Search

This aim of this review is to map the literature investigating 'injury representations' and their association with recovery related outcomes in adults with traumatic orthopaedic injuries. This review will use the Common Sense Model of Illness Perceptions as a guiding framework for article inclusion and analysis of results. This OSF project page contains the pre-registered protocol (see 'Components' section) that outlines the review aims, study eligibility criteria, search strategy and how results will be presented. The scoping review protocol was originally registered at protocols.io doi: dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.bds9i6h6

[NB. Published protocol: doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048964] Existing reviews in this area have focussed on synthesising evidence of effectiveness from randomised controlled trials. To our knowledge, no reviews have examined how messaging systems for individuals with musculoskeletal pain may be best developed. Similarly, the findings from observational studies of messaging for musculoskeletal pain have not been synthesised. Our aims are twofold: (i) to identify information that could be influential in the design of future messaging interventions for musculoskeletal pain conditions, and (ii) to synthesise the findings of efficacy, effectiveness and economics derived from both experimental and observational messaging studies used for individuals with musculoskeletal pain.

Additional file 1: Appendix A. Comparison of accuracy statistics for the likelihood of chronic moderate/severe pain and disability for the derivation, validation, and current study populations at 6-months post injury.

Driving phobia is prevalent in injured individuals following motor vehicle crashes (MVCs). The evidence for virtual reality (VR) based psychological treatments for driving phobia is unknown. This systematic review synthesized the available evidence on the effectiveness, feasibility, and user experience of psychological treatments for driving phobia using VR. Three databases (PsycINFO, SCOPUS, and PubMed) were searched. Eligibility criteria included adults with clinical or sub-clinical levels of driving phobia manifesting as part of an anxiety disorder or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Primary outcomes were driving-related anxiety/fear or avoidance, PTSD symptoms and driving frequency/intensity, as well as treatment feasibility including recruitment, treatment completion and retention rates, user experience and immersion/presence in the VR program. Secondary outcomes were other health outcomes (e.g., depression) and VR technological features. The 14 included studies were of low methodological quality. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity prevented quantitative pooling of data. The evidence provided in this review is limited by trials with small sample sizes, and lack of diagnostic clarity, controlled designs, and long-term assessment. The evidence did suggest that VR-based psychological interventions could be feasible and acceptable in this population. For VR-based psychological interventions to be recommended for driving phobia, more high-quality trials are needed. Implications for rehabilitationVirtual reality (VR) based psychological treatments may be feasible and acceptable to patients with driving phobia.There is potential to increase accessibility to psychological therapies in patients with driving phobia following motor vehicle crashes through the use of digital psychiatry such as VR. Virtual reality (VR) based psychological treatments may be feasible and acceptable to patients with driving phobia. There is potential to increase accessibility to psychological therapies in patients with driving phobia following motor vehicle crashes through the use of digital psychiatry such as VR.

Objectives: A core outcomes set (COS) for whiplash-associated disorders (WADs) has been proposed to improve consistency of outcome reporting in clinical trials. Patient-reported disability was one outcome of interest within this COS. The aim of this review was to identify the most suitable tools for measuring self-reported disability in WAD based on clinimetric performance. Methods: Database searches took place in 2 stages. The first identified outcome measures used to assess self-reported disability in WAD, and the second identified studies assessing the clinimetric properties of these outcome measures in WAD. Data on the study, population and outcome measure characteristics were extracted, along with clinimetric data. Quality and clinimetric performance were assessed in accordance with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). Results: Of 19,663 records identified in stage 1 searches, 32 were retained following stage 2 searches and screening. Both the Whiplash Disability Questionnaire and Neck Disability Index performed well in reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.84 to 0.98), construct validity (74% to 82% of hypotheses accepted), and responsiveness (majority of correlations in accordance with hypotheses). Both received Category B recommendations due to a lack of evidence for content validity. Discussion: This review identified the Neck Disability Index and Whiplash Disability Questionnaire as the most appropriate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for assessing self-reported disability in WAD based on moderate to high-quality evidence for sufficient reliability, construct validity and responsiveness. However, the content validity of these PROMs has yet to be established in WAD, and until this is undertaken, it is not possible to recommend 1 PROM over the other for inclusion in the WAD COS.

Additional file 1. Additional Tables.

Supplemental material, Supplementary_file_BJP_April27 for Psycho-sensory relationships in chronic pain by Daniel S Harvie, Daniela Vasco, Michele Sterling, Samantha Low-Choy and Nils G Niederstrasser in British Journal of Pain

Additional file 1. Questionnaire tool used to assess provision of evidence-based care.

Additional quotes to support the themes and sub-themes. Table with additional quotes to support the sub-themes and themes. (DOCX 26 kb)

Additional quotes to support the themes and sub-themes. Table with additional quotes to support the sub-themes and themes. (DOCX 26 kb)

How people perceive their injury may be associated with recovery. This scoping review used the Common Sense Model of Illness Perceptions (CSM) as a framework to: (1) characterise injury perceptions; (2) describe biopsychosocial factors related to injury perceptions, and (3) determine how injury perceptions are associated with recovery outcomes. A broad search strategy was used across eight databases to identify studies exploring injury perceptions and related concepts in adults with traumatic orthopaedic injuries. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data. Quality appraisal was performed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The search yielded 9736 records, of which 22 publications were included; 12 quantitative and 10 qualitative studies. Overall, the quality of the evidence was low to moderate. Consistent with the CSM, injury perceptions comprised beliefs relating to the injury diagnosis, consequences, causes, recovery duration, and treatments. Perceptions of injury were multidimensional and influenced by personal, inter-personal, and socio-cultural factors. Negative injury perceptions were associated with worse functional outcomes. Although this review provided some insight into the characteristics of injury perceptions, relationships between injury perceptions and recovery, and characteristics of perceptions across different socio-cultural or clinical settings are still poorly understood.Implications for rehabilitationA person’s perception of their injury is complex; it emerges from dynamic interactions between personal, interpersonal and socio-cultural elements.People who perceive that their injury represents a threat to them typically report higher pain, negative affect, and worse general health than people with more positive perceptions of injury.Rehabilitation providers should consider how they might positively influence perceptions of traumatic orthopaedic injury.Perceptions of injury might be influenced at the individual level (e.g., during healthcare encounters), or at a system level, such as through endorsement of codes of practice for rehabilitation clinicians or funding of psychologically informed treatments to help people better understand their injuries. A person’s perception of their injury is complex; it emerges from dynamic interactions between personal, interpersonal and socio-cultural elements. People who perceive that their injury represents a threat to them typically report higher pain, negative affect, and worse general health than people with more positive perceptions of injury. Rehabilitation providers should consider how they might positively influence perceptions of traumatic orthopaedic injury. Perceptions of injury might be influenced at the individual level (e.g., during healthcare encounters), or at a system level, such as through endorsement of codes of practice for rehabilitation clinicians or funding of psychologically informed treatments to help people better understand their injuries.

Objective Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most disabling and costly conditions worldwide. It remains unclear why many individuals experience persistent and recurrent symptoms after an acute episode whereas others do not. A longitudinal cohort study was established to address this problem. We aimed to; (1) evaluate whether promising and potentially modifiable biological, psychological, social and behavioural factors, along with their possible interactions, predict LBP outcome after an acute episode; (2) compare these factors between individuals with and without acute LBP; and (3) evaluate the time-course of changes in these factors from LBP onset. This paper outlines the methodology and compares baseline characteristics between acute LBP and control, and LBP participants with and without follow-up. Results 133 individuals with acute LBP and 74 pain-free individuals participated. Bio-psycho-social and behavioural measures were collected at baseline and 3-monthly for 12 months (LBP) or 3 months (control). Pain and disability were recorded fortnightly. Baseline characteristics were mostly similar between those who did and did not return for follow-up. Initial analyses of this cohort have revealed important insights into the pathways involved in acute-to-chronic LBP. These and future findings will provide new targets for treatment and prevention of persistent and recurrent LBP.

Background and aims Pain is not a linear result of nociception, but is dependent on multisensory inputs, psychological factors, and prior experience. Since nociceptive models appear insufficient to explain chronic pain, understanding non-nociceptive contributors is imperative. Several recent models propose that cues associatively linked to painful events might acquire the capacity to augment, or even cause, pain. This experiment aimed to determine whether contexts associated with pain, could modulate mechanical pain thresholds and pain intensity. Methods Forty-eight healthy participants underwent a contextual conditioning procedure, where three neutral virtual reality contexts were paired with either unpredictable noxious stimulation, unpredictable vibrotactile stimulation, or no stimulation. Following the conditioning procedure, mechanical pain thresholds and pain evoked by a test stimulus were examined in each context. In the test phase, the effect of expectancy was equalised across conditions by informing participants when thresholds and painful stimuli would be presented. Results Contrary to our hypothesis, scenes that were associated with noxious stimulation did not increase mechanical sensitivity (p=0.08), or increase pain intensity (p=0.46). However, an interaction with sex highlighted the possibility that pain-associated contexts may alter pain sensitivity in females but not males (p=0.03). Conclusions Overall, our data does not support the idea that pain-associated contexts can alter pain sensitivity in healthy asymptomatic individuals. That an effect was shown in females highlights the possibility that some subgroups may be susceptible to such an effect, although the magnitude of the effect may lack real-world significance. If pain-associated cues prove to have a relevant pain augmenting effect, in some subgroups, procedures aimed at extinguishing pain-related associations may have therapeutic potential.

Background: Clinical tools assessing tactile acuity in people with persistent pain have limitations. Therefore, a novel and semi-automated tool was developed: The Imprint Tactile Acuity Device (iTAD). Aim: To describe the iTAD prototype and present the psychometric properties of its tactile acuity assessments: the localisation test, the orientation test and the overall score (mean of both tests). Method: A test-retest design with fifty healthy participants was used to assess intra-rater reliability (ICC(2.1)), internal consistency (ICC(2.4)) and measurement error (SEM) of the three assessments (0–100% accuracy scores each) performed at the neck. Using a known-group comparison design, balanced by age and sex, scores of thirty individuals with persistent neck pain were compared to thirty healthy controls to determine construct validity. Results: The ICC(2,1) and ICC(2,4) were 0.60 and 0.78 for the localisation test, 0.66 and 0.77 for the orientation test, and 0.73 and 0.84 for the overall score. The SEMs were 9.0%, 8.1% and 6.0%, respectively. No fixed or proportional bias, or signs of heteroscedasticity were observed. Overall, no between group differences were observed (p = 0.49). In the male subgroup, however, the overall score was lower for people with neck pain than for healthy participants (mean difference (SE); 7.6% (2.5); p = 0.008). Discussion: The tactile acuity assessments of the iTAD demonstrate moderate reliability and good internal consistency. Measurement errors appear comparable to currently preferred methods. Clear construct validity was not established, but results may be biased by design issues of the prototype. Taken together, the iTAD shows promise but further fine-tuning is needed.

Objectives: Body illusions have shown promise in treating some chronic pain conditions. We hypothesized that neck exercises performed in virtual reality (VR) with visual feedback of rotation amplified would reduce persistent neck pain. Methods: In a multiple-baseline replicated single case series, 8 blinded individuals with persistent neck pain completed a 4-phase intervention (initial n=12, 4 dropouts): (1) "baseline"; (2) "VR" during which participants performed rotation exercises in VR with no manipulation of visual feedback; (3) "VR enhanced" during which identical exercises were performed but visual feedback overstated the range of motion being performed; (4) "follow-up." Primary outcomes were twice-daily measures of pain-free range of motion and pain intensity. During the baseline and follow-up phases, measures were taken but no intervention took place. Results: No differences in primary outcomes were found between VR and baseline, VR enhanced and VR, or VR enhanced and follow-up. Discussion: Our hypothesis, that neck exercises performed in VR with visual feedback of rotation amplified, would reduce persistent neck pain was not supported. Possible explanations and future directions are discussed. ispartof: Clinical Journal Of Pain vol:36 issue:2 pages:101-109 ispartof: location:United States status: published

Emma K was a 38-year-old woman who was referred to physiotherapy by her general practitioner (GP) for management of neck pain as a result of a motor vehicle crash 10 days earlier. She had no previous history of neck pain or headache. Emma was a partner in a law practice and worked full time. She was involved in various fields of law, but her predominant work was in wills and conveyancing. She was married with two children (aged 11 and 9 years). Ten days earlier, after dropping the children off at school on her way to work, she was stationary at red lights. She heard screeching of brakes the instant before her car was hit from the rear. She felt the jolt and immediately had a sudden twinge of pain in her neck. Her car had been hit directly in the rear, and the bumper bar and boot had crushed. The police attended the accident, her car was towed to a repair shop and the police advised her to have her neck checked as a precaution. Emma felt that her neck was not too bad, so she caught a taxi to work. However, during the day, her neck pain increased progressively, and by the day’s end, a headache had developed. She went home, took two Nurofen (over-the-counter anti-inflammatory) and went to bed early

Central sensitization is considered to have a pathophysiological role in chronic low back pain (LBP). Whether individuals with increased central sensitization early in their condition are more likely to develop persistent pain or whether it increases over time is unclear. This study aimed to determine whether sensory profiles during acute LBP differ between individuals who did and did not recover by 6 months and to identify subgroups associated with outcomes. Individuals with acute LBP (

Reduced pain perception during painful stimulation to another body region (ie, conditioned pain modulation [CPM]) is considered important for pain modulation and development of pain disorders. The various methods used to study CPM limit comparison of findings. We investigated the influence of key methodologic variations on CPM and the properties of CPM when the back is used for the test stimulus or the conditioning stimulus (CS). Two different test stimuli (pressure pain threshold and pain response to suprathreshold heat [Pain-45, ie, pain rated at 45 on a 0-100 numeric rating scale]) were assessed before and during application of a noxious or non-noxious (sham) CS. Eight blocks of trials varied the anatomic location (back and forearms) and arrangement (body side) of the stimuli. Pressure pain threshold (as the test stimulus) increased during application of noxious, but not non-noxious, CS when stimuli were applied to opposite body sides or heterotopic sites on one body side. Inconsistent with pain-induced CPM, Pain-45 decreased during both noxious and non-noxious CS. These findings indicate that 1) pressure pain threshold can be more confidently interpreted with respect to CPM evoked by a painful stimulus than Pain-45, 2) the back and forearm are equally effective as sites for stimuli, and 3) stimuli arrangement does not influence CPM, except for identical anatomic regions on the same body side. Perspective: This study indicates that pressure pain threshold as the test stimulus provides a more valid measure of pain-induced CPM than pain response to a suprathreshold heat stimulus. Induction and magnitude of CPM is independent of stimuli arrangement, as long as ipsilateral homotopic sites are avoided. These findings clarify methods to study CPM. (C) 2015 by the American Pain Society Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Generalized hyperalgesia and impaired pain modulation are reported in chronic low back pain (LBP). Few studies have tested whether these features are present in the acute phase. This study aimed to test for differences in pain presentation in early-acute LBP and evaluate the potential contribution of other factors to variation in sensitivity. Individuals within 2 weeks of onset of acute LBP(n = 126) and pain-free controls (n = 74) completed questionnaires related to their pain, disability, behavior,and psychological status before undergoing conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and pain threshold (heat, cold, and pressure) testing at the back and forearm/thumb. LBP participants were more sensitive to heat and cold at both sites and pressure at the back than controls, without differences in CPM. Only those with high-pain (numeric rating scale ≥4) were more sensitive to heat atthe forearm and pressure at the back. Four subgroups with distinct features were identified: “high sensitivity,” “low CPM efficacy,” “high sensitivity/low CPM efficacy,” and “low sensitivity/high CPM efficacy.” Various factors such as sleep and alcohol were associated with each pain measure. Results provide evidence for generalized hyperalgesia in many, but not all, individuals during acute LBP, with variation accounted for by several factors. Specific pain phenotypes provide candidate features totest in longitudinal studies of LBP outcome. Perspective: Sensory changes indicative of increased/decreased central processing of pain and nociceptiveinput presented differently between individuals with acute LBP and were related to factorssuch as sleep and alcohol. This may underlie variation in outcome and suggest potential for earlyidentification of individuals with poor long-term outcome. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Background Interest in measurement of tactile acuity in musculoskeletal practice has emerged following its link to functional reorganization of the somatosensory cortex in ongoing pain states. Several tactile acuity measurement methods have been described but have not been thoroughly investigated in the cervical region. Objective This study examined reliability, concurrent validity and responsiveness of four tests of tactile acuity—Two-point discrimination, Point-to-point, Graphesthesia, and Localisation tests—at the cervical region. Method Forty-two healthy participants were included. In Part 1 (n = 22), participants' tactile acuity was assessed at two time points, 30 min apart, to determine the test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of each of the tests. In Part 2 (n = 20), participants received five daily tactile training sessions, delivered via a vibro-tactile device. Tactile acuity was assessed pre- and post-training to examine responsiveness of each test. Results Two-point discrimination demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.85, SEM = 3.7 mm), Point-to-point and Localisation tests demonstrated good reliability (ICC = 0.60, SEM = 2.8 mm; ICC = 0.60, SEM = 8.8%), and Graphesthesia demonstrated fair reliability (ICC = 0.48, SEM = 1.9/20). There was no significant correlation among measures. Only Graphesthesia failed to show responsiveness to change following training. Conclusion The reliability of Two-point discrimination appears superior to other examined tests of tactile acuity, however measurement variability should be considered. Two-point discrimination, Point-to-point, and Localisation tests appear responsive to change, although testing in clinical samples is needed. The lack of concurrent validity among tests suggests that they cannot be used interchangeably.

Introduction Whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) are a huge worldwide health and economic burden. The propensity towards developing into chronic, disabling conditions drives the rise in health and economic costs associated with treatment, productivity loss and compulsory third party insurance claims. Current treatments fail to address the well-documented heterogeneity of WAD and often result in poor outcomes. A novel approach is to evaluate whether the care provided according to the estimated risk of poor prognosis improves health outcomes while remaining cost-effective. Research questions (1) Does a guideline-based clinical pathway of care improve health outcomes after whiplash injury compared to usual care? (2) Does risk of recovery have a differential effect on health outcomes for the clinical pathway of care? (3) Is the clinical pathway of care intervention cost-effective? (4) What are the variations in professional practice between usual care and the clinical pathway of care? Design Multi-centre, randomised, controlled trial conducted over two Australian states: Queensland and New South Wales. Participants and setting 236 people with WAD (grade I-III, within 6 weeks of injury) and their primary healthcare providers. Intervention A clinical pathway of care, with care matched to the predicted risk of poor recovery. Participants at low risk of ongoing pain and disability (hence, predicted to fully recover) will receive up to three sessions of guideline-based advice and exercise with their primary healthcare provider. Participants at medium/high risk of developing ongoing pain and disability will be referred to a specialist (defined as a practitioner with expertise in whiplash) who will conduct a more in-depth physical and psychological assessment. As a result, the specialist will liaise with the original primary healthcare provider and determine one of three further pathways of care. Control Usual care provided by the primary healthcare provider that is based on clinical judgment. Measurements Primary (global rating of change and neck-related disability) and secondary (self-efficacy, pain intensity, general health and disability and psychological health) outcomes will be collected using validated scales. Direct (eg, professional care, transportation costs, time spent for care, co-payments) and indirect (eg, lost economic productivity) costs will be obtained through an electronic cost diary. Health and cost outcomes will be assessed at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months after randomisation. Professional practice outcomes will be evaluated through questionnaires completed by healthcare providers and their patients at 3 months. Procedure Potential participants (patients) will be identified through emergency departments, primary health clinics and advertisements. Eligible participants will complete baseline assessments and will be categorised into low or medium/high risk of poor recovery using a clinical prediction rule. After this assessment, participants will be randomly allocated to either a control group ( n =118) or intervention group ( n =118), stratified by risk subgroup and treatment site. The participants' nominated primary healthcare providers will be informed of their involvement in the trial. Consent will be obtained from the primary healthcare providers to participate and to obtain information about professional practice. Participants in the intervention group will additionally have access to an interactive website that provides information about whiplash and recovery relative to their risk category. Analysis Analysis will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Outcomes will be analysed independently through cross-sectional analyses using generalised linear models methods, with an appropriate link function, to test for an intervention effect, adjusted for the baseline values. The risk category will be tested for its association with treatment effect by adding risk group to the regression equation. Cost-effectiveness will be calculated using utility weights and the resulting measure will be cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) saved. Professional practice outcomes will be analysed using descriptive statistics. Discussion This research is significant as it will be the first study to address the heterogeneity of whiplash by implementing a clinical pathway of care that matches evidence-based interventions to projected risk of poor recovery. The results of this trial have the potential to change clinical practice for WAD, thereby maximising treatment effects, improving patient outcomes, reducing costs and maintaining the compulsory third party system.

Background Whiplash is the most common injury following a motor vehicle accident. Approximately 60% of people suffer persistent pain and disability six months post injury. Two forms of exercise; specific motor relearning exercises and graded activity, have been found to be effective treatments for this condition. Although the effect sizes for these exercise programs, individually, are modest, pilot data suggest much larger effects on pain and disability are achieved when these two treatments are combined. The aim of this study is to investigate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this comprehensive exercise approach for chronic whiplash. Methods/Design A multicentre randomised controlled trial will be conducted. One hundred and seventy-six participants with chronic grade I to II whiplash will be recruited in Sydney and Brisbane, Australia. All participants will receive an educational booklet on whiplash and in addition, those randomised to the comprehensive exercise group (specific motor relearning and graded activity exercises) will receive 20 progressive and individually-tailored, 1 hour exercise sessions over a 12 week period (specific motor relearning exercises: 8 sessions over 4 weeks; graded activity: 12 sessions over 8 weeks). The primary outcome to be assessed is pain intensity. Other outcomes of interest include disability, health-related quality of life and health service utilisation. Outcomes will be measured at baseline, 14 weeks, 6 months and 12 months by an assessor who is blinded to the group allocation of the subjects. Recruitment is due to commence in late 2009. Discussion The successful completion of this trial will provide evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a simple treatment for the management of chronic whiplash. Trial registration ACTRN12609000825257