.03) higher odds of having a crash in the first 3 months following their injury, compared to those with isolated wrist fracture injuries. CONCLUSIONS: These results inform and update return to drive recommendations. The reduced proportion of drivers involved in crashes following wrist fracture persisted for 2 years; longer than the expected physical recovery timeframe. It is important that hand therapists actively educate the sub-group of adults with more severe wrist fracture injury patterns of the increased likelihood of car crash for the 3 months following their fracture.

Feasibility of testing the effectiveness of a theory-informed intervention to reduce imaging for low back pain: a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: General medical practitioner (GP) recruitment and subsequent data collection in clinical practice are challenging and may limit successful completion of a large-scale trial. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of undertaking a cluster randomised controlled trial to test an intervention to reduce non-indicated imaging for low back pain in general medical practice. METHODS: A pilot cluster randomised controlled trial was performed, with recruitment of GPs and randomisation of GP clinics. All GPs attended a training session and were asked to record low back pain codes in electronic medical records for any low back pain presentations. Intervention group GPs were trained in the use of a patient education booklet to be used during low back pain patient visits. Control group GPs provided usual care. Outcomes for the proposed trial were collected to determine feasibility. GP recruitment was assessed as the proportion of GPs approached who consented to participate. Low back pain imaging outcomes were collected from electronic medical records (counts of patients presenting with low back pain) and from Australian healthcare administrative (Medicare) data (counts of imaging use). GP compliance with study procedures was assessed and qualitative data reported. RESULTS: Thirty-four GP clinics were approached, with four participating (12%). At these clinics, 13/19 (68%) GPs consented to participate, and 10/19 (53%) started the study. Outcome data were collected from medical records for all GPs. Three GPs (30%) withdrew consent to access Medicare data, limiting reporting of imaging outcome measures. Three GPs (30%) self-reported low compliance entering low back pain codes. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot cluster randomised controlled trial demonstrated the feasibility of many aspects of a full-scale effectiveness study, while also identifying a number of challenges that need to be resolved. Recommendations related to GP recruitment, study compliance, data collection, and outcome measures were made to increase the success of a future trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR), Trial ID: ACTRN12619000991112; Registered 11 July 2019, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=376973.

General practitioner experiences using a low back pain management booklet aiming to decrease non-indicated imaging for low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Imaging is overused in the management of low back pain, resulting in overdiagnosis, increased healthcare utilisation, and increased costs. Few effective interventions to decrease inappropriate use have been developed and have typically not been developed using behaviour change theory. An intervention to reduce non-indicated imaging for low back pain was developed using behavioural change theory, incorporating a novel low back pain management booklet to facilitate patient education and reassurance. The aim of this study was to assess the adoption and feasibility of use of the developed intervention within clinical practice and to determine appropriate implementation strategies to address identified barriers to use. METHODS: Fourteen general medical practitioners were recruited and trained to use the booklet with low back pain patients over a minimum 5-month period. Quantitative data on use of the booklet were collected and analysed descriptively. Qualitative data on use of the booklet and training session were collected in general medical practitioner interviews and thematically analysed. Barriers to use were identified and mapped to suitable implementation strategies using the Behaviour Change Wheel. RESULTS: Practitioners used the booklet with 73 patients. The booklet was used with 63% of patients presenting with low back pain. Facilitators for using the booklet included patient's requesting imaging and lower practitioner confidence in managing low back pain. Barriers included accessible storage and remembering to use the booklet. Implementation strategies were identified to increase adoption and feasibility of use, including development of a digital version of the booklet. CONCLUSIONS: General medical practitioners reported that the low back pain management booklet and training were useful for clinical practice, particularly with patients requesting imaging. Barriers to use were identified and implementation strategies to address these barriers will be incorporated into future effectiveness studies. This study forms one of a series of studies to thoroughly develop and test an intervention to reduce non-indicated imaging for low back pain; a successful intervention would decrease healthcare costs and improve patient management.

Psychological Factors Are Associated with Pain at All Time Frames After Breast Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to 1) assess associations between psychological factors and pain after breast cancer (BC) treatment and 2) determine which preoperative psychological factors predicted pain in the acute, subacute, and chronic time frames after BC surgery. DESIGN: A systematic review with meta-analysis. SUBJECTS: Women with early-stage BC. METHODS: The Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases were searched between 1990 and January 2019. Studies that evaluated psychological factors and pain after surgery for early-stage BC were included. Associations between psychological factors and pain, from early after surgery to >12 months after surgery, were extracted. Effect size correlations (r equivalents) were calculated and pooled by using random-effects meta-analysis models. RESULTS: Of 4,137 studies, 47 were included (n = 15,987 participants; 26 studies ≤12 months after surgery and 22 studies >12 months after surgery). The majority of the studies had low to moderate risk of bias. Higher preoperative anxiety and depression were weak but significant predictors of pain at all time points up to 12 months (r equivalent: 0.15-0.22). Higher preoperative pain catastrophizing and distress were also weak but significant predictors of pain during the acute (0-7 days) and chronic (3-12 months) periods (r equivalent: 0.10-0.20). For the period >12 months after surgery, weak but significant cross-sectional associations with pain were identified for anxiety, depression, pain catastrophizing, and distress (r equivalents: 0.15, 0.17, 0.25, 0.14, respectively). CONCLUSION: Significant pooled effect size correlations between psychological factors and pain were identified across all time frames. Though weak, these associations should encourage assessment of key psychological factors during preoperative screening and pain assessments at all postoperative time frames.

Using behaviour change theory and preliminary testing to develop an implementation intervention to reduce imaging for low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Imaging is overused in the management of low back pain (LBP). Interventions designed to decrease non-indicated imaging have predominantly targeted practitioner education alone; however, these are typically ineffective. Barriers to reducing imaging have been identified for both patients and practitioners. Interventions aimed at addressing barriers in both these groups concurrently may be more effective. The Behaviour Change Wheel provides a structured framework for developing implementation interventions to facilitate behavioural change. The aim of this study was to develop an implementation intervention aiming to reduce non-indicated imaging for LBP, by targeting both general medical practitioner (GP) and patient barriers concurrently. METHODS: The Behaviour Change Wheel was used to identify the behaviours requiring change, and guide initial development of an implementation intervention. Preliminary testing of the intervention was performed with: 1) content review by experts in the field; and 2) qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with 10 GPs and 10 healthcare consumers, to determine barriers and facilitators to successful implementation of the intervention in clinical practice. Results informed further development of the implementation intervention. RESULTS: Patient pressure on the GP to order imaging, and the inability of the GP to manage a clinical consult for LBP without imaging, were determined to be the primary behaviours leading to referral for non-indicated imaging. The developed implementation intervention consisted of a purpose-developed clinical resource for GPs to use with patients during a LBP consult, and a GP training session. The implementation intervention was designed to provide GP and patient education, remind GPs of preferred behaviour, provide clinical decision support, and facilitate GP-patient communication. Preliminary testing found experts, GPs, and healthcare consumers were supportive of most aspects of the developed resource, and thought use would likely decrease non-indicated imaging for LBP. Suggestions for improvement of the implementation intervention were incorporated into a final version. CONCLUSIONS: The developed implementation intervention, aiming to reduce non-indicated imaging for LBP, was informed by behaviour change theory and preliminary testing. Further testing is required to assess feasibility of use in clinical practice, and the effectiveness of the implementation intervention in reducing imaging for LBP, before large-scale implementation can be considered.

Pain sensitization associated with nonresponse after physiotherapy in people with knee osteoarthritis.

In knee osteoarthritis (OA), pain sensitization has been linked to a more severe symptomatology, but the prognostic implications of pain sensitivity in people undergoing conservative treatment such as physiotherapy are not established. This study aimed to prospectively investigate the association between features of pain sensitization and clinical outcome (nonresponse) after guideline-based physiotherapy in people with knee OA. Participants (n = 156) with moderate/severe knee OA were recruited from secondary care. All participants completed self-administered questionnaires and underwent quantitative sensory testing at baseline, thereby establishing subjective and objective measures of pain sensitization. Participants (n = 134) were later classified after a physiotherapy intervention, using treatment responder criteria (responder/nonresponder). Quantitative sensory testing data were reduced to a core set of latent variables using principal component analysis. A hierarchical logistic regression model was constructed to investigate whether features related to pain sensitization predicted nonresponse after controlling for other known predictors of poor outcome in knee OA. Higher temporal summation (odds ratio 2.00, 95% confidence interval 1.23-3.27) and lower pressure pain thresholds (odds ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.81) emerged as robust predictors of nonresponse after physiotherapy, along with a higher comorbidity score. The model demonstrated high sensitivity (87.8%) but modest specificity (52.3%). The independent relationship between pain sensitization and nonresponse may indicate an underlying explanatory association between neuroplastic changes in nociceptive processing and the maintenance of ongoing pain and disability in knee OA pain. These preliminary results suggest that interventions targeting pain sensitization may warrant future investigation in this population.

Imaging for low back pain: is clinical use consistent with guidelines? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The problem of imaging patients with low back pain (LBP) when it is not indicated is well recognized. The converse is also possible, although rarely considered. The extent of these two problems is presently unclear. PURPOSE: This study aimed to estimate how commonly overuse, and also underuse, of imaging occurs in the management of LBP, and how appropriate use of imaging is assessed. DESIGN: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis. PATIENT SAMPLE: The sample comprised patients with LBP presenting to primary care. OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportions of inappropriate referral, and inappropriate non-referral, for diagnostic imaging for LBP were the outcome measures. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched from January 1, 1995 to December 17, 2017. Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Meta-analyses were performed where appropriate, and strength of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies were included. In patients referred for lumbar imaging, 34.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 27.1, 43.3) were judged inappropriate by the absence of red flags for serious pathology and 31.6% (95% CI: 28.3, 35.1) were judged inappropriate by the criteria of no clinical suspicion of pathology. In patients presenting for care, imaging was inappropriately performed in 27.7% of cases (95% CI: 21.3, 35.1) when judged by duration of episode, 9.0% of cases (95% CI: 7.4, 11.0) when judged by absence of red flags, and 7.0% (95% CI: 1.8, 23.3) when judged by no clinical suspicion of pathology. In patients presenting for care, imaging was not performed where appropriately indicated in 65.6% (95% CI: 51.8, 77.2) of patients who presented with red flags, and 60.8% (95% CI: 42.0, 76.8) with clinical suspicion of serious pathology. CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate imaging is common in LBP management, including both overuse in those where imaging is not indicated and underuse of imaging when it is indicated. Appreciating that both underuse and overuse can occur is fundamental to efforts to improve imaging practice to align with current guidelines and best evidence.

Nervous System Sensitization as a Predictor of Outcome in the Treatment of Peripheral Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Research suggests that peripheral and central nervous system sensitization can contribute to the overall pain experience in peripheral musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions. It is unclear, however, whether sensitization of the nervous system results in poorer outcomes following the treatment. This systematic review investigated whether nervous system sensitization in peripheral MSK conditions predicts poorer clinical outcomes in response to a surgical or conservative intervention. METHODS: Four electronic databases were searched to identify the relevant studies. Eligible studies had a prospective design, with a follow-up assessing the outcome in terms of pain or disability. Studies that used baseline indices of nervous system sensitization were included, such as quantitative sensory testing (QST) or questionnaires that measured centrally mediated symptoms. RESULTS: Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria, of which six were at a high risk of bias. The peripheral MSK conditions investigated were knee and hip osteoarthritis, shoulder pain, and elbow tendinopathy. QST parameters indicative of sensitization (lower electrical pain thresholds, cold hyperalgesia, enhanced temporal summation, lower punctate sharpness thresholds) were associated with negative outcome (more pain or disability) in 5 small exploratory studies. Larger studies that accounted for multiple confounders in design and analysis did not support a predictive relationship between QST parameters and outcome. Two studies used self-report measures to capture comorbid centrally mediated symptoms, and found higher questionnaire scores were independently predictive of more persistent pain following a total joint arthroplasty. CONCLUSION: This systematic review found insufficient evidence to support an independent predictive relationship between QST measures of nervous system sensitization and treatment outcome. Self-report measures demonstrated better predictive ability. Further high-quality prognostic research is warranted.

1000 Norms Project: protocol of a cross-sectional study cataloging human variation.

BACKGROUND: Clinical decision-making regarding diagnosis and management largely depends on comparison with healthy or 'normal' values. Physiotherapists and researchers therefore need access to robust patient-centred outcome measures and appropriate reference values. However there is a lack of high-quality reference data for many clinical measures. The aim of the 1000 Norms Project is to generate a freely accessible database of musculoskeletal and neurological reference values representative of the healthy population across the lifespan. METHODS/DESIGN: In 2012 the 1000 Norms Project Consortium defined the concept of 'normal', established a sampling strategy and selected measures based on clinical significance, psychometric properties and the need for reference data. Musculoskeletal and neurological items tapping the constructs of dexterity, balance, ambulation, joint range of motion, strength and power, endurance and motor planning will be collected in this cross-sectional study. Standardised questionnaires will evaluate quality of life, physical activity, and musculoskeletal health. Saliva DNA will be analysed for the ACTN3 genotype ('gene for speed'). A volunteer cohort of 1000 participants aged 3 to 100 years will be recruited according to a set of self-reported health criteria. Descriptive statistics will be generated, creating tables of mean values and standard deviations stratified for age and gender. Quantile regression equations will be used to generate age charts and age-specific centile values. DISCUSSION: This project will be a powerful resource to assist physiotherapists and clinicians across all areas of healthcare to diagnose pathology, track disease progression and evaluate treatment response. This reference dataset will also contribute to the development of robust patient-centred clinical trial outcome measures.

Pain sensitisation and the risk of poor outcome following physiotherapy for patients with moderate to severe knee osteoarthritis: protocol for a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Pain is the dominant symptom of knee osteoarthritis (OA), and recent evidence suggests factors outside of local joint pathology, such as pain sensitisation, can contribute significantly to the pain experience. It is unknown how pain sensitisation influences outcomes from commonly employed interventions such as physiotherapy. The aims of this study are, first, to provide a comprehensive description of the somatosensory characteristics of people with pain associated with knee OA. Second, we will investigate if indicators of pain sensitisation in patients with knee osteoarthritis are predictive of non-response to physiotherapy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre prospective cohort study with 140 participants. Eligible patients with moderate to severe symptomatic knee osteoarthritis will be identified at outpatient orthopaedic and rheumatology clinics. A baseline assessment will provide a comprehensive description of the somatosensory characteristics of each participant by means of clinical examination, quantitative sensory testing, and validated questionnaires measuring pain and functional capacity. Participants will then undergo physiotherapy treatment. The primary outcome will be non-response to physiotherapy on completion of the physiotherapy treatment programme as defined by the Osteoarthritis Research Society International treatment responder criteria. A principal component analysis will identify measures related to pain sensitisation to include in the predictive model. Regression analyses will explore the relationship between responder status and pain sensitisation while accounting for confounders. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by St James' Hospital/AMNCH Research Ethics Committee and by the St Vincent's Healthcare Group Ethics and Medical Research Committee. The results will be presented at international conferences and published in a peer review journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02310945.

The clinical utility of pain classification in non-specific arm pain.

Mechanisms-based pain classification has received considerable attention recently for its potential use in clinical decision making. A number of algorithms for pain classification have been proposed. Non-specific arm pain (NSAP) is a poorly defined condition, which could benefit from classification according to pain mechanisms to improve treatment selection. This study used three published classification algorithms (hereafter called NeuPSIG, Smart, Schafer) to investigate the frequency of different pain classifications in NSAP and the clinical utility of these systems in assessing NSAP. Forty people with NSAP underwent a clinical examination and quantitative sensory testing. Findings were used to classify participants according to three classification algorithms. Frequency of pain classification including number unclassified was analysed using descriptive statistics. Inter-rater agreement was analysed using kappa coefficients. NSAP was primarily classified as 'unlikely neuropathic pain' using NeuPSIG criteria, 'peripheral neuropathic pain' using the Smart classification and 'peripheral nerve sensitisation' using the Schafer algorithm. Two of the three algorithms allowed classification of all but one participant; up to 45% of participants (n = 18) were categorised as mixed by the Smart classification. Inter-rater agreement was good for the Schafer algorithm (к = 0.78) and moderate for the Smart classification (к = 0.40). A kappa value was unattainable for the NeuPSIG algorithm but agreement was high. Pain classification was achievable with high inter-rater agreement for two of the three algorithms assessed. The Smart classification may be useful but requires further direction regarding the use of clinical criteria included. The impact of adding a pain classification to clinical assessment on patient outcomes needs to be evaluated.

Reliability of thermal quantitative sensory testing: a systematic review.

The use of quantitative sensory testing (QST) has become more widespread, with increasing focus on describing somatosensory profiles and pain mechanisms. However, the reliability of thermal QST has yet to be established. We systematically searched the literature using key medical databases. Independent reviewers evaluated reliability data using the Quality Appraisal for Reliability Studies checklist. Of the 21 studies we included in this review, we deemed 5 to have high methodological quality. Narrative analysis revealed that estimates of reliability varied considerably, but overall, the reliability of cold and warm detection thresholds ranged from poor to excellent, while heat and cold pain thresholds ranged from fair to excellent. The methodological quality of research investigating the reliability of thermal QST warrants improvement, particularly in terms of appropriate blinding. The results from this review showed considerable variability in the reliability of each thermal QST parameter.

Reliability of thermal quantitative sensory testing of the hand in a cohort of young, healthy adults.

INTRODUCTION: The reliability of thermal quantitative sensory testing (QST) has yet to be fully established. In this study we investigated intra- and interrater reliability of thermal QST in a blinded manner. METHODS: Two investigators recorded thermal detection and pain thresholds on the hand of 22 volunteers, twice on two occasions. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and coefficients of variation (CVs). RESULTS: Mean intraindividual differences were small for all measures except cold pain thresholds. ICC values for intra- and interrater reliability were: cold detection, 0.27-0.55; warm detection, 0.33-0.69; and heat pain, 0.39-0.86. Cold pain yielded high ICC values (0.87-0.94), but also high CV (84.9-90.2%). CONCLUSIONS: In young, healthy adults, thermal detection and heat pain thresholds of the hand demonstrated good reliability for group comparisons and individual analyses. Cold pain threshold measures may be suitable for group comparisons, but a large variance in the data limits individual analyses.