Search

Pain education is a popular treatment approach for persistent pain that involves learning a variety of concepts about pain (ie, target concepts), which is thought to be an important part of recovery. Yet, little is known about what patients value learning about pain. A mixed-methods survey was conducted to identify pain concepts that were valued by people with persistent pain who improved after a pain science education intervention. An online survey was distributed to 123 people who were treated for persistent pain with a pain science education approach; responses of participants who self-identified as "improved" were analysed. Open-ended survey questions were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and close-ended questions were analysed for frequency of responses. Each question-type was analysed separately, before integration for complementarity. We analysed the data of 97 participants. We constructed 3 themes from the open-ended questions. Pain does not mean my body is damaged (theme 1) captured the importance of abandoning preexisting ideas that pain indicated damage. Thoughts, emotions and experiences affect pain (theme 2) captured the value of recognising multifactorial influences on pain. I can retrain my overprotective pain system (theme 3) captured the importance of conceptualising pain as a heightened protective response that could be lessened. Responses from close-ended questions confirmed that the target concepts represented by these themes are among those most valued, although divergence with the qualitative data suggests differences between patient and clinician language. These data offer patient-centred conceptualizations and language that could assist in further refining pain education interventions Refereed/Peer-reviewed

This systematic review and meta-analysis critically examined the evidence for bodily illusions to modulate pain. Six databases were searched; 2 independent reviewers completed study inclusion, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction. Included studies evaluated the effect of a bodily illusion on pain, comparing results with a control group/condition. Of the 2213 studies identified, 20 studies (21 experiments) were included. Risk of bias was high due to selection bias and lack of blinding. Consistent evidence of pain decrease was found for illusions of the existence of a body part (myoelectric/Sauerbruch prosthesis vs cosmetic/no prosthesis; standardized mean differences -1.84, 95% CI -2.67 to -1.00) and 4 to 6 weeks of mirror therapy (standardized mean differences -1.11, 95% CI -1.66 to -0.56). Bodily resizing illusions had consistent evidence of pain modulation (in the direction hypothesized). Pooled data found no effect on pain for 1 session of mirror therapy or for incongruent movement illusions (except for comparisons with congruent mirrored movements: incongruent movement illusion significantly increased the odds of experiencing pain). Conflicting results were found for virtual walking illusions (both active and inactive control comparisons). Single studies suggest no effect of resizing illusions on pain evoked by noxious stimuli, no effect of embodiment illusions, but a significant pain decrease with synchronous mirrored stroking in nonresponders to traditional mirror therapy. There is limited evidence to suggest that bodily illusions can alter pain, but some illusions, namely mirror therapy, bodily resizing, and use of functional prostheses show therapeutic promise. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

People with chronic pain commonly report impaired cognitive function. However, to date, there has been no systematic evaluation of the body of literature concerning cognitive impairment and pain. Nor have modern meta-analytical methods been used to verify and clarify the extent to which cognition may be impaired. The objective of this study was to systematically evaluate and critically appraise the literature concerning working memory function in people with chronic pain. The study was conducted along Cochrane collaboration and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines. A sensitive search strategy was designed and conducted with the help of an expert librarian using 6 databases. Twenty-four observational studies evaluating behavioural and/or physiological outcomes in a chronic pain group and a control group met the inclusion criteria. All studies had a high risk of bias, owing primarily to lack of assessor blinding to outcome. High heterogeneity within the field was found with the inclusion of 24 papers using 21 different working memory tests encompassing 9 different working memory constructs and 9 different chronic pain populations. Notwithstanding high heterogeneity, pooled results from behavioural outcomes reflected a consistent, significant moderate effect in favour of better performance by healthy controls and, with the exception of one study, pooled results from physiological outcomes reflected no evidence for an effect. Future research would benefit from the use of clearly defined constructs of working memory, as well as standardised methods of testing. Refereed/Peer-reviewed