Heterogeneity of pain-related psychological distress in patients seeking care for shoulder pathology.

BACKGROUND: Psychological distress is associated with disability and quality of life for patients with shoulder pain. However, uncertainty around heterogeneity of psychological distress has limited the adoption of shoulder care models that address psychological characteristics. In a cohort of patients with shoulder pain, our study sought to (1) describe the prevalence of various subtypes of psychological distress; (2) evaluate associations between psychological distress and self-reported shoulder pain, disability, and function; and (3) determine differences in psychological distress profiles between patients receiving nonoperative vs. operative treatment. METHODS: The sample included 277 patients who were evaluated in clinic by a shoulder surgeon and completed the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Yellow Flag Assessment Tool (OSPRO-YF) from 2019 to 2021. This tool categorizes maladaptive and adaptive psychological traits, and the number of yellow flags (YFs) ranges from 0 to 11, with higher YF counts indicating higher pain-related psychological distress. Operative and nonoperative cohorts were compared using χ2 test and Student t test. Linear regression was used to evaluate the association between pain, disability, and YFs, whereas Poisson regression evaluated the association between operative treatment and psychological distress. K-means cluster analysis was performed to propose potential psychological distress phenotypes. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-one patients (91%) had at least 1 YF on the OSPRO-YF tool, with a mean number of 6 ± 3.5 YFs. YFs in unhelpful coping (85%) and helpful coping domains (78%) were most prevalent. The number of YFs was significantly associated with baseline shoulder pain (P < .001), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (P < .001), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (P < .001) scores. Comparing operative and nonoperative cohorts, the operative cohort had a significantly higher mean number of YFs (6.5 vs. 5.6, P = .035), presence of any YF (94.3% vs. 85.7%, P = .015), and presence of YFs within the unhelpful coping domain (91.8% vs. 75.6%, P < .001). Three phenotypes were described, corresponding to low, moderate, and severe psychological distress (P < .001), with females (P = .037) and smokers (P = .018) associated with higher psychological distress phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: YFs, particularly within the unhelpful coping and helpful coping domains, were highly prevalent in a cohort of patients presenting to a shoulder surgeon's clinic. Additionally, operative patients were found to have a significantly higher rate of YFs across multiple dimensions of psychological distress. These findings stress the importance of routine attentiveness to multiple dimensions of pain-related psychological distress in shoulder populations, which can provide an opportunity to reinforce healthy interpretation of pain while minimizing distress in appropriately identified patients.

Pain associated psychological distress is more strongly associated with shoulder pain and function than tear severity in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair.

Background: Psychological distress has been associated with declining shoulder function in patients with rotator cuff tears (RCTs). Thus, we aimed to 1) evaluate the absence or presence of differences in shoulder pain, function, or pain-associated psychological distress in patients with increasing RCT severity and 2) assess whether psychological distress is associated with shoulder pain and function while adjusting for RCT severity. Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent rotator cuff repair and completed the optimal screening for prediction of referral and outcome (OSPRO) survey from 2019 to 2021 were included. OSPRO is composed of 3 domains that estimate pain associated psychological distress (negative mood, negative coping, and positive coping). Demographics, tear characteristics, and three patient reported outcomes (PRO), including the visual analog scale (VAS), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) were collected. Patients were analyzed with analysis of variance and chi-square tests and stratified based on severity of RCTs into three groups: partial-thickness, small-to-medium full-thickness, and large-to-massive full-thickness tear. Linear regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between OSPRO scores and PROs, adjusting for severity of RCT. Results: Eighty-four patients were included: 33 (39%) had partial-thickness, 17 (20%) had small-to-medium full-thickness, and 34 (41%) had large-to-massive tears. Regarding PROs and psychological distress, there were no significant differences amongst the three cohorts. In contrast, multiple significant associations between psychological distress and PROs were found. Within the negative coping domain, fear avoidance dimensions demonstrated the strongest correlation to PROs: fear-avoidance behavior for physical activity (ASES Beta -0.592, P < .001; VAS 0.357, P < .001) and work (ASES Beta -0.442, P < .001; VAS 0.274, P = .015). Several other dimensions within the negative coping, negative mood, and positive coping domains also demonstrated significant associations to PROs. Discussion: These findings suggest that in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, preoperative psychological distress can more strongly influence patient perception of shoulder pain and diminished shoulder function than RCT severity.

Four Variables Were Sufficient for Low Back Pain: Determining Which Patient-Reported Tools Pain and Disability Improvements.

OBJECTIVE: To predict 30- and 180-day improvements in disability and pain for patients seeking physical therapy care for low back pain (LBP). DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort. METHODS: Baseline assessment was completed by 259 patients with chief complaint of LBP, and the assessment includes psychosocial measures (Keele STarT Back Screening [SBST] and the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Yellow Flag [OSPRO-YF] tools), the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Review of Symptoms (OSPRO-ROS) and the Review of Symptoms Plus (OSPRO-ROS+) tools, the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), the Area Deprivation Index (ADI), and the National Institute of Health Chronic Pain Criteria (NIH-CP). Using the Modified Low Back Disability Questionnaire (MDQ) and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) as primary outcomes, statistical analysis determined multiple sets of predictor variables with similar model performance. RESULTS: The parsimonious "best model" for prediction of the 180-day MDQ change included 3 predictors (Admit MDQ, NIH-CP, and OSPRO ROS+) because it had the lowest penalized goodness-of-fit statistic (BIC = -35.21) and the highest explained variance (R2 = 0.295). The parsimonious "best model" for 180-day NPRS change included 2 variables (Admit NPRS and OSPRO-ROS+) with the lowest penalized goodness-of-fit statistic (BIC = -18.2) and the highest explained variance (R2 = 0.190). CONCLUSION: There were many model options with similar statistical performance when using established measures to predict MDQ and NPRS outcomes. A potential variable set for a standard predictive model that balances statistical performance with pragmatic considerations included the OSPRO-ROS+, OSPRO-YF, NIH-CP definition, and admit MDQ and NPRS scores. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(10):685-693. Epub: 12 August 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11018.

Can Physical Therapy Deliver Clinically Meaningful Improvements in Pain and Function Through a Mobile App? An Observational Retrospective Study.

Objective: To examine the effect of digital physical therapy (PT) delivered by mobile application (app) on reducing pain and improving function for people with a variety of musculoskeletal conditions. Design: An observational, longitudinal, retrospective study using survey data collected pre- and postdigital PT to estimate multilevel models with random intercepts for patient episodes. Setting: Privately insured employees participating in app-based PT as an employer health care benefit. Participants: The study sample included 814 participants (N=814) 18 years or older who completed their digital PT program with reported final clinical outcomes between February 2019 (program launch) through December 2020. Mean age of the sample at baseline was 40.9±11.89 years, 47.5% were female, 21% sought care for lower back pain, 16% for shoulders, 15% for knees, and 13% for neck. Interventions: Digital PT consisted of a synchronous video evaluation with a physical therapist followed by a course of PT delivered through a mobile app. Main Outcome Measures: Pain was measured by the visual analog scale from 0 "no pain" to 10 "worst pain imaginable" and physical function by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale on a scale from 0 "completely unable to perform" to 10 "able to perform normally." Results: After controlling for significant demographics, comorbid conditions, adverse symptoms, chronicity, and severity, the results from multilevel random intercept models showed decreased pain (-2.69 points; 95% CI, -2.86 to -2.53; P<.001) and increased physical function (+2.67 points; 95% CI, 2.45-2.89; P<.001) after treatment. Conclusions: Digital PT was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in pain and function among a diverse set of participants. These early data are an encouraging indicator of the clinical benefit of digital PT.

Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) for Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions: Results From the Validation Cohort.

Study Design Observational, prospective cohort. Background Musculoskeletal pain is a common reason to seek health care, and earlier nonpharmacological treatment and enhancement of personalized care options are 2 high-priority areas. Validating concise assessment tools is an important step toward establishing better care pathways. Objectives To determine the predictive validity of Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) tools for individuals with neck, low back, shoulder, or knee pain. Methods A convenience sample (n = 440) was gathered by Orthopaedic Physical Therapy-Investigator Network clinics (n = 9). Participants completed demographic, clinical, and comorbidity questionnaires and the OSPRO tools, and were followed for 12-month outcomes in pain intensity, region-specific disability, quality of life, and comorbidity change. Analyses predicted these 12-month outcomes with models that included the OSPRO review-of-systems (OSPRO-ROS) and yellow flag (OSPRO-YF) tools and planned covariates (accounting for comorbidities and established demographic and clinical factors). Results The 10-item OSPRO-YF tool (baseline and 4-week change score) consistently added to predictive models for 12-month pain intensity, region-specific disability, and quality of life. The 10-item OSPRO-ROS tool added to a predictive model for quality of life (mental summary score), and 13 additional items of the OSPRO-ROS+ tool added to prediction of 12-month comorbidity change. Other consistent predictors included age, race, income, previous episode of pain in same region, comorbidity number, and baseline measure for the outcome of interest. Conclusion The OSPRO-ROS and OSPRO-YF tools statistically improved prediction of multiple 12-month outcomes. The additional variance explained was small, and future research is necessary to determine whether these tools can be used as measurement adjuncts to improve management of musculoskeletal pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(6):460-475. Epub 7 Apr 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7811.