Lisa C Carlesso1,2, Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme3,4, William Shaw5, Christian Larivière6,7, Manon Choinière8,9. 1. School of Rehabilitation Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. 2. School of Rehabilitation, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Quebec, Canada. 3. School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada. 4. Clinical Research of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (CRCHUS), Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada. 5. Division of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Departments of Medicine and Public Health Sciences, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT. 6. Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (IRSST), Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 7. Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation of Greater Montreal (CRIR), Institut universitaire sur la réadaptation en déficience physique de Montréal (IURDPM), Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Ile-de-Montréal (CCSMTL), Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 8. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 9. Research Center of the Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Abstract
Background: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a major cause of disability globally. Stratified care has been proposed as a means to improve prognosis and treatment but is generally based on limited aspects of pain, including biopsychosocial drivers. Aims: Following Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) recommendations, the present study explored pain phenotypes with a sample of workers with CLBP, a population for which no pain phenotypes have been derived to date. Methods: A cross-sectional design was used with a sample of 154 workers with CLBP attending a rehabilitation clinic, recruited in person and from social media. Latent class analysis was used to identify subgroups of patients with different pain profiles based on ten pain indicators (pain variability, pain intensity, pain quality, somatization, sleep quality, depression, fatigue, pain catastrophizing, neuropathic pain, and central sensitization). Results: The majority of the sample (85%) were recruited through social media. Both the two-class and three-class solutions were found to be satisfactory in distinguishing phenotypes of workers with CLBP. Three variables proved particularly important in distinguishing between the pain phenotypes-pain quality, fatigue, and central sensitization-with higher scores on these indicators associated with pain phenotypes with higher pain burden. Increased chronic pain self-efficacy, work-related support, and perceived work abilities were protective risk factors for being in a higher pain burden class. Conclusions: The present study is the first to explore IMMPACT recommendations for pain phenotyping with workers with CLBP. Future prospective research will be needed to validate the proposed pain phenotypes.
Background: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a major cause of disability globally. Stratified care has been proposed as a means to improve prognosis and treatment but is generally based on limited aspects of pain, including biopsychosocial drivers. Aims: Following Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) recommendations, the present study explored pain phenotypes with a sample of workers with CLBP, a population for which no pain phenotypes have been derived to date. Methods: A cross-sectional design was used with a sample of 154 workers with CLBP attending a rehabilitation clinic, recruited in person and from social media. Latent class analysis was used to identify subgroups of patients with different pain profiles based on ten pain indicators (pain variability, pain intensity, pain quality, somatization, sleep quality, depression, fatigue, pain catastrophizing, neuropathic pain, and central sensitization). Results: The majority of the sample (85%) were recruited through social media. Both the two-class and three-class solutions were found to be satisfactory in distinguishing phenotypes of workers with CLBP. Three variables proved particularly important in distinguishing between the pain phenotypes-pain quality, fatigue, and central sensitization-with higher scores on these indicators associated with pain phenotypes with higher pain burden. Increased chronic pain self-efficacy, work-related support, and perceived work abilities were protective risk factors for being in a higher pain burden class. Conclusions: The present study is the first to explore IMMPACT recommendations for pain phenotyping with workers with CLBP. Future prospective research will be needed to validate the proposed pain phenotypes.
Authors: Karl Chaory; Fouad Fayad; François Rannou; Marie-Martine Lefèvre-Colau; Jacques Fermanian; Michel Revel; Serge Poiraudeau Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2004-04-15 Impact factor: 3.468
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: Marina B Pinheiro; Manuela L Ferreira; Kathryn Refshauge; Christopher G Maher; Juan R Ordoñana; Tude B Andrade; Alexandros Tsathas; Paulo H Ferreira Journal: Spine J Date: 2015-10-30 Impact factor: 4.166