Juliana Valentim Bittencourt1, Ana Carolina de Melo Magalhães Amaral2, Pedro Vidinha Rodrigues3, Leticia Amaral Corrêa3, Bruno Moreira Silva4, Felipe José Jandre Reis2, Leandro Alberto Calazans Nogueira3,2. 1. Rehabilitation Science Postgraduate Program at Augusto Motta University Centre (UNISUAM), Avenida Paris, 84, Bonsucesso, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 21041-020, Brazil. juliana.valentimfisioterapia@gmail.com. 2. Physiotherapy Department at Federal Institute of Rio de Janeiro (IFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 3. Rehabilitation Science Postgraduate Program at Augusto Motta University Centre (UNISUAM), Avenida Paris, 84, Bonsucesso, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 21041-020, Brazil. 4. Department of Physiology, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The identification of central sensitization (CS) is an important aspect in the management of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Several methods have been developed, including clinical indicators and psychophysical measures. However, whether clinical indicators coincide with the psychophysical test of CS-related sign and symptoms is still unknown. Therefore, the present study aimed to analyze the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical indicators in identifying CS-related sign and symptoms in patients with musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: One-hundred consecutive patients with musculoskeletal pain were included. Clinical indicators (index method) based on a combination of patient self-report pain characteristics and physical examination were used to identify the phenotype of patients with musculoskeletal pain and the predominance of the CS-related sign and symptoms. Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) was assessed by the Cold Pressor Test (reference standard), which is a psychophysical test used to detect impairment of CPM. Measurements of the diagnostic accuracy were performed. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients presented predominance of CS-related sign and symptoms in the assessment of the clinical indicators, and 20 had impairment of CPM. Clinical indicators showed high accuracy (75.0%; 95% confidence interval = 65.3 to 83.1), high specificity (80.0%; 95% confidence interval = 69.6 to 88.1), high negative predictive value (87.7%; 95% confidence interval = 81.2 to 92.1), and a relevant positive likelihood ratio (2.8, 95% confidence interval = 1.5 to 5.0) when compared to the Cold Pressor Test. CONCLUSION: Clinical indicators demonstrated a valuable tool for detecting the impaired CPM, which is a remarkable feature of the CS-related sign and symptoms. Clinicians are encouraged to use the clinical indicators in the management of patients with musculoskeletal pain.
BACKGROUND: The identification of central sensitization (CS) is an important aspect in the management of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Several methods have been developed, including clinical indicators and psychophysical measures. However, whether clinical indicators coincide with the psychophysical test of CS-related sign and symptoms is still unknown. Therefore, the present study aimed to analyze the diagnostic accuracy of the clinical indicators in identifying CS-related sign and symptoms in patients with musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: One-hundred consecutive patients with musculoskeletal pain were included. Clinical indicators (index method) based on a combination of patient self-report pain characteristics and physical examination were used to identify the phenotype of patients with musculoskeletal pain and the predominance of the CS-related sign and symptoms. Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) was assessed by the Cold Pressor Test (reference standard), which is a psychophysical test used to detect impairment of CPM. Measurements of the diagnostic accuracy were performed. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients presented predominance of CS-related sign and symptoms in the assessment of the clinical indicators, and 20 had impairment of CPM. Clinical indicators showed high accuracy (75.0%; 95% confidence interval = 65.3 to 83.1), high specificity (80.0%; 95% confidence interval = 69.6 to 88.1), high negative predictive value (87.7%; 95% confidence interval = 81.2 to 92.1), and a relevant positive likelihood ratio (2.8, 95% confidence interval = 1.5 to 5.0) when compared to the Cold Pressor Test. CONCLUSION: Clinical indicators demonstrated a valuable tool for detecting the impaired CPM, which is a remarkable feature of the CS-related sign and symptoms. Clinicians are encouraged to use the clinical indicators in the management of patients with musculoskeletal pain.
Entities:
Keywords:
Central nervous system sensitization; Chronic pain; Diffuse noxious inhibitory control; Musculoskeletal pain; Pain management; Pain mechanisms; Pain threshold
Authors: Tom G Mayer; Randy Neblett; Howard Cohen; Krista J Howard; Yun H Choi; Mark J Williams; Yoheli Perez; Robert J Gatchel Journal: Pain Pract Date: 2011-09-27 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Adley Tsang; Michael Von Korff; Sing Lee; Jordi Alonso; Elie Karam; Matthias C Angermeyer; Guilherme Luiz Guimaraes Borges; Evelyn J Bromet; K Demytteneare; Giovanni de Girolamo; Ron de Graaf; Oye Gureje; Jean-Pierre Lepine; Josep Maria Haro; Daphna Levinson; Mark A Oakley Browne; Jose Posada-Villa; Soraya Seedat; Makoto Watanabe Journal: J Pain Date: 2008-07-07 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: L Arendt-Nielsen; B Morlion; S Perrot; A Dahan; A Dickenson; H G Kress; C Wells; D Bouhassira; A Mohr Drewes Journal: Eur J Pain Date: 2017-11-05 Impact factor: 3.931
Authors: A Akinci; M Al Shaker; M H Chang; C W Cheung; A Danilov; H José Dueñas; Y C Kim; R Guillen; W Tassanawipas; T Treuer; Y Wang Journal: Int J Clin Pract Date: 2015-11-11 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Juliana Valentim Bittencourt; Márcia Cliton Bezerra; Mônica Rotondo Pina; Felipe José Jandre Reis; Arthur de Sá Ferreira; Leandro Alberto Calazans Nogueira Journal: Arch Physiother Date: 2022-02-17