Severity, Irritability, Nature, Stage, and Stability (SINSS): A clinical perspective

Biopsychosocial contributors to irritability in individuals with shoulder or low back pain

OBJECTIVES

Irritability is a foundational clinical reasoning concept in rehabilitation to evaluate reactivity of the examination and treatment. While originally theorized to reflect tissue damage, a large body of evidence supports pain is a biopsychosocial experience impacted by pain sensitivity and psychological factors. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine biopsychosocial contributors to irritability.

METHODS

40 patients with shoulder (n = 20) and low back (n = 20) pain underwent Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) (Pressure Pain Threshold, Heat Pain Threshold, Conditioned Pain Modulation, Temporal Summation), completed pain-related psychological questionnaires, an Exercise-Induced Hypoalgesia protocol, and standardized irritability assessment based on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Participants were then categorized as irritable or not irritable based on Maitland's criteria and by irritability level based on Clinical Practice Guidelines. An independent samples t-test examined for differences in QST and psychological factors by irritability category. A MANOVA examined for differences in QST and psychological factors by irritability level (high, moderate, low).

RESULTS

Significantly lower heat and pressure pain thresholds at multiple locations (p < 0.05), as well as less efficient conditioned pain modulation (p = 0.02), were demonstrated in individuals categorized as irritable. Heat and pressure pain thresholds were also significantly lower in patients with high irritability compared to other levels. Significantly higher depression and anger, as well as lower self-efficacy, were reported in individuals with an irritable presentation.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

Biopsychosocial factors, including widespread hyperalgesia and elevated psychological factors, may contribute to an irritable presentation.

Are we asking the right questions to people with Achilles tendinopathy? The best questions to distinguish mild versus severe disability to improve your clinical management

OBJECTIVE

Determine the capacity of individual items on the Tendinopathy Severity Assessment - Achilles (TENDINS-A), Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), and Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment - Achilles (VISA-A) to differentiate patients with mild and severe tendon-related disability in order to provide clinicians the best questions when they are consulting patients with Achilles tendinopathy.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

PARTICIPANTS

Seventy participants with Achilles tendinopathy (61.4% mid-portion only, 31.4% insertional only, 7.2% both).

OUTCOME MEASURES

The discrimination index was determined for each TENDINS-A, FAOS, and VISA-A item to determine if items could discriminate between mild and severe disability. A Guttman analysis for polytomous items was conducted.

RESULTS

All 62 tems from the TENDINS-A, FAOS, and VISA-A were ranked with the best items relating to pain with physical tendon loading, time for pain to settle following aggravating activities and time for the tendon to 'warm-up' following inactivity.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain with loading the Achilles tendon, time for pain to settle following aggravating activity, as well as time taken for the tendon symptoms to subside after prolonged sitting or sleeping are the best questions indicative of the severity of disability in patients with Achilles tendinopathy. These questions can assist clinicians with assessing baseline severity and monitoring treatment response.

Dosage of joint mobilization for the management of patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Evidence supporting type and dosage of joint mobilizations and rationale for selecting joint mobilization dosage for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain are limited.

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aimed to systematically map the type and dosage of joint mobilizations used in previous trials for managing patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain; and summarize the rationale for adopting a specific joint mobilization dosage.

METHODS

We searched six databases. We included randomised controlled trials using joint mobilization for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. We extracted data regarding technique, treatment joint mobilization dosages and rationale for a specific dosage.

RESULTS

We included 32 studies. Most studies did not or partially report technique (67%) and within-session dosage (64%) of passive joint mobilization. Overall treatment was fully reported in 95% of studies. The dosage used for passive joint mobilization was heterogeneous (ranging from grade I to grade V). Most studies (85%) did not or partially report technique of mobilization with movement (MWM), whereas within-session and overall treatment dosages were fully reported in more than 85% of studies. Three sets of 10 repetitions were commonly used within-session dosage for MWM. We found very limited information on the rationale for selecting dosage of joint mobilization.

CONCLUSION

We found limited information about the dosage or the rationale for selecting joint mobilization, with a heterogeneous dosage being tested across trials. Our findings highlight the importance of detailed reporting for dosage and rationale for selecting a specific dosage of joint mobilization.

Resident Case Series: Blood Flow Restriction as an Adjunct to Strengthening Exercises in Two Patients with Subacromial Impingement and High Irritability

Introduction

Evidence informed management of individuals presenting with subacromial impingement syndrome (SAIS) includes strengthening exercises directed at the shoulder musculature. Patients with subacromial impingement syndrome (SAIS) can present with pain during and after completion of heavy resistance training limiting the applicability of this recommended treatment approach. Blood flow restriction (BFR) training is indicated for patients who have pain while completing heavy resistance training and may represent an important treatment modification for patients with SAIS unable to fully participate in a strengthening exercise program. The purpose of this case series is to describe the inclusion of BFR in the treatment of two patients with SAIS.

Case descriptions

Two middle aged, non-operative patients with signs and symptoms consistent with SAIS and high levels of irritability were included. Treatment over one month consisted of three commonly used exercises in the treatment of SAIS in conjunction with a standard BFR protocol: 75 reps broken up into sets of 30,15,15,15 with the BFR cuff placed over proximal humerus.

Outcomes

Immediate within session improvements beyond measurement error were observed in resting pain and pain pressure thresholds at three sites. At the end of the course of treatment, clinically meaningful improvements were observed in patient reported outcomes including the PENN Score, ASES score, and the patient-specific functional scale. Clinically meaningful improvements and change beyond measurement error were also observed in range of motion and strength which (assessed via a handheld dynamometer).

Discussion

The incorporation of low load resistance training with BFR may be a useful adjunct for treating patients with SAIS to promote exercise-induced hypoalgesia, decrease pain, and increase function in the upper extremity.

Level of Evidence

5.