Search

The main objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide a series of recommendations for healthcare and exercise professionals, such as neurologists, physical therapists, and conditioning coaches, regarding exercise prescription for patients with migraine. This guideline was developed following the methodology and procedures recommended in the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE). The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were evaluated with the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). A systematic literature review was performed and an established appraisal process was employed to rate the quality of relevant scientific research (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology). The evaluation of the current evidence, the elaboration of the grades of recommendation, and their validation show a B grade of recommendation for aerobic exercise, moderate-continuous aerobic exercise, yoga, and exercise and lifestyle recommendations for the improvement of symptoms, disability, and quality of life in patients with migraine. Relaxation techniques, high-intensity interval training, low-intensity continuous aerobic exercise, exercise and relaxation techniques, and resistance exercise obtained a C grade of recommendation for the improvement of migraine symptoms and disability.

Objective To compare the effectiveness of a biobehavioral approach with and without orthopedic manual physical therapy on the intensity and frequency of pain in patients diagnosed with nonspecific chronic low back pain. Methods A single-blind randomized controlled trial. Fifty patients were randomly allocated into two groups: one group received biobehavioral therapy with orthopedic manual physical therapy, and the other group received only biobehavioral therapy. Both groups completed a total of eight sessions, with a frequency of two sessions per week. The somatosensory, physical, and psychological variables were recorded at baseline and during the first and third month after initiation of treatment. Results In both groups, the treatment was effective, presenting significant differences for all the variables in the time factor. There were no significant differences between groups in intensity or frequency of pain, with a large effect size (>0.80), but there were intragroup differences for both intervention groups at one- and three-month follow-up. There were also no significant differences between groups in the secondary variables during the same follow-up period. Conclusions The results of this study suggest that orthopedic manual physical therapy does not increase the effects of a treatment based on biobehavioral therapy in the short or medium term, but these results should be interpreted with caution.

Objective The purpose of this study is to present the development and analysis of the factorial structure and psychometric properties of a new self-administered questionnaire (Therapeutic Alliance in Physiotherapy Questionnaire-Patients [CAF-P]) designed to measure therapeutic alliance in physiotherapy. Methods The sample included 204 patients with chronic pain attending nine primary care centres. The CAF-P was developed and validated using standard methodology, which included developing items, cognitive debriefing and psychometric validation. Results CAF-P has excellent internal consistency, with Cronbach’s α of 0.91 and an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.87. We propose a structure of two factors that explain 55.80 % of the variance. The convergent validity showed a moderate positive correlation with the probability of recommending treatment and with the level of satisfaction. Conclusions The CAF-P appears to be a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the therapeutic alliance perceived by patients in physiotherapy. Practice implications: The results of the present study leads to further research to identify the differences in the therapeutic alliance construct between different settings or professions.

espanolObjetivo Adaptar la Escala de gradacion del dolor cronico en pacientes de Atencion Primaria en Espana y evaluar sus propiedades psicometricas. Metodos Estudio observacional de medicion clinica de una escala de magnitud del dolor cronico. Se realizo un proceso de traduccion-retrotraduccion siguiendo las guias internacionales. Setenta y cinco sujetos con dolor lumbar de mas de 6 meses de evolucion derivados a las unidades de fisioterapia en Atencion Primaria participaron en el estudio. Se analizaron: la consistencia interna, la validez del constructo, la fiabilidad test-retest, los efectos techo y suelo, y la capacidad de respuesta. Resultados La Escala de gradacion del dolor cronico posee una alta consistencia interna, el α de Cronbach fue de 0,87, similar al que presentan las versiones en otros idiomas, y el coeficiente de correlacion intraclase fue 0,81. En cuanto a la validez del constructo, se extrajeron 2 factores que consiguieron explicar el 72,37% de la varianza. La validez convergente muestra una correlacion positiva moderada con la escala visual analogica, la subescala de evitacion de actividad de la Escala Tampa de kinesiofobia, la Escala del catastrofismo para el dolor, el Cuestionario de discapacidad por dolor lumbar de Roland-Morris, y el Cuestionario de conductas de miedo-evitacion, y una correlacion negativa moderada con el Cuestionario de autoeficacia en el dolor cronico. El tiempo medio de administracion fue de 2 min y 28 s. Conclusiones La version espanola de la Escala de gradacion del dolor cronico parece ser un instrumento valido, fiable y util para medir de forma precoz el dolor cronico en la practica clinica en Atencion Primaria en Espana. EnglishObjective To adapt the Graded Chronic Pain Scale for use in Primary care patients in Spain, and to assess its psychometric properties. Methods Clinical measures observational study investigating the severity of chronic pain. The methodology included a process of translation and back-translation following the international guidelines. Study participants were 75 patients who experienced lower back pain for more than six months and were sent to Primary Care physiotherapy units. Internal consistency, construct validity, test-retest reliability, floor and ceiling effects, and answering capacity were analysed. Results The Spanish version of the Graded Chronic Pain Scale had a high internal consistency, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.87 and intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.81. Regarding construct validity, it was identified that two factors explained 72.37% of the variance. Convergent validity showed a moderate positive correlation with the Visual Analogue Scale, the activity avoidance subscale of the Tampa Scale of Kinesophobia, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, the Roland-Morris Low Back Pain and Disability Questionnaire, and the FearAvoidance Beliefs Questionnaire. A moderate negative correlation was identified with the Chronic Pain Self-Efficacy Scale. The mean time of questionnaire administration was 2 minutes and 28 seconds. Conclusions The Spanish version of the Graded Chronic Pain Scale appears to be a valid, reliable, and useful tool for measuring chronic pain at an early stage in Primary Care settings in Spain.

Objective To adapt the Graded Chronic Pain Scale for use in primary care patients in Spain, and to assess its psychometric properties. Methods Clinical measures observational study investigating the severity of chronic pain. The methodology included a process of translation and back-translation following the international guidelines. Study participants were 75 patients who experienced lower back pain for more than six months and were sent to primary care physiotherapy units. Internal consistency, construct validity, test–retest reliability, floor and ceiling effects, and answering capacity were analyzed. Results The Spanish version of the Graded Chronic Pain Scale had a high internal consistency, with a Cronbach's α of 0.87 and intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.81. Regarding construct validity, it was identified that two factors explained 72.37% of the variance. Convergent validity showed a moderate positive correlation with the Visual Analog Scale, the activity avoidance subscale of the Tampa Scale of Kinesophobia, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, the Roland-Morris Low Back Pain and Disability Questionnaire, and the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire. A moderate negative correlation was identified with the Chronic Pain Self-Efficacy Scale. The mean time of questionnaire administration was 2 min and 28 s. Conclusions The Spanish version of the Graded Chronic Pain Scale appears to be a valid, reliable, and useful tool for measuring chronic pain at an early stage in primary care settings in Spain.

Objective Our aim was to systematically review and meta-analyze the effectiveness of therapeutic patient education for migraine. Methods A literature search of multiple electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, CINAHL, and PsychINFO) was conducted to identify randomized control trials (RCTs) published in the English and Spanish languages up to and including May 2013. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, conducted the quality assessment (Delphi list), and extracted the results. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses method was used throughout the systematic review and meta-analysis. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for relevant outcome measures (headache frequency, headache disability, self-efficacy, depressive symptoms, and quality of life) and pooled in a meta-analysis using the random effects model. Results Fourteen RCTs were included in the systematic review. Only nine studies were included in the meta-analysis. The median quality score was 6.14 ± 1.29 (range: 5–9). There was strong-moderate evidence for intermediate-term effectiveness of therapeutic patient education on headache frequency (five studies: N = 940, SMD = −0.24, 95% CI of −0.48 to −0.01, P = 0.03), headache disability (four studies: N = 799, SMD = −1.02, 95% CI of −1.95 to −0.08, P = 0.03), and quality of life (three studies: N = 674, SMD = 0.36, 95% CI of 0.05–0.67, P = 0.02). There was no evidence for either short-term or intermediate-term effectiveness of therapeutic patient education on self-efficacy or depressive symptoms. Conclusion This systematic review revealed strong-moderate evidence for intermediate-term effectiveness of therapeutic patient education for migraine. Further high-quality RCTs are required for conclusive determination of its effectiveness.

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).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).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, P0.0001). 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).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.

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 metaanalysis. GA was significantly more effective than the control group (CG) for improvements in disability in the short term (three studies: n 5 254, SMD 52 0.3, 95% CI 20.55 to 20.05, P 5 0.02) and long term (two studies: n 5 238, SMD 52 0.53, 95% CI 20.79 to 20.27, P < 0.0001). GA was significantly less effective than GEXP for the improvement of disability in the short term (two studies: n 5 105, SMD 5 0.39, 95% CI 0.003–0.78, P 5 0.048). GA was also significantly less effective than GEXP at improving catastrophizing in the short term (two studies: n 5 105, SMD 5 0.48, 95% CI 0.09–0.87, P 5 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.

Background Recent research has shown a relationship of craniomandibular disability with neck-pain-related disability has been shown. However, there is still insufficient information demonstrating the influence of neck pain and disability in the sensory-motor activity in patients with headache attributed to temporomandibular disorders (TMD). The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of neck-pain-related disability on masticatory sensory-motor variables. Methods An experimental case–control study investigated 83 patients with headache attributed to TMD and 39 healthy controls. Patients were grouped according to their scores on the neck disability index (NDI) (mild and moderate neck disability). Initial assessment included the pain catastrophizing scale and the Headache Impact Test-6. The protocol consisted of baseline measurements of pressure pain thresholds (PPT) and pain-free maximum mouth opening (MMO). Individuals were asked to perform the provocation chewing test, and measurements were taken immediately after and 24 hours later. During the test, patients were assessed for subjective feelings of fatigue (VAFS) and pain intensity. Results VAFS was higher at 6 minutes (mean 51.7; 95% CI: 50.15-53.26) and 24 hours after (21.08; 95% CI: 18.6-23.5) for the group showing moderate neck disability compared with the mild neck disability group (6 minutes, 44.16; 95% CI 42.65-45.67/ 24 hours after, 14.3; 95% CI: 11.9-16.7) and the control group. The analysis shows a decrease in the pain-free MMO only in the group of moderate disability 24 hours after the test. PPTs of the trigeminal region decreased immediately in all groups, whereas at 24 hours, a decrease was observed in only the groups of patients. PPTs of the cervical region decreased in only the group with moderate neck disability 24 hours after the test. The strongest negative correlation was found between pain-free MMO immediately after the test and NDI in both the mild (r = −0.49) and moderate (r = −0.54) neck disability groups. VAFS was predicted by catastrophizing, explaining 17% of the variance in the moderate neck disability group and 12% in the mild neck disability group. Conclusion Neck-pain-related disability and pain catastrophizing have an influence on the sensory-motor variables evaluated in patients with headache attributed to TMD.

Background: Orofacial pain, headaches, and neck pain are very common pain conditions in the general population and might be associated in their pathophysiology, although this is not yet clarified. The development and validation of a prediction inventory is important to minimize risks. Most recent questionnaires have not focused on pain, but pain is the common symptom in temporomandibular disorders, headaches, and neck pain. It is necessary to provide tools for these conditions. Objectives: The purpose of this study is to present the development and analysis of the factorial structure and psychometric properties of a new self-administered questionnaire (Craniofacial Pain and Disability Inventory [CF-PDI]) designed to measure pain, disability, and functional status of the mandibular and craniofacial regions. Study Design: Multicenter, prospective, cross-sectional, descriptive survey design. A secondary analysis of the reliability of the measures was a longitudinal, observational study. Setting: A convenience sample was recruited from a hospital and 2 specialty clinics in Madrid, Spain. Methods: The study sample consisted of 192 heterogeneous chronic craniofacial pain patients. A sub-sample of 106 patients was asked to answer the questionnaire a second time, to assess the test-retest reliability. The development and validation of the CF-PDI were conducted using the standard methodology, which included item development, cognitive debriefing, and psychometric validation. The questionnaire was assessed for the following psychometric properties: internal consistency (Cronbach’s α); floor and ceiling effects; testretest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient [ICC]; Bland and Altman method); construct validity (exploratory factor analysis); responsiveness (standard error of measurement [SEM] and minimal detectable change [MDC]); and convergent validity (Pearson correlation coefficient), by comparing visual analog scale (VAS), the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-11), the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and the Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6). Multiple linear regression analysis was used to estimate the strength of the associations with theoretically similar constructs. Results: The final version of the CF-PDI consists of 21 items. Exploratory factor analysis revealed 2 factors (“pain and disability” and “jaw functional status”), both with an eigenvalue greater than one, explaining 44.77% of the variance. Floor or ceiling effects were not observed. High internal consistency of the CF-PDI (Cronbach’s α: 0.88) and also of the 2 subscales (Cronbach’s α: 0.80 – 0.86) was confirmed. ICC was found to be 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86 – 0.93), which was considered to be excellent test-retest reliability. The SEM and MDC were 2.4 and 7 points, respectively. The total CF-PDI score showed a moderate correlation with most of the assessed questionnaires (r = 0.36 – 0.52) and a strong correlation with the NDI (r = 0.65; P < 0.001). The NDI, VAS, and TSK-11 were predictors of CF-PDI. Limitations: Only self-reported measures were considered for convergent validity. Future research should use physical tests to explore the clinical signs relating to pain and disability. Conclusion: The CF-PDI showed good psychometric properties. Based on the findings of this study, the CF-PDI can be used in research and clinical practice for the assessment of patients with craniofacial pain. Key words: Craniofacial pain, temporomandibular disorders, headache, neck pain, disability, development, questionnaire, reliability, psychometric validation, minimal detectable change