Exploring the association of gender role expectations of pain and measures of pain sensitization in people with knee osteoarthritis: A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: First, we explored the association between Gender Role Expectations of Pain (GREP), and psychophysical measures of sensitization in people with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Second, we explored whether the association differed by level of GREP items (high vs low scores). DESIGN: We conducted secondary analyses of a cohort study. Those who were (i) age of ≥40, English or French speaking, ii) diagnosed with knee OA using American College of Rheumatology criteria and iii) consulting with an orthopedic surgeon were included. GREP items pertaining to pain sensitivity and pain endurance of the typical man or woman were rated by males and females respectively. Psychophysical tests consisted of pressure pain thresholds (PPTs), Temporal Summation (TS), and Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM). Multiple linear regression models for males and females were run with GREP scores (independent variables) and psychophysical tests (dependent variables). Next models stratified on the median split of GREP scores were run. Models were adjusted for age, BMI, pain catastrophizing, anxio-depressive symptoms, and radiographic severity. RESULTS: 280 participants (57% females; age (SD): 63.9 (9.6) and BMI (SD): 31.3 (8.40)) were included. GREP pain sensitivity scores in males were associated with CPM values (ß: 95% CI: 0.09 (0.01 to 0.17)). Males with low GREP pain sensitivity or pain endurance had very small to small positive associations with PPT and CPM values. CONCLUSION: This first exploration of gendered pain sensitivity and pain endurance by males and females has small and clinically unimportant associations with measures of pain sensitization requiring further validation.

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

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

Prioritizing Healthcare Interventions: A Comparison of Multicriteria Decision Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the extent to which stated preferences for treatment criteria elicited using multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) methods are consistent with the trade-offs (implicitly) applied in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), and the impact of any differences on the prioritization of treatments. METHODS: We used existing MCDA and CEA models developed to evaluate interventions for knee osteoarthritis in the New Zealand population. We established equivalent input parameters for each model, for the criteria "treatment effectiveness," "cost," "risk of serious harms," and "risk of mild-to-moderate harms" across a comprehensive range of (hypothetical) interventions to produce a complete ranking of interventions from each model. We evaluated the consistency of these rankings between the 2 models and investigated any systematic differences between the (implied) weight placed on each criterion in determining rankings. RESULTS: There was an overall moderate-to-strong correlation in intervention rankings between the MCDA and CEA models (Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.51). Nevertheless, there were systematic differences in the evaluation of trade-offs between intervention attributes and the resulting weights placed on each criterion. The CEA model placed lower weights on risks of harm and much greater weight on cost (at all accepted levels of willingness-to-pay per quality-adjusted life-year than did respondents to the MCDA survey. CONCLUSIONS: MCDA and CEA approaches to inform intervention prioritization may give systematically different results, even when considering the same criteria and input data. These differences should be considered when designing and interpreting such studies to inform treatment prioritization decisions.

A comparison between measurement properties of four shoulder-related outcome measures in Nepalese patients with shoulder pain.

PURPOSE: The Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), Quick-DASH, and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) are frequently used instruments in shoulder functional assessment. They are available in Nepali and all but the PSFS has been validated for shoulder assessment. Therefore, the aim of this study was to validate the Nepali PSFS in shoulder pain patients and to compare validity, reliability, and responsiveness of all four instruments to provide a recommendation for their use. METHOD: Patients attending physiotherapy completed the Nepali PSFS at baseline and follow-up (1-3 weeks). It was tested for reliability using internal consistency (Cronbach's α), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), construct validity by hypothesis testing and responsiveness by anchor-based method using Area Under the Curve (AUC). The instruments were compared based on reported measurement properties and patients' preference. RESULTS: 156 patients enrolled at baseline and 121 at follow-up. The PSFS showed sufficient reliability (α = 0.70, ICC = 0.82), construct validity (all three hypotheses met) and responsiveness (AUC = 0.83). Measurement property comparison demonstrated adequate reliability and validity, while PSFS was the most responsive instrument. Patients favoured the verbal rating scale of the DASH/Quick-DASH. The DASH had a lower completion rate for 'culturally sensitive' and 'uncommon' activities. CONCLUSION: The Nepali PSFS is a reliable, valid, and responsive instrument in shoulder functional assessment. The combined use of the Quick-DASH or SPADI with the PSFS is recommended for a comprehensive assessment of Nepali shoulder pain patients in clinical and research settings. They are shorter, more appropriate to the Nepali context and provide balanced self-evaluation.

The Associations Between Sleep Disturbance, Psychological Dysfunction, Pain Intensity, and Pain Interference in Children with Chronic Pain.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to better understand the associations between both sleep disturbance and psychological dysfunction (i.e., anxiety and depressive symptoms, and anger), and pain intensity and pain interference, in a sample of children with chronic pain. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design. METHODS: Three hundred and forty-two children with chronic pain (8-18 years) completed measures assessing pain intensity, pain interference, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depressive symptoms, and anger. Regression analyses examined the direct, interaction (with sex), and mediation effects of sleep quality and psychological dysfunction on pain intensity and interference. RESULTS: Sleep disturbance was significantly associated with both pain intensity and pain interference. However, measures of psychological dysfunction were associated significantly only with pain interference. Sex did not moderate these associations. The measures of psychological dysfunction mediated the associations between sleep disturbance and pain interference but not those between sleep disturbance and pain intensity. CONCLUSIONS: The results confirmed significant cross-sectional associations between both sleep disturbance and psychological dysfunction and pain outcomes in children with chronic pain. Future research to test for causal associations is warranted.

Does Religiosity/Spirituality Play a Role in Function, Pain-Related Beliefs, and Coping in Patients with Chronic Pain? A Systematic Review.

This systematic review examined the extent to which measures of religiosity/spirituality (R/S): (1) are associated with pain, function, pain-related beliefs (beliefs), coping responses, and catastrophizing in people with chronic pain; and (2) moderate the association between beliefs, coping and catastrophizing, and pain and function. Experimental and observational studies examining at least one of these research questions in adults with chronic pain were eligible. Two reviewers independently performed eligibility screening, data extraction, and quality assessment. Twenty studies were included. Most studies focused on the association between R/S and pain or function. When significant associations emerged, those between R/S and psychological function were weak to strong and positive; those between religious/spiritual well-being and pain and physical dysfunction were negative, but weak. Few studies examined the associations between R/S and beliefs/coping/catastrophizing; none examined the moderation role of R/S. The findings suggest that R/S is associated with pain and psychological function in people with chronic pain, and that viewing oneself as being "spiritual," regardless of religion, may contribute to positive psychological adjustment. More research is needed to determine the reliability of this finding. PROSPERO registry CRD42018088803.

Development and assessment of a verbal response scale for the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) in a low-literacy, non-western population.

PURPOSE: The Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) is a routinely used measure of physical function with a 0-10 response scale. We aimed to develop verbal response options for the PSFS, pre-test it for use in a multilingual, low-literacy country- Nepal, and compare preference and error rates between numeric and verbal scale. We hypothesized that a verbal scale would be preferred by respondents and yield fewer errors. METHOD: We interviewed 42 individuals with musculoskeletal, neurological, and cardiopulmonary conditions to understand how people describe varying levels of physical ability. Transcripts were thematically analyzed, and through consensus, we developed two sets of verbal responses for the PSFS. Next, we pre-tested the scales on an additional 119 respondents following which participants were asked to specify their preferred scale. Error rates were analyzed retrospectively using pre-specified criteria. RESULTS: Participants described their ability in terms of the quality (95%) and the quantity of task performance (88%). Although the verbal scales were preferred over the numeric scale (50% versus 12%), there was no significant difference in error rates between numeric (34%) and verbal scales (32% and 36%). Higher error rates were associated with greater age, fewer years of education, and inexperience with numeric scales. CONCLUSION: Despite a higher preference for verbal scale, 1 out of 3 patients made errors in using the PSFS, even with an interview format. The error rates were higher among participants with low literacy. The findings raise questions about the utility of PROMs in countries with low literacy rates.

Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of Nepali versions of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Pain Intensity, Pain Interference, Pain Behavior, Depression, and Sleep Disturbance short forms in chronic musculoskeletal pain.

PURPOSE: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Meaurement Information System (PROMIS®) measures have been translated into many languages and have been shown to have strong measurement properties across a wide range of clinical conditions. However, Nepali translations of the PROMIS short forms are not yet available. The aim of this study was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the PROMIS Pain Intensity, Pain Interference, Pain Behavior, Depression, and Sleep Disturbance short forms into Nepali. METHODS: We used the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) translation methodology, which incorporated two forward translations, synthesis of the translations, a back-translation, and three independent reviews, harmonization, cognitive debriefing, revisions, and proof reading. The translation and review teams were fluent in Nepali and English and represented five different countries and four continents. We evaluated the short forms for comprehensibility and relevance (two key aspects of the content validity of an instrument), conducting cognitive debriefing with six adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain, in compliance with recommendations by the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). The final version was proofread by two native Nepali speakers before and three new proofreaders after cognitive debriefing. RESULTS: All five short forms were successfully translated and cross-culturally adapted into Nepali while maintaining equivalence to the source. CONCLUSIONS: The translation and review team, along with a sample from the target population with chronic musculoskeletal pain and the proofreaders considered all five PROMIS short forms relevant and comprehensible. An important next step is to evaluate the measurement properties of these instruments.

Measurement properties of translated versions of the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To summarise measurement properties of translated versions of the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and to assess their methodological quality. METHODS: Relevant studies testing measurement properties of translated versions of the SPADI in non-specific shoulder pain participants were included from 11 databases (August 2020). Two reviewers independently screened articles and assessed individual measurement property risk of bias using the COSMIN checklist as very good, adequate, doubtful or inadequate. For each measurement property results were pooled and rated sufficient, insufficient, or inconsistent. Synthesised evidence was graded as high, moderate, low or very low (GRADE approach). RESULTS: Thirty-four studies (21 languages and 26 different versions) were included from 4402 articles. A total of 141 measurement properties were reported with 60 rated as very good or adequate. These included; internal consistency (19), test-retest reliability (4), construct validity (6), structural validity (10), measurement error (5), responsiveness (9), and cross-cultural validity (2). Comprehensibility was adequate in the Chinese, German, Nepali, Spanish and Urdu versions. Only the Danish, Dutch and Nepali versions confirmed all, or all but one, of their measurement properties with sound methodology. Pooled results of all measurement properties except structural validity were rated as sufficient. Quality of evidence was graded moderate to high with downgrading due to inconsistent results. CONCLUSION: Overall evidence suggests the SPADI is valid, reliable and responsive in translated form but less than half the measurement properties tested were of adequate quality. Further testing is required in many languages particularly in; test-retest reliability, measurement error and construct validity.

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and measurement properties of the Nepali version of the central sensitization inventory (CSI).

BACKGROUND: Central sensitization is thought to be an important contributing factor in many chronic pain disorders. The Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) is a patient-reported measure frequently used to assess symptoms related to central sensitization. The aims of the study were to translate and cross-culturally adapt the CSI into Nepali (CSI-NP) and assess its measurement properties. METHODS: The CSI was translated into Nepali using recommended guidelines. The CSI-NP was then administered on 100 Nepalese adults with sub-acute and chronic musculoskeletal pain with additional demographic and pain-related questions. The CSI-Nepali was administered again about 2 weeks later. Four measurement properties of the CSI-NP were evaluated: (1) internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha, (2) test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1), (3) measurement errors, and (4) construct validity testing five a priori hypotheses. Confirmation of construct validity was determined if a minimum of 75% of the hypotheses were met. RESULTS: The CSI was successfully translated into Nepali. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were both excellent (Cronbach's alpha = 0.91, and ICC = 0.98). The standard error of measurement was 0.31 and the smallest detectable change was 0.86. Four out of five (80%) a priori hypotheses were met, confirming the construct validity: the CSI-NP correlated strongly with the Pain Catastrophizing Scale total scores (r = 0.50); moderately with the total number of pain descriptors (r = 0.35); weakly with the Numerical Rating Scale (r = 0.25); and women had significantly higher CSI scores than men. However, the CSI scores did not correlate significantly with the total duration of pain, as hypothesized (r = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: The Nepali translation of the CSI demonstrated excellent reliability and construct validity in adults with musculoskeletal pain. It is now available to Nepali health care providers to help assess central sensitization-related signs and symptoms in individuals with musculoskeletal pain in research or clinical practice to advance the understanding of central sensitization in Nepalese samples.

Group Differences Between Countries and Between Languages in Pain-Related Beliefs, Coping, and Catastrophizing in Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the extent to which pain-related beliefs, appraisals, coping, and catastrophizing differ between countries, language groups, and country economy. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched 15 databases without restriction for date or language of publication. Studies comparing pain beliefs/appraisals, coping, or catastrophizing across two or more countries or language groups in adults with chronic pain (pain for longer than three months) were included. Two independent reviewers extracted data and performed the quality appraisal. Study quality was rated as low, moderate, or high using a 10-item modified STROBE checklist. Effect sizes were reported as small (0.20-0.49), medium (0.50-0.79), or large (≥0.80). RESULTS: We retrieved 1,365 articles, read 42 potential full texts, and included 10 (four moderate-quality, six low-quality) studies. A total of 6,797 adults with chronic pain (33% with chronic low back pain) were included from 16 countries. Meta-analysis was not performed because of heterogeneity in the studies. A total of 103 effect sizes were computed for individual studies, some of which indicated between-country differences in pain beliefs, coping, and catastrophizing. Of these, the majority of effect sizes for pain beliefs/appraisal (60%; eight large, eight medium, and eight small), for coping (60%; seven large, 11 medium, and 16 small), and for catastrophizing (50%; two medium, one small) evidenced statistically significant between-country differences, although study quality was low to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: In 50% or more of the studies, mean scores in the measures of pain beliefs and appraisals, coping responses, and catastrophizing were significantly different between people from different countries.

Cross-cultural adaptation and measurement properties of the Nepali version of the DASH (disability of arm, shoulder and hand) in patients with shoulder pain.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important tools in both clinical practice and research. However, no upper extremity PROM to assess physical disability is available in Nepali. The most commonly used and recommended questionnaire for the shoulder is the Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH). Therefore, the aim of the study was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the DASH into Nepali and determine its measurement properties. METHODS: The translation and cultural adaptation process followed international standard procedures. The translated Nepali version of the questionnaire (DASH-NP) was completed by 156 patients with shoulder pain from three Nepali hospitals at an initial assessment and by 121 at follow-up. A Nepali version of Global Rating of Change (GROC-NP) was completed at follow-up to dichotomise improved and stable participants. Measurement properties testing included: internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, ICC), Minimal Detectable Change (MDC), construct validity - factor analysis, hypothesis testing with the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) (Pearson Correlation = r) and responsiveness - Area Under the Curve with minimal important change. RESULTS: Significant adaptations such as changing measurement units, activities and terminology were incorporated to improve cultural relevance. Internal consistency (α = 0.92) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.94-0.98, p < 0.001) were excellent. The MDC was 11 out of 100 points. There were moderate-high positive correlations with the SPADI pain and disability items (rs = 0.63 and 0.81, P < 0.001). Four factor solution was retrieved for the DASH-NP. The Area Under the Curve was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.57 - 0.81, p < 0.001) with minimal important change of 11.2/100 points. CONCLUSIONS: The Nepali translation of the DASH is comprehensible, easy to administer via self-report or interview. It is found to be a reliable, valid, and responsive measure in patients with shoulder pain in Nepal. The DASH-NP can be used to assess shoulder pain related disability in Nepal for clinical practice or research.

Measurement properties of the Nepali version of the Connor Davidson resilience scales in individuals with chronic pain.

BACKGROUND: Resilience is an individual's ability to recover or "bounce back" from stressful events. It is commonly identified as a protective factor against psychological dysfunctions in wide range of clinical conditions including chronic pain. Resilience is commonly assessed using the Connor Davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC). Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the CD-RISC into Nepali will allow for a deeper understanding of resilience as an important domain in health in Nepal, and will allow for cross-cultural comparison with other cultures. Therefore, the aims of the study were to translate and culturally adapt 10- and 2-item versions of the CD-RISC into Nepali and evaluate their psychometric properties. METHODS: After translating the measures, we performed exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the 10-item version in two independent samples (ns = 131 and 134) of individuals with chronic pain. We then evaluated the internal consistency, test-retest stability, and construct validity of the 10- and 2-item measures in these samples. We also evaluated the internal consistency, and the construct and concurrent validity of the 2-item version in an additional sample of 140 individuals. RESULTS: The results supported a single factor model for the 10-item measure; this measure also evidenced good to excellent internal consistency and excellent test-retest stability. Construct validity was supported via moderate associations with pain catastrophizing. The internal consistency of 2-item version was marginal, although construct validity was supported via weak to moderate associations with measures of pain catastrophizing, depression and anxiety, and concurrent validity was supported by strong association with the 10-item CD-RISC scale. CONCLUSION: The findings support the reliability and validity of the 10-item Nepali version of the CD-RISC, and use of the 2-item version in survey studies in individuals with chronic pain. The availability of these translated measures will allow for cross-cultural comparisons of resilience in samples of individuals with chronic pain.

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties of the Nepali versions of numerical pain rating scale and global rating of change.

BACKGROUND: Pain intensity and patients' impression of global improvement are widely used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical practice and research. They are commonly assessed using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and Global Rating of Change (GROC) questionnaires. The GROC is essential as an anchor for evaluating the psychometric properties of PROMs. Both of these PROMs are translated to many languages and have shown excellent psychometric properties. Their availability in Nepali would facilitate pain research and cross-cultural comparison of research findings. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to translate and cross-culturally adapt the NPRS and GROC into Nepali and to assess the psychometric properties of the Nepali version of the NPRS (NPRS-NP). METHODS: After translating and cross-culturally adapting the NPRS and GROC into Nepali using recommended guidelines, NPRS-NP was administered to 104 individuals with musculoskeletal pain twice. The Nepali version of the GROC (GROC-NP) was administered at the follow-up for anchor-based assessment. (1) Test-retest reliability and minimum detectable change (MDC) among the stable group, (2) construct validity (by single sample t-test within the improved group and independent sample t-test between groups), and (3) concurrent validity were assessed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to determine the responsiveness of the NPRS-NP using the area under the curve (AUC), and minimum important changes (MIC) for small, medium and large improvements. RESULTS: Significant cultural adaptations were required to obtain relevant Nepali versions of both the NPRS and GROC. The NPRS-NP showed excellent test-retest reliability and a MDC of 1.13 points. NPRS-NP demonstrated a good construct validity by significant within-group difference in mean of NPRS score- t(63)= 7.57, P < 0.001 and statistically significant difference of mean score- t(98)= -4.24, P < .001 between the stable and improved groups. It demonstrated moderate concurrent correlation with the GROC-NP; r = 0.43, P < 0.01. Responsiveness of the NPRS-NP was shown at three levels with AUC = 0.68-0.82, and MIC = 1.17-1.33. CONCLUSIONS: The NPRS and GROC were successfully translated and culturally adapted into Nepali. The NPRS-NP demonstrated good reliability, validity and responsiveness in assessing musculoskeletal pain intensity in a Nepali population.

A Qualitative Study Identifying Barriers and Enablers to Exercise Adherence in People with Chronic Low Back Pain. "It's a personal journey".

Exercise leads to clinically meaningful pain reductions in people with chronic low back pain and is recommended as a first line treatment. The benefits of exercise for chronic low back pain decrease over time with a lack of long-term exercise adherence as a potential reason for this decreasing effect. We aimed to identify the barriers and enablers to exercise adherence from the perspective of people with chronic low back pain. This qualitative study was underpinned by a constructivist epistemology and used a critical realist ontological perspective. Adults (18-65 years) with chronic low back pain who had exercised since the onset of their back pain were recruited to participate in focus groups and individual interviews. Audio data were transcribed and then analysed in 2 stages 1) inductive coding using reflexive thematic analysis, followed by 2) deductive analysis through mapping codes onto the Theoretical Domains Framework. Five enablers and 3 barriers were identified across 6 of the 14 Theoretical Domain Framework domains. Exercise identity and confidence in deciding to self-manage pain were enablers, whereas beliefs about the consequences of exercise, exercise context, and relationships could function as either barriers or enablers. These barriers and enablers were complex and fluid, with participants reporting conflicting barriers and enablers that varied, depending on context. These findings improve our understanding of the barriers and enablers to exercise adherence from the individual perspective of people with chronic low back pain and can be utilised for more effective exercise treatment in this population. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the barriers and enablers to exercise adherence from the perspective of people with chronic low back pain. These perspectives may aid to individualise and optimise exercise treatment, improve its long-term adherence and therefore its effectiveness for chronic low back pain.

Self-Efficacy in Nepali Adults With Musculoskeletal Pain: Measurement Properties of Hard-Copy and Online Versions of the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire.

The Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) is commonly used in pain self-efficacy research. Yet its Nepali translation is unavailable, limiting the ability to conduct cross-cultural research on the role of self-efficacy in musculoskeletal pain and its management. This study aimed to 1) translate and culturally adapt the 10-item (PSEQ-10) and 2-item (PSEQ-2) versions of the PSEQ into Nepali, 2) evaluate their measurement properties in Nepali adults with musculoskeletal pain, and 3) evaluate whether the type of administration (ie, hard-copy vs online) affected their measurement properties. The measurement properties of different administrations of the Nepali PSEQ-10 and PSEQ-2 were evaluated in 180 Nepali adults (120 hard-copy and 60 online administrations) with musculoskeletal pain. We conducted confirmatory factor analyses and estimated the measures' internal consistencies, test-retest reliabilities, and smallest detectable changes using standard error of measurement. We planned to conclude that the measures were valid if ≥ 75% of the validity hypotheses were supported. The results supported unidimensionality for the Nepali PSEQ-10. The Nepali PSEQ-2 and PSEQ-10 evidenced excellent internal consistencies (Cronbach alphas = .90-.95) and good to excellent test-retest reliabilities (intraclass correlation coefficient = .61-.85) for both administrations. Construct validity (r's ≥ .20) and concurrent validity (r's ≥ .83) were supported, as hypothesized. Both hard-copy and online administrations of the Nepali PSEQ-2 and PSEQ-10 are similar, reliable, and valid ways to assess self-efficacy in Nepali adults with musculoskeletal pain. The findings should facilitate telehealth and cross-cultural research on pain self-efficacy in Nepal. PERSPECTIVE: This is the first Nepali adaptation of a self-efficacy scale with testing of measurement properties for hard-copy and online administrations. It will facilitate the assessment of pain self-efficacy in clinical practice and research and facilitate a deeper cross-cultural understanding of the role of self-efficacy in musculoskeletal pain.

Development of recommendations for a minimum dataset for Identifying Social factors that Stratify Health Opportunities and Outcomes (ISSHOOs) in pain research.

There is increasing recognition of the need for researchers to collect and report data that can illuminate health inequities. In pain research, routinely collecting equity-relevant data has the potential to inform about the generalisability of findings; whether the intervention has differential effects across strata of society; or it could be used to guide population targeting for clinical studies. Developing clarity and consensus on what data should be collected and how to collect it is required to prompt researchers to further consider equity issues in the planning, conduct, interpretation, and reporting of research. The overarching aim of the 'Identifying Social Factors that Stratify Health Opportunities and Outcomes' (ISSHOOs) in pain research project is to provide researchers in the pain field with recommendations to guide the routine collection of equity-relevant data. The design of this project is consistent with the methods outlined in the 'Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines' and involves 4 stages: (i) Scoping review; (ii) Delphi Study; (iii) Consensus Meeting; and (iv) Focus Groups. This stakeholder-engaged project will produce a minimum dataset that has global, expert consensus. Results will be disseminated along with explanation and elaboration as a crucial step towards facilitating future action to address avoidable disparities in pain outcomes.