Clinical assessment and grading of back pain in horses.

BACKGROUND: The clinical presentation of horses with back pain (BP) vary considerably with most horse's willingness to take part in athletic or riding purpose becoming impossible. However, there are some clinical features that are directly responsible for the loss or failure of performance. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the clinical features of the thoracolumbar region associated with BP in horses and to use some of the clinical features to classify equine BP. METHODS: Twenty-four horses comprised of 14 with BP and 10 apparently healthy horses were assessed for clinical abnormality that best differentiate BP from normal horses. The horses were then graded (0-5) using the degree of pain response, muscular hypertonicity, thoracolumbar joint stiffness and overall physical dysfunction of the horse. RESULTS: The common clinical features that significantly differentiate horses with BP from non-BP were longissimus dorsi spasm at palpation (78.6%), paravertebral muscle stiffness (64.3%), resist lateral bending (64.3%), and poor hindlimb impulsion (85.7%). There were significantly (p < 0.05) higher scores for pain response to palpation, muscular hypertonicity, thoracolumbar joint stiffness and physical dysfunction among horses with BP in relation to non-BP. A significant relationship exists between all the graded abnormalities. Based on the cumulative score, horses with BP were categorized into mild, mild-moderate, moderate and severe cases. CONCLUSIONS: BP in horse can be differentiated by severity of pain response to back palpation, back muscle hypertonicity, thoracolumbar joint stiffness, physical dysfunctions and their cumulative grading score is useful in the assessment and categorization of BP in horses.

What is axial spondyloarthritis? A latent class and transition analysis in the SPACE and DESIR cohorts.

OBJECTIVES: To gain expert-judgement-free insight into the Gestalt of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), by investigating its 'latent constructs' and to test how well these latent constructs fit the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) classification criteria. METHODS: Two independent cohorts of patients with early onset chronic back pain (SPondyloArthritis Caught Early (SPACE)) or inflammatory back pain (IBP) (DEvenir des Spondylarthopathies Indifférenciées Récentes (DESIR)) were analysed. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to estimate the (unobserved) potential classes underlying axSpA. The best LCA model groups patients into clinically meaningful classes with best fit. Each class was labelled based on most prominent features. Percentage fulfilment of ASAS axSpA, peripheral SpA (pSpA) (ignoring IBP) or both classification criteria was calculated. Five-year data from DESIR were used to perform latent transition analysis (LTA) to examine if patients change classes over time. RESULTS: SPACE (n=465) yielded four discernible classes: 'axial' with highest likelihood of abnormal imaging and HLA-B27 positivity; 'IBP+peripheral' with 100% IBP and dominant peripheral symptoms; 'at risk' with positive family history and HLA-B27 and 'no SpA' with low likelihood for each SpA feature. LCA in DESIR (n=576) yielded similar classes, except for the 'no-SpA'. The ASAS axSpA criteria captured almost all (SPACE: 98%; DESIR: 93%) 'axial' patients, but the 'IBP+peripheral' class was only captured well by combining the axSpA and pSpA criteria (SPACE: 78%; DESIR: 89%). Only 4% of 'no SpA' patients fulfilled the axSpA criteria in SPACE. LTA suggested that 5-year transitions across classes were unlikely (11%). CONCLUSION: The Gestalt of axSpA comprises three discernible entities, only appropriately captured by combining the ASAS axSpA and pSpA classification criteria. It is questionable whether some patients with 'axSpA at risk' will ever develop axSpA.

Current Evidence for Diagnosis of Common Conditions Causing Low Back Pain: Systematic Review and Standardized Terminology Recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate and summarize current evidence for diagnosis of common conditions causing low back pain and to propose standardized terminology use. METHODS: A systematic review of the scientific literature was conducted from inception through December 2018. Electronic databases searched included PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Index to Chiropractic Literature. Methodological quality was assessed with the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network checklists. RESULTS: Of the 3995 articles screened, 36 (8 systematic reviews and 28 individual studies) met final eligibility criteria. Diagnostic criteria for identifying likely discogenic, sacroiliac joint, and zygapophyseal (facet) joint pain are supported by clinical studies using injection-confirmed tissue provocation or anesthetic procedures. Diagnostic criteria for myofascial pain, sensitization (central and peripheral), and radicular pain are supported by expert consensus-level evidence. Criteria for radiculopathy and neurogenic claudication are supported by studies using combined expert-level consensus and imaging findings. CONCLUSION: The absence of high-quality, objective, gold-standard diagnostic methods limits the accuracy of current evidence-based criteria and results in few high-quality studies with a low risk of bias in patient selection and reference standard diagnosis. These limitations suggest practitioners should use evidence-based criteria to inform working diagnoses rather than definitive diagnoses for low back pain. To avoid the unnecessary complexity and confusion created by multiple overlapping and nonspecific terms, adopting International Association for the Study of Pain terminology and definitions is recommended.

Using Pain Medication Intensity to Stratify Back Pain Among Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence of musculoskeletal back pain among older adults stratified by pain medication intensity to 1) review treatment patterns and 2) consider targeted back pain prevention interventions. METHODS: A random sample of older adults age 64 years and older was utilized to identify new and recurring back pain. Prescription pain medications from drug claims were used to stratify to five unique intensity levels. The characteristics of each level were determined using regression models. RESULTS: About 10% had musculoskeletal back pain. Of these, 54% (N = 20,645) had new back pain and 46% (N = 17,252) had recurring back pain. Overall, about 35% received physical therapy. Pain medication intensity levels included no prescription pain medications, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), muscle relaxants, low-dose opioids, and high-dose opioids (new back pain: 39%, 10%, 6%, 23%, and 23%, respectively; recurring back pain 32%, 9%, 4%, 17%, and 38%, respectively). NSAID and muscle relaxant users were younger, healthier, and received physical therapy. Opioid users were younger, in poorer health, used sleep medications, received physical therapy, and had more falls and higher health care utilization and expenditures. CONCLUSIONS: New and recurring back pain patients can be stratified by pain medication intensity to review treatment patterns and target back pain prevention programs. Those with back pain but taking no prescription pain medications may benefit from back pain prevention programs. More research on guidelines for treatment options for those on high levels of pain medications is warranted.

Reliability of the Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy System in Patients With Spinal Pain: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: An updated summary of the evidence for the reliability of the Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) system in patients with spinal pain is needed. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the evidence on the intrarater and interrater reliability of MDT in patients with spinal pain. METHODS: Searches in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, PEDro, and Scopus were conducted for this systematic review. We included any study design as long as reliability of the MDT method was tested in patients with spinal pain. We collected data on the reliability of MDT to identify main and subsyndromes, directional preference, the centralization phenomenon, and lateral shift. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Quality Appraisal of Diagnostic Reliability and the Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies checklists. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included (8 studies on back pain, pooled n = 2160 patients; 3 studies on neck pain, pooled n = 45 patients; and 3 studies recruited mixed spinal conditions, pooled n = 389 patients). Studies investigating patients with back pain reported kappa estimates ranging from 0.26 to 1.00 (main and subsyndromes), 0.27 to 0.90 (directional preference), and 0.11 to 0.70 (centralization phenomenon). Kappa estimates for studies investigating neck pain ranged from 0.47 to 0.84 (main and subsyndromes) and 0.46 (directional preference). In mixed populations, kappa estimates ranged from 0.56 to 0.96 (main and subsyndromes). CONCLUSION: The MDT system appears to have acceptable interrater reliability for classifying patients with back pain into main and subsyndromes when applied by therapists who have completed the credentialing examination, but unacceptable reliability in other therapists. We found conflicting evidence regarding the reliability of the MDT system in patients with neck pain or mixed pain locations. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(12):923-933. Epub 22 Jun 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7876.

Classification criteria versus physician's opinion for considering a patient with inflammatory back pain as suffering from spondyloarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess agreement among methods for classifying patients with inflammatory back pain (IBP) after a 2-year follow-up. METHODS: Patients with IBP in the French nationwide, longitudinal, prospective cohort DESIR were classified after 2years based on imaging findings, rheumatologist's confidence in a diagnosis of spondyloarthritis, three classification criteria sets (axial Assessment of Spondyloarthritis international Society [ASAS], European Spondylarthropathy Study Group [ESSG], and Amor) and treatment (TNFα antagonists). Agreement among these methods was assessed by computing the percentage of concordant classifications and Cohen's kappa coefficient. Using logistic regression, we identified the items most strongly associated with rheumatologist's confidence. RESULTS: Agreement among criteria sets was poor (kappa<0.6), even in the group with inflammation by magnetic resonance imaging. Of 708 patients, 541 had all available data including rheumatologist's confidence after 2years, which was 0/10 for 31 (5.7%) patients, 1/10 to 7/10 for 158 (29.2%) patients, 8/10 or 9/10 for 167 (30.9%) patients, and 10/10 for 185 (34.2%) patients. TNFα antagonists were used in 156/356 (43.8%) patients in the two highest confidence groups versus 53/188 (28.2%) patients in the two lowest confidence groups. Factors independently associated with confidence ≥8/10 were fulfilment of ASAS, ESSG, and Amor criteria. CONCLUSION: Confidence of rheumatologists in the diagnosis of spondyloarthritis in patients with recent-onset IBP shows limited agreement with classification criteria. The best way to currently classify spondyloarthritis should be the association of both at least one classification criteria and a diagnosis of spondyloarthritis according to the rheumatologist.

[Evaluation of Inpatient Conservative Management of Acute, Subacute, and Chronic Back Pain]. / Evaluation einer stationären nicht operativen Behandlung von akuten, subakuten und chronischen Rückenschmerzen.

BACKGROUND: Backache is very common in the German population. It is a common reason for people to seek medical advice and specific back pain programs have been developed. The intention of this study is to evaluate the short and long term effects of conservative management of back pain in a German general hospital. Outcomes of interest were pain intensity, interference in daily functions, physical functioning and health related quality of life. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined 1010 patients with acute, subacute and chronic back pain, admitted to inpatient nonsurgical interventional therapy in a German hospital between July 2013 and July 2015. Outcomes were assessed at the end of the inpatient treatment and at 3, 6 and 12 months follow-up, using Numerical Rating Scales (NRS) for pain and daily function, the Hannover Ability Questionnaire for Measuring Back Pain-Related Functional Limitations (FFbH - R) and the German Version of the EuroQol Questionnaire (EQ-5D) for measuring health-related quality of life. The baseline questionnaire also included questions on the risk of developing long-term disability following back pain (HKF-R 10) for acute and subacute cases and the Mainz Pain Staging System (MPSS) for patients with chronic back pain. The return rate was 54% after 3 months, 38% after 6 months and 27% at 12 months follow-up. The results from the follow-up measurements (T2 - T5) were compared to the pre-treatment results (T1). Because of missing or insufficiently normal distributions nonparametric paired Wilcoxon tests were used to test differences over time for each variable. Level of significance was adjusted for multiple testing. In addition, effect sizes were computed to estimate the clinical relevance of statistically significant results. RESULTS: Pain intensity and impact of pain on daily function were significantly lower at the end of the inpatient treatment (T2). The results remained largely stable at the 3, 6 and 12 month follow-ups. Significant improvements were found in physical functioning and health-related quality of life. These improvements were maintained equally at the 3, 6 and 12 month follow-ups. In consequence, working ability increased during the follow-up period. Calculated effect sizes showed large effects for pain intensity, interference and quality of life (r = 0.51 to 0.85) and predominately moderate effects (r = 0.45 to 0.62) for physical functioning at all measurement points. The percentage of patients who had an operation due to continuing back pain after conservative treatment was 7.8, 9.9, and 12.3 at the 3, 6, and 12 month follow-ups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Persistent effects of inpatient conservative treatment of back pain were found for all outcome variables. The specific approach appears to be effective in conservative treatment programs of back pain. In the end, it's not about the alternative of surgery or conservative treatment for back pain. Treatment has to be coordinated with the patient in terms of participative decisions.

An Overview of Chronic Spinal Pain: Revisiting Diagnostic Categories and Exploring an Evolving Role for Neurostimulation.

STUDY DESIGN: Topic overview. OBJECTIVE: To describe the varied etiologies resulting in chronic spinal pain and review the current available evidence for treatments. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Chronic pain conditions, especially those that affect the axial back and radiate to the extremities, affect a large population. This results in pronounced disability and a high socioeconomic burden. Our understanding of the underlying mechanisms for chronic pain is limited. This prevents a comprehensive diagnostic approach. Evidence from high-level clinical trials supporting treatments for chronic spinal pain is also limited. METHODS: Articles were identified through PubMed searches or already known to the author. The literature was reviewed and summarized, indicating the strength of evidence available for many treatment modalities. RESULTS: There are very few studies published that evaluate behavioral modifications for chronic spinal pain and only one long-term study investigating chronic pharmacological treatments. The data on the success of spinal surgeries to relieve chronic spinal pain suggest an unacceptably high failure rate. The best evidence (Level I) currently available suggests that spinal cord stimulation is a safe, effective, and durable treatment for chronic spinal pain. Recent clinical data support further investigation of new innovations and earlier therapeutic consideration of currently employed approaches. CONCLUSION: Currently, physicians are limited in the practice of evidence-based medicine regarding chronic spinal pain treatments due to both the paucity of data available and an inconsistent diagnostic nomenclature. The introduction of new neurostimulation modalities is promising but requires better characterization through ongoing prospective clinical investigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.

Facilitated Pronociceptive Pain Mechanisms in Radiating Back Pain Compared With Localized Back Pain.

Facilitated pain mechanisms and impaired pain inhibition are often found in chronic pain patients. This study compared clinical pain profiles, pain sensitivity, as well as pronociceptive and antinociceptive mechanisms in patients with localized low back pain (n = 18), localized neck pain (n = 17), low back and radiating leg pain (n = 18), or neck and radiating arm pain (n = 17). It was hypothesized that patients with radiating pain had facilitated pain mechanisms and impaired pain inhibition compared with localized pain patients. Cuff algometry was performed on the nonpainful lower leg to assess pressure pain threshold, tolerance, temporal summation of pain (increase in pain scores to 10 repeated stimulations at pressure pain tolerance intensity), and conditioning pain modulation (increase in pressure pain threshold during pain conditioning on the contralateral leg). Heat detection and heat pain threshold at the nonpainful hand were also assessed. Clinical pain intensity, psychological distress, and disability were assessed with questionnaires. Temporal summation of pain was increased in patients with radiating back pain compared with localized back pain (P < .03). Patients with radiating arm pain or localized low back pain demonstrated hyperalgesia to heat and pressure in nonpainful body areas (P < .05), as well as well as a facilitated clinical pain profile compared with patients with localized neck pain (P = .03). Patients with radiating pain patterns demonstrated facilitated temporal summation suggesting differences in the underlying pain mechanisms between patients with localized back pain and radiating pain. PERSPECTIVE: These findings have clinical implications because the underlying mechanisms in different back pain conditions may require different treatment strategies.

Trial of Pregabalin for Acute and Chronic Sciatica.

BACKGROUND: Sciatica can be disabling, and evidence regarding medical treatments is limited. Pregabalin is effective in the treatment of some types of neuropathic pain. This study examined whether pregabalin may reduce the intensity of sciatica. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of pregabalin in patients with sciatica. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either pregabalin at a dose of 150 mg per day that was adjusted to a maximum dose of 600 mg per day or matching placebo for up to 8 weeks. The primary outcome was the leg-pain intensity score on a 10-point scale (with 0 indicating no pain and 10 the worst possible pain) at week 8; the leg-pain intensity score was also evaluated at week 52, a secondary time point for the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included the extent of disability, back-pain intensity, and quality-of-life measures at prespecified time points over the course of 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 209 patients underwent randomization, of whom 108 received pregabalin and 101 received placebo; after randomization, 2 patients in the pregabalin group were determined to be ineligible and were excluded from the analyses. At week 8, the mean unadjusted leg-pain intensity score was 3.7 in the pregabalin group and 3.1 in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference, 0.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.2 to 1.2; P=0.19). At week 52, the mean unadjusted leg-pain intensity score was 3.4 in the pregabalin group and 3.0 in the placebo group (adjusted mean difference, 0.3; 95% CI, -0.5 to 1.0; P=0.46). No significant between-group differences were observed with respect to any secondary outcome at either week 8 or week 52. A total of 227 adverse events were reported in the pregabalin group and 124 in the placebo group. Dizziness was more common in the pregabalin group than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with pregabalin did not significantly reduce the intensity of leg pain associated with sciatica and did not significantly improve other outcomes, as compared with placebo, over the course of 8 weeks. The incidence of adverse events was significantly higher in the pregabalin group than in the placebo group. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; PRECISE Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12613000530729 .).

[Differential diagnostic considerations using ICD-10 in chronic back pain with special regard to persistent somatoform pain disorder with somatic and psychological factors (ICD-10 F45.41)]. / Differenzialdiagnostische Überlegungen zum ICD-10 bei chronischen Rückenschmerzen unter besonderer Berücksich- tigung der chronischen Schmerzstörung mit somatischen und psychischen Faktoren (ICD-10 F45.41).

It is often difficult to pass an expert opinion in cases of chronic back pain. This article analyses the differential diagnostic considerations related to coding various causes in line with ICD-10. It emphasises the I importance of making a careful distinction between orthopoedic and psychiatric conditions and disorders. Simultaneous coding of orthopoedic and psychiatric illnesses and disorders based on a distinct cluster of symptoms necessitates an interdisciplinary approach that consistently applies the ICD-10 definitions of mental an behavioural disorders in order to clearly identify the main reason for a functional impairment in the insurance and sociomedical context. Persistant somatoform pain disorder with somatic and psychological factors (ICD-10 F45.41) should be regarded as related to the underlying disease and be used primarily as an additional and descriptive diagnosis.

Clinical presentation of patients suffering from recent onset chronic inflammatory back pain suggestive of spondyloarthritis: The DESIR cohort.

OBJECTIVES: DESIR is a prospective longitudinal multicentric French cohort of patients with inflammatory back pain suggestive of spondyloarthritis, with a 10-year-follow-up. The purpose is to evaluate the performances of the different sets of classification criteria for axial spondyloarthritis, and to describe the frequency and characteristics of the clinical features of axial spondyloarthritis. METHODS: Demographic data and items allowing classification and indices calculation were collected, as well as biologic and imaging data. Baseline data are analyzed. The performance of the several classification criteria sets was evaluated (likelihood ratio) with the physician's diagnosis as external gold standard. For the clinical presentation of axial spondyloarthritis, a descriptive analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Seven hundred and eight patients are included. Ninety-two percent of them satisfy at least one set of classification criteria: mNY 26%, Amor 79%, ESSG 78%, ASAS 70%; physician's confidence level 6.8±2.7. 81 and 83% of patients fulfil modified (including MRI) Amor or ESSG criteria. Axial involvement is present in 100% of the cases. NSAIDs are taken by 90%, with an NSAID sore of 50±46. BASDAI over 40 is noted in 60% and elevated CRP in 30% of the cases. HLA-B27 is present in 58%. According to ASDAS CRP levels, 12.7% are in inactive disease, 63% in high disease activity; mean BASFI was 30. Peripheral involvement is present in 57%, with arthritis in 37% of these. Enthesitis is noted in 49% of the patients, and first symptom in 22.5%; anterior chest wall involvement is noted in 44.6%, and dactylitis in 13%. For extra articular manifestations, psoriasis is recorded in 16%, uveitis in 8.5% and IBD in 5.1%. Smoking is present in 36.3% and hypertension in 5.1% of the cases. CONCLUSION: These data represent the base of evaluation of the follow-up of this cohort, allowing future specific studies.

A tool for classifying individuals with chronic back pain: using multivariate pattern analysis with functional magnetic resonance imaging data.

Chronic pain is one of the most prevalent health problems in the world today, yet neurological markers, critical to diagnosis of chronic pain, are still largely unknown. The ability to objectively identify individuals with chronic pain using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data is important for the advancement of diagnosis, treatment, and theoretical knowledge of brain processes associated with chronic pain. The purpose of our research is to investigate specific neurological markers that could be used to diagnose individuals experiencing chronic pain by using multivariate pattern analysis with fMRI data. We hypothesize that individuals with chronic pain have different patterns of brain activity in response to induced pain. This pattern can be used to classify the presence or absence of chronic pain. The fMRI experiment consisted of alternating 14 seconds of painful electric stimulation (applied to the lower back) with 14 seconds of rest. We analyzed contrast fMRI images in stimulation versus rest in pain-related brain regions to distinguish between the groups of participants: 1) chronic pain and 2) normal controls. We employed supervised machine learning techniques, specifically sparse logistic regression, to train a classifier based on these contrast images using a leave-one-out cross-validation procedure. We correctly classified 92.3% of the chronic pain group (N = 13) and 92.3% of the normal control group (N = 13) by recognizing multivariate patterns of activity in the somatosensory and inferior parietal cortex. This technique demonstrates that differences in the pattern of brain activity to induced pain can be used as a neurological marker to distinguish between individuals with and without chronic pain. Medical, legal and business professionals have recognized the importance of this research topic and of developing objective measures of chronic pain. This method of data analysis was very successful in correctly classifying each of the two groups.

Performance of different criteria sets for inflammatory back pain in patients with axial spondyloarthritis with and without radiographic sacroiliitis.

It is important to recognize inflammatory back pain (IBP) for an early diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS) has recently published new criteria set for diagnosing IBP. In the present study, we evaluated the performance of the new ASAS IBP criteria and to compare the performance of IBP criteria sets in axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) patients with and without radiographic sacroiliitis. The study sample included a total of 274 patients with a diagnosis of axSpA and 50 patients with a diagnosis of chronic (>3 months) mechanical back pain (MBP). A face-to-face interview by using a standardized questionnaire addressing all the components of IBP was performed. Data about HLA-B27 status and C-reactive protein levels were obtained from the patients' charts. There were significantly more male patients (P < 0.001) in the AS group (68.6 %) than in the non-radiographic axSpA group (29.6 %) and also than in the MBP group (37.5 %). Among the criteria sets, the Calin criteria showed the best sensitivity (91.2 %), and the Berlin criteria showed the best specificity (82.4 %) in differentiation of IBP from MBP. If the morning stiffness item of the Calin criteria was defined as lasting >30 min (Calin 30), the specificity improved (72.9 %), but at a price of loss in sensitivity (82.4 %). In this study, new ASAS criteria for IBP performed almost as good as but not better than the existing criteria sets. Performances of the criteria sets were quite comparable in the differentiation of IBP from MBP in patients with and without radiographic sacroiliitis.

Matching patients to an intervention for back pain: classifying patients using a latent class approach.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Classification of patients with back pain in order to inform treatments is a long-standing aim in medicine. We used latent class analysis (LCA) to classify patients with low back pain and investigate whether different classes responded differently to a cognitive behavioural intervention. The objective was to provide additional guidance on the use of cognitive behavioural therapy to both patients and clinicians. METHOD: We used data from 407 participants from the full study population of 701 with complete data at baseline for the variables the intervention was designed to affect and complete data at 12 months for important outcomes. Patients were classified using LCA, and a link between class membership and outcome was investigated. For comparison, the latent class partition was compared with a commonly used classification system called Subgroups for Targeted Treatment (STarT). RESULTS: Of the relatively parsimonious models tested for association between class membership and outcome, an association was only found with one model which had three classes. For the trial participants who received the intervention, there was an association between class membership and outcome, but not for those who did not receive the intervention. However, we were unable to detect an effect on outcome from interaction between class membership and the intervention. The results from the comparative classification system were similar. CONCLUSION: We were able to classify the trial participants based on psychosocial baseline scores relevant to the intervention. An association between class membership and outcome was identified for those people receiving the intervention, but not those in the control group. However, we were not able to identify outcome associations for individual classes and so predict outcome in order to aid clinical decision making. For this cohort of patients, the STarT system was as successful, but not superior.

The classification and diagnostic criteria of ankylosing spondylitis.

Ankylosing spondylitis is the prototype of immune-mediated inflammatory rheumatic diseases grouped under the term spondyloarthritis (SpA). An early diagnosis has now become increasingly important because effective therapies are available and anti-TNF drugs are even more effective if used in early stages of the disease. In ankylosing spondylitis, the 1984 modified New York criteria have been used widely in clinical studies and daily practice but are not applicable in early disease when the characteristic radiographic signs of sacroiliitis are not visible but active sacroiliitis is readily detectable by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Thus there has been a need for new classification or diagnostic criteria to identify inflammatory spondyloarthritis at early stage of the disease. This led to the concept of axial SpA to include the entire spectrum of patients with axial disease both, with and without radiographic damage. New classification criteria for the wider group of SpA have been proposed by ASAS (Assessment of Spondylo Arthritis International Society); and the patients are sub-grouped into (1) a predominantly axial disease, termed axial SpA including AS and non-radiographic axial SpA; (2) peripheral SpA. The clinical course and disease process of non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis remains unclear. However the development of the SpA criteria by ASAS particularly for axial SpA, is an important step for early diagnosis and better management of these patients.

The prevalence rate and the role of the spatial extent of pain in nonspecific chronic back pain--a population-based study in the south-west of Germany.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of chronic back pain in the general population and to establish an evidence-based subclassification system for chronic back pain based on pain extent. DESIGN: Representative population-based survey. SETTING: South-western Germany. SUBJECTS: Four-thousand representative residents were contacted. The corrected response rate was 61.8% (N = 2,408). Those suffering from chronic back pain (pain ≥45 days/last 3 months) were invited to a clinical evaluation. OUTCOME MEASURES: Chronic back pain, spatial extent of pain, sociodemographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: Age- and sex-adjusted prevalence rate for chronic back pain was 17.7%. Analyzing pain extent, we found that only 19.6% suffered strictly from chronic local back pain, while the majority indicated additional pain regions. Thus, we developed a subclassification system based on pain extent that consists of four more homogeneous groups (19.6% strict chronic local pain, 42.1% chronic regional pain, 24.3% common chronic widespread pain, 13.9% extreme chronic widespread pain). Interestingly, in this system, increasing pain extent was significantly associated with higher distress, as reflected by sociodemographic (e.g., lower education, lower social class, and higher application rate for disability pension) and clinical variables (e.g., higher pain intensity, more pain medication, more consultations, higher impairment, and lower quality of life). CONCLUSIONS: Chronic back pain is prevalent and usually involves additional pain areas outside of the back. This challenges the concept of chronic back pain as a distinct entity. To identify patients who are distressed by chronic back pain, a four-class taxonomy based on pain drawings is both feasible and clinically useful.