Search

Objectives: The objective was to explore whether action observation (AO) and motor imagery (MI) of aerobic and isometric exercise could induce hypoalgesic responses in asymptomatic individuals compared with placebo observation (PO)., Methods: A randomized controlled pilot trial was designed. Twenty-four healthy participants (mean age = 21.9 ± 2.1 years) were randomized into three groups: AO+MI (N = 8), AO, (N = 8), and PO (N = 8). All participants performed an actual aerobic running exercise (three series of 90 seconds at 85% of their VO2max and 30 seconds at 65% of their VO2max) and an isometric exercise protocol (isometric squats). A day later, they all performed the mental intervention, observing or imagining exercise execution performed the day before, according to their allocated group. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) of the quadriceps and epicondyle regions were assessed at baseline, postintervention, and 15 minutes postintervention., Results: Analysis of variance revealed statistically significant differences in the group*time interaction for PPT in the quadriceps. The AO group showed a statistically significant increase at postintervention and at 15 minutes postintervention. The AO+MI group obtained a statistically significant increase in the two PPT regions compared with the PO group at Δpre-post. The AO group obtained a greater increase in the PPT in the quadriceps femoris than the PO group at Δpre-post and Δpre-post 15 minutes., Conclusions: AO and MI induce hypoalgesic responses compared with PO. AO isolated training showed pain modulation responses in the PPTs of the quadriceps region in young physically active adults. These findings highlight the potential role of brain training in pain management., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: Subjects with greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) show an altered physical function while performing static and dynamic tasks. Pain and psychosocial factors are also variables that influence the outcomes of these patients. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between dynamic balance, pain-related measures, and psychosocial measures in subjects with chronic GTPS., Design: Descriptive cross-sectional study., Setting: Primary health care center., Subjects: Fifty-one subjects with greater trochanteric pain syndrome were recruited., Methods: Dynamic balance was evaluated using the Y-Balance Test (YBT), and a self-reported test battery was used to assess the following aspects: pain catastrophizing (Pain Catastrophizing Scale [PCS]), kinesiophobia (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia [TSK-11]), pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]), disability (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]), and self-efficacy (Chronic Pain Self-Efficacy Scale [CPSS])., Results: Correlation analysis showed that YBT was negatively associated with the VAS average, the helplessness subscale of the PCS, and the pain and function subscales and total score of the WOMAC. YBT was positively associated with the pain subscale of the CPSS. The scores of the YBT forward movement were predicted by the VAS average (38.1% of variance) in addition to the WOMAC total score (34.2% of variance) and TSK-11 total score (43.8% of variance)., Conclusions: The findings of this study suggest that kinesiophobia, pain, and physical function are related to dynamic balance in subjects with GTPS. Thus, when diagnosing and planning the treatment of patients with GTPS, psychosocial and physical function factors should be taken into account, in addition to pain management., (© 2018 American Academy of Pain Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: Insufficient evidence exists to compare widespread pain (WP), pain sensibility, and psychological factors that occur in patients presenting with chronic neck pain (CNP) or a combination of temporomandibular disorder (TMD) and other complaints. The present study compared the pain sensibility and psychological factors of subjects with CNP with those with TMD + CNP., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: Local community., Subjects: A nonprobabilistic convenience sample of 86 persons with CNP or TMD was recruited into three groups: CNP, TMD with myofascial pain in masticatory muscles with cocomitant CNP (TMD + CNP), and asymptomatic control groups consisted of 27, 29, and 30 participants, respectively., Methods: Participants underwent a clinical examination to evaluate WP with computerized assessment based on the pain drawing, pressure pain thresholds (PPT), and psychological factors, which were evaluated using the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) and the state-trait anxiety inventory (STAI)., Results: Statistically significant differences were observed between participants with CNP and TMD + CNP for WP (t = -2.80, P  < 0.01, d = -1.06). Post hoc analyses only revealed significant differences between TMD + CNP participants and asymptomatic controls for PPT at extratrigeminal areas. Pearson correlation analyses showed a moderate positive association between symptomatic groups within the WP and STAI ( P  < 0.05) and a moderate negative association between PCS and PPT ( P  < 0.05) at the right tibialis muscle., Conclusion: TMD + CNP participants had more areas of pain and also showed widespread pain hyperalgesia. Both groups of participants had psychological factors positively associated with STAI and WP; further, PCS and the PPT at the extratrigeminal region were negatively associated with each other in both groups, except for the left tibialis in the TMD + CNP group., (© 2016 American Academy of Pain Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Objective: Our aim was to systematically review and meta-analyze the effectiveness of graded activity (GA) or graded exposure (GEXP) for chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP)., Methods: A literature search of multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, CINAHL, and PsychINFO) was conducted to identify randomized control trials (RCTs). Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for relevant outcome measures (pain intensity, disability, quality of life, and catastrophizing)., Results: Thirteen RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Only nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. GA was significantly more effective than the control group (CG) for improvements in disability in the short term (three studies: n = 254, SMD = -0.3, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.05, P = 0.02) and long term (two studies: n = 238, SMD = -0.53, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.27, P < 0.0001). GA was significantly less effective than GEXP for the improvement of disability in the short term (two studies: n = 105, SMD = 0.39, 95% CI 0.003-0.78, P = 0.048). GA was also significantly less effective than GEXP at improving catastrophizing in the short term (two studies: n = 105, SMD = 0.48, 95% CI 0.09-0.87, P = 0.02)., Conclusion: Limited evidence has been found to show that GA significantly reduces disability in the short and long term when compared with the CG in CNSLBP. There is moderate evidence that GEXP more effectively decreases catastrophizing than GA in the short term. No difference was found between GA and other exercise for any variable., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. 2016. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.)

Objective: To assess differences in neural mechanosensitivity between patients with chronic nonspecific neck pain with and without neuropathic features (NF and No-NF, respectively)., Design: Descriptive, cross-sectional study., Setting: A primary care center, a hospital physiotherapy outpatient department, and a university campus., Subjects: Chronic nonspecific neck pain patients classified by the self-completed leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs pain scale (S-LANSS; 49 patients with NF [S-LANSS ≥ 12] and 50 patients with No-NF [S-LANSS < 12]) and a healthy control group (n = 48)., Methods: The primary measurements were the mechanosensitivity of the median nerve and cervical region, specifically the assessment of the onset of symptoms and submaximal pain intensity according to the upper limb neural test 1 (ULNT1) for the median nerve and the modified passive neck flexion test (MPNFT) for the cervical region; secondary measurements included pain intensity, neck disability, kinesiophobia, and pain catastrophizing., Results: Statistically significant differences between the NF and No-NF groups were found with respect to the onset of symptoms of ULNT1 (-15.11 [-23.19 to -7.03]) and MPNFT (-6.58 [-11.54 to -1.62]), as well as the outcomes of the visual analogue scale (Mean difference [95% Confidence Interval]; 7.12 [1.81-12.42]) and neck disability index (3.72 [1.72-5.71]). Both chronic nonspecific neck pain groups showed statistically significant differences compared with the control group for all outcomes assessed (P < 0.01) except for the onset of symptoms of ULNT1 in the No-NF group., Conclusions: The findings of this study suggest that chronic nonspecific neck pain patients with NF have greater neural mechanosensitivity, pain intensity, and neck disability than those with No-NF., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. 2016. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.)