Dosage of pain rehabilitation programmes for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain: a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial

Can Baseline Characteristics Predict Successful Outcomes after Individual, Physiotherapist-Led Rehabilitation in Patients with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain?

Background

No strong and consistent variables to predict outcome after pain rehabilitation have been reported in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. The aim of the present study was to clarify if baseline variables could predict successful outcome after a unique, individualized, physiotherapist-led rehabilitation of nine sessions.

Methods

In 274 individuals with severe chronic musculoskeletal pain, the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for potentially predictive baseline variables on successful outcomes of pain management, overall health, and pain rating.

Results

Statistically significant results show that patients rating moderate or severe baseline pain were in both cases 14% less likely to improve pain management compared to patients rating mild baseline pain (RR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.77-0.97, RR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.74-1.00). Patients with the shortest pain duration were 1.61 times more likely to improve overall health (RR = 1.61; 95% CI 1.13-2.29) compared to patients reporting the longest pain duration (>5 years). Patients reporting anxiety/depression or severe pain were in both cases 1.48 times more likely to improve overall health compared to better baseline presentations (RR = 1.48; 95% CI 1.16-1.88, RR = 1.48; 95% CI 1.03-2.15). Patients with regional/generalized pain were 36% less likely to rate pain reduction (RR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.41-1.00) compared to patients rating localized baseline pain. Of 17 potentially predictive baseline variables, four reached statistical significance for at least one of the three outcomes; although none of them for all three outcomes.

Conclusions

Of 17 potentially predictive baseline variables, mild pain ratings, short pain duration, and localized baseline pain were statistically significantly associated with improvements after individual, physiotherapist-led rehabilitation for patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. This suggests that this type of rehabilitation probably should be offered early in the pain process. Reporting anxiety/depression or severe pain at the baseline did not hinder the improvements of overall health.

A Meta-Epidemiological Appraisal of the Effects of Interdisciplinary Multimodal Pain Therapy Dosing for Chronic Low Back Pain

Using a meta-analysis, meta-regression, and a meta-epidemiological approach, we conducted a systematic review to examine the influence of interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) dosage on pain, disability, return to work, quality of life, depression, and anxiety in published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain (CLBP). We considered all RCTs of IMPT from a Cochrane review and searched PubMed for additional RCTs through 30 September 2018. A subgroup random-effects meta-analysis by length, contact, and intensity of treatment was performed followed by a meta-regression analysis. Using random and fixed-effect models and a summary relative odds ratio (ROR), we compared the effect sizes (ES) from short-length, non-daily contact, and low-intensity RCTs with long-length, daily contact, and high-intensity RCTs. Heterogeneity was quantified with the I² metric. A total of 47 RCTs were selected. Subgroup meta-analysis showed that there were larger ES for pain and disability in RCTs with long-length, non-daily contact, and low intensity of treatment. Larger ES were also observed for quality of life in RCTs with short-length, non-daily contact, and low intensity treatment. However, these findings were not confirmed by the meta-regression analysis. Likewise, the summary RORs were not significant, indicating that the length, contact, and intensity of treatment did not have an overall effect on the investigated outcomes. For the outcomes investigated here, IMPT dosage is not generally associated with better ES, and an optimal dosage was not determined.