This systematic review and meta-analysis critically examined the evidence for peer support interventions to reduce pain and improve health outcomes in community-dwelling adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain (PROSPERO CRD42022356850). A systematic search (inception-January 2023) of electronic databases and grey literature was undertaken to identify relevant randomised controlled trials, with risk of bias and GRADE assessments performed on included studies. Meta-analyses used a generic, inverse-variance, random-effects model, calculating mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD). Of 16,445 records identified, 29 records reporting on 24 studies (n = 6202 participants) were included. All evidence had unclear/high risk of bias and low-very low certainty. Peer support interventions resulted in small improvements in pain (medium-term: MD -3.48, 95% CI -6.61, -0.35; long-term: MD -1.97, 95% CI -3.53, -0.42), self-efficacy (medium-term: SMD 0.26, 95% CI 0.16, 0.36; long-term: SMD 0.21, 95% CI 0.07, 0.36), and function (long-term: SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.19, -0.00) relative to usual care and greater self-efficacy (medium-term: SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.20, 0.51) relative to waitlist control. Peer support interventions resulted in similar improvement as active (health professional led) interventions bar long-term self-efficacy (MD -0.41, 95% CI -0.77, -0.05), which favoured active interventions. No point estimates reached minimal clinically important difference thresholds. Pooled health service utilisation outcomes showed unclear estimates. Self-management, quality of life, and social support outcomes had mixed evidence. Despite low-very low evidence certainty, peer support interventions demonstrated small improvements over usual care and waitlist controls for some clinical outcomes, suggesting that peer support may be useful as an adjunct to other treatments for musculoskeletal pain.
Systematic review.To identify the definitions of recurrence (and related recovery definitions) currently used in the literature.Recurrence of low back pain (LBP) is a common and costly problem and the goal of many treatments is to prevent future recurrences. However, it is unclear whether standardized recurrence definitions are being used in the research literature evaluating the risk of recurrence and the effectiveness of treatments to prevent recurrence.A literature search was performed of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, and PEDro, and from chosen systematic reviews investigating treatments that could plausibly affect recurrence of LBP. Studies were considered eligible if they investigated recurrence of LBP in a cohort of patients with LBP. Inclusion was assessed by 2 reviewers and definitions of recurrence (and related recovery) were extracted.Fifty-three studies were identified by the review. Only 32% of studies gave explicit definitions of recurrence and only 10% gave a definition for both recurrence and recovery. Less than 10% of studies shared a common definition of recurrence.Because of a lack of an agreed terminology it is very difficult to compare results between studies reporting recurrence rates or evaluating strategies to prevent recurrence. Steps to achieve consensus on recurrence and recovery definitions are required. In the interim, it is recommended that a minimum pain duration of 24 hours with a minimum pain intensity equivalent to the appropriate minimal important change for the chosen scale, be used for defining a recurrence. If disability measures are used, it is also recommended that the appropriate minimal important change be used. For recovery, a minimum duration of 1 month pain-free should be used.
Successful management of tissue injury cannot rely solely on pain responses because tissue healing is not directly related to pain. Pain without identifiable pathology is common in athletes,1 and as a result medical labelling remains an ongoing challenge. Therefore, we argue that, for the benefit of athletes, there is an urgent need for a clear distinction between pain and injury (see Infographic).
Synonymous use of pain and injury in research and clinical practice may negatively impact clinical management. First, benign and normal fluctuations in pain may be seen as signs of sports-related injury, which could impact performance negatively. Second, viewing all pain …
Background Bodily state is theorised to play a role in perceptual scaling of the environment, whereby low bodily capacity shifts visuospatial perception, with distances appearing farther and hills steeper, and the opposite seen for high bodily capacity. This may play a protective role, where perceptual scaling discourages engaging with the environment when capacity is low. Methodology Our protocol was pre-registered via Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/6zya5/ ) with all amendments to the protocol tracked. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the role of bodily state/capacity on spatial perception measures of the environment. Databases (Medline, PsychINFO, Scopus, Embase, and Emcare) and grey literature were searched systematically, inclusive to 26/8/21. All studies were assessed using a customised Risk of Bias form. Standard mean differences and 95% CIs were calculated via meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Results A total of 8,034 studies were identified from the systematic search. Of these, 68 experiments (3,195 participants) met eligibility and were included in the review. These were grouped into the following categories: fatigue; pain; age; embodiment; body size/body paty size; glucose levels; fitness; and interoception, and interoceptive accuracy. We found low level evidence (limited studies, high risk of bias) for the effect of bodily state on spatial perception. There was consistent evidence that both glucose manipulations and age influence spatial perception of distances and hills in a hypothesised direction (lower capacity associated with increased distance and hill steepness). Mixed evidence exists for the influence of external loads, embodiment, body/body-part size manipulations, pain, and interoceptive accuracy. Evidence for fitness and/or fatigue influencing spatial perception was conflicting; notably, methodological flaws with fitness and fatigue paradigms and heterogenous spatial perception measures may underlie null/conflicting results. Conclusion We found limited evidence for bodily state influencing spatial perception of the environment. That all studies had high risk of bias makes conclusions about reported effects reflecting actual perceptual shifts ( vs merely reflecting experimental demands or error due to inadequate study design) pre-emptive. Rigorous evaluation is needed to determine whether reported effects reflect more than bias ( e.g ., experimental demands, inadequate blinding). Future work using reliable measures of spatial perception, comprehensive evaluation of relevant confounders, and methodologically robust (and experimentally confirmed) bodily state experimental paradigms is warranted.
The effects of altered neural processing, defined as altering neural networks responsible for perceptions of pain and function, on chronic pain remains unclear.
Objective
To estimate the effect of a graded sensorimotor retraining intervention (RESOLVE) on pain intensity in people with chronic low back pain.
Design, Setting, and Participants
This parallel, 2-group, randomized clinical trial recruited participants with chronic (>3 months) nonspecific low back pain from primary care and community settings. A total of 276 adults were randomized (in a 1:1 ratio) to the intervention or sham procedure and attention control groups delivered by clinicians at a medical research institute in Sydney, Australia. The first participant was randomized on December 10, 2015, and the last was randomized on July 25, 2019. Follow-up was completed on February 3, 2020.
Interventions
Participants randomized to the intervention group (n = 138) were asked to participate in 12 weekly clinical sessions and home training designed to educate them about and assist them with movement and physical activity while experiencing lower back pain. Participants randomized to the control group (n = 138) were asked to participate in 12 weekly clinical sessions and home training that required similar time as the intervention but did not focus on education, movement, and physical activity. The control group included sham laser and shortwave diathermy applied to the back and sham noninvasive brain stimulation.
Main Outcomes and Measures
The primary outcome was pain intensity at 18 weeks, measured on an 11-point numerical rating scale (range, 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst pain imaginable]) for which the between-group minimum clinically important difference is 1.0 point.
Results
Among 276 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 46 [14.3] years; 138 [50%] women), 261 (95%) completed follow-up at 18 weeks. The mean pain intensity was 5.6 at baseline and 3.1 at 18 weeks in the intervention group and 5.8 at baseline and 4.0 at 18 weeks in the control group, with an estimated between-group mean difference at 18 weeks of −1.0 point ([95% CI, −1.5 to −0.4];P = .001), favoring the intervention group.
Conclusions and Relevance
In this randomized clinical trial conducted at a single center among patients with chronic low back pain, graded sensorimotor retraining, compared with a sham procedure and attention control, significantly improved pain intensity at 18 weeks. The improvements in pain intensity were small, and further research is needed to understand the generalizability of the findings.
Clinical scenarios of repeated pain usually involve both nociceptive and non-nociceptive input. It is likely that associations between these stimuli are learned over time. Such learning may underlie subsequent amplification of pain, or evocation of pain in the absence of nociception.We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the evidence that allodynia or hyperalgesia can be a classically conditioned response. A sensitive search of the literature covered Medline, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, PubMed, Scopus, PsycArticles, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Additional studies were identified by contacting experts and searching published reviews. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion, evaluated risk of bias, and extracted data. Studies were included if they aimed to elicit or amplify pain using a classical conditioning procedure in healthy, adult humans. Studies were excluded if they did not distinguish between classical conditioning and explicit verbal suggestion as learning sources, or did not use experiential learning.Thirteen studies, with varying risk of bias, were included. Ten studies evaluated classically conditioned hyperalgesia: nine found hyperalgesia; one did not. Pooled effects (n = 8 with full data) showed a significant pain increase after conditioning (mean difference of 7.40 [95%CI: 4.00-10.80] on a 0-100 pain scale). Three studies evaluated conditioned allodynia and found conflicting results.The existing literature suggests that classical conditioning can amplify pain. No conclusions can be drawn about whether or not classical conditioning can elicit pain. Rigorous experimental conditioning studies with nociceptive unconditioned stimuli are needed to fill this gap in knowledge.
A barrier to dissemination of research is that it depends on the end-user searching for or 'pulling' relevant knowledge from the literature base. Social media instead 'pushes' relevant knowledge straight to the end-user, via blogs and sites such as Facebook and Twitter. That social media is very effective at improving dissemination seems well accepted, but, remarkably, there is no evidence to support this claim. We aimed to quantify the impact of social media release on views and downloads of articles in the clinical pain sciences. Sixteen PLOS ONE articles were blogged and released via Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and ResearchBlogging.org on one of two randomly selected dates. The other date served as a control. The primary outcomes were the rate of HTML views and PDF downloads of the article, over a seven-day period. The critical result was an increase in both outcome variables in the week after the blog post and social media release. The mean ± SD rate of HTML views in the week after the social media release was 18±18 per day, whereas the rate during the other three weeks was no more than 6±3 per day. The mean ± SD rate of PDF downloads in the week after the social media release was 4±4 per day, whereas the rate during the other three weeks was less than 1±1 per day (p<0.05 for all comparisons). However, none of the recognized measures of social media reach, engagement or virality related to either outcome variable, nor to citation count one year later (p>0.3 for all). We conclude that social media release of a research article in the clinical pain sciences increases the number of people who view or download that article, but conventional social media metrics are unrelated to the effect.
'/%3e%3c/defs%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0h10080v5040H0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='.6' d='m0 0 6 3m0-3L0 3' clip-path='url(%23b)' transform='scale(840)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23e4002b' stroke-width='.4' d='m0 0 6 3m0-3L0 3' clip-path='url(%23c)' transform='scale(840)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='840' d='M2520 0v2520M0 1260h5040'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23e4002b' stroke-width='504' d='M2520 0v2520M0 1260h5040'/%3e%3cg fill='%23fff'%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23d' x='2520' y='3780'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='7560' y='4200'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='6300' y='2205'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='7560' y='840'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='8680' y='1869'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23e' x='8064' y='2730'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
