What do clinicians consider when assessing chronic low back pain? A content analysis of multidisciplinary pain centre team assessments of functioning, disability, and health

Methodological considerations in cross-sectional studies validating the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core-Sets: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To describe and analyze the methodological characteristics and quality of cross-sectional studies that have validated an ICF-CS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify empirical studies published in English that validated any ICF-CS using a cross-sectional design. Databases searched included Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO. The search was conducted in November 2022 with an update in October 2023. Two independent reviewers coded studies that met the inclusion criteria and assessed their methodological quality and risk of bias using the AXIS tool. Synthesis was performed by calculating frequencies and percentages.

RESULTS

87 articles validating 24 ICF-CSs were analyzed. Most articles showed strengths in consistency between study objectives and the outcome variables measured. However, a large majority did not report sample size calculation (up to 94.2% in Delphi studies), and few validation studies were conducted in the WHO regions of Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of cross-sectional studies validating ICF-CSs was satisfactory, although several articles did not describe aspects such as sample size calculation. Validity evidence for ICF-CS studies could be improved by conducting more multicenter studies, replicating ICF-CS validation studies in different WHO regions, and through synthesis of existing research.

Co-creation in healthcare and research to improve service delivery for young people with chronic pain

Introduction

The process of co-creation can enable more effective, agile and integrated healthcare solutions achieving outcomes that effectively translate to healthcare delivery. Collaborative knowledge generation is particularly important in fields such as pediatric chronic pain where there is a complex interplay between biological, social, environmental, emotional, familial and school factors. The co-creation initiative described here was designed to amplify the voices of youth with chronic pain and their families and a variety of key stakeholders and generate novel approaches to the management of chronic pediatric pain in the setting of the South Australian Pediatric Chronic Pain Service.

Methods

Stakeholders who were identified as influential in this ecosystem were allocated to 6 groups. A skilled facilitator co-prepared and delivered the workshop, engaging participants in three structured activities. Firstly, the challenges to service delivery were outlined, followed by the groups discussing what is currently working. The second activity involved lateral thinking without restrictions on time, resources or system to generate solutions to the key challenges presented. Finally, stakeholders were asked to agree on a generated solution from Activity 2 and build a case for actionable implementation of this solution. Data were summarised by the workshop facilitator and reflexive thematic analysis was used for coding and generating themes.

Results

From Activity 1, six themes collectively demonstrated that stakeholders valued many of the existing strengths of the service delivery, but some areas such as pain education was undervalued. Activity 2 generated solutions from high-level ideas to more day-to- day management strategies. Each of six groups generated unique solutions to an identified challenge for Activity 3.

Discussion

Engaging a wide variety of stakeholders in collaborative knowledge generation successfully provided the South Australian Pediatric Chronic Pain Service with a variety of novel, scalable solution across the healthcare continuum. Equally important is that this initiative helped to raise awareness about the complex issues faced in pediatric chronic pain care and helped to establish new partnerships that have led to enhanced service delivery.

The Potential Role of Probiotics in the Management of Osteoarthritis Pain: Current Status and Future Prospects

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This narrative review article comprehensively explains the pathophysiology of osteoarthritis (OA) pain perception, how the gut microbiota is correlated with it, possible molecular pathways involved in probiotics-mediated OA pain reduction, limitations in the current research approaches, and future perspectives.

RECENT FINDINGS

The initiation and progression of OA, including the development of chronic pain, is intricately associated with activation of the innate immune system and subsequent inflammatory responses. Trauma, lifestyle (e.g., obesity and metabolic disease), and chronic antibiotic treatment can disrupt commensal homeostasis of the human microbiome, thereby affecting intestinal integrity and promoting leakage of bacterial endotoxins and metabolites such as lipopolysaccharides (LPS) into circulation. Increased level of LPS is associated with knee osteophyte severity and joint pain. Both preclinical and clinical studies strongly suggest that probiotics may benefit patients with OA pain through positive gut microbiota modulation and attenuating low-grade inflammation via multiple pathways. Patent data also suggests increased interest in the development of new innovations that involve probiotic use for reducing OA and joint pain. Recent data suggest that probiotics are attracting more and more attention for OA pain management. The advancement of knowledge in this area may pave the way for developing different probiotic strains that can be used to support joint health, improve treatment outcomes in OA, and reduce the huge impact of the disease on healthcare systems worldwide.

Validation of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) core sets from 2001 to 2019 - a scoping review

Objective: To investigate and summarize the literature on the validation of International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) core sets from 2001 to 2019 and explore what research methods have been used when validating ICF core sets.Methods: The current study is a scoping review using a structured literature search.Results: In total, 66 scientific articles were included, of which 23 ICF core sets were validated. Most validation studies were conducted in Europe using a quantitative methodology and were validated from the perspective of patients. Analysis methods differed considerably between the studies, and most ICF core sets were validated only once for a single target population or from a single perspective. The comprehensive core sets were validated more often than the brief core sets, and core sets for stroke and low back pain were validated most often.Conclusion: The results of the current study show that only 66% of the existing ICF core sets are validated. Many of the validation studies are conducted in a European context and from a single perspective. More validation studies of ICF core sets from the perspective of both patients and professionals are needed.Implications for rehabilitationICF core sets aim to facilitate assessments in clinical settings and research.Validation studies indicate in general that the ICF core sets are valid and relevant for patients and professionals in the specific areas explored and thus can be used in rehabilitation settings.To improve the quality of ICF core sets, more validation studies are needed for ICF core sets not yet tested and for ICF core sets that have been validated only in one study or for one specific population or target group.

Consensus on functional assessment of chronic pain in primary care: a Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is a public health concern affecting 20-30% of the population of Western countries. Focus groups of people with persistent pain indicated that their overall physical function had deteriorated because of pain, therefore assessment of function should be an integral part of pain assessment. The objective of this study was to establish a consensus on assessment of function in chronic pain primary care patients and to evaluate the use of scales and clinical guidelines in clinical practice.

METHODS

A Delphi study (CL4VE study) was carried out. A group of primary care physicians, were asked to rate how strongly they agreed/disagreed with the statements in: general functioning data, and functioning outcomes in chronic pain patients.

RESULTS

Seventy-one primary care physicians were invited to participate. Of these, 69 completed Round 1 (98.5% response rate), and 68 completed Round 2 (97.1%). Under the predefined criterion, a high degree of agreement (91.4%) was observed, this was confirmed in 32 of 35 questions in the second round. Discrepancies were noted, firstly, because functioning was only linked to joint recovery; secondly, in the use of specific scales and questionnaires to measure functioning, and thirdly, that no scale of functioning is used in clinical practice due to complexity and lack of time for assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians agreed on the need for a precise definition of the concept of patient functional impediment to facilitate homogeneous recognition, and for the development of simple and practical scales focused on patients with chronic pain and their needs.

Identifying goals in patients with chronic pain: A European survey

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is a major healthcare issue that often requires an interdisciplinary treatment approach. Defining relevant treatment goals is one of the crucial steps in creating successful rehabilitation schemes. Therefore, the first aim was to explore goals that patients suffering from chronic pain aim to achieve. The second aim was to translate those goals into measurable functional outcome variables which can be used to measure treatment success.

METHODS

An online survey was developed and spread through local pain alliances in six European countries. Participants, patients suffering from chronic pain, were asked to report their most important goals, combined with a rank to denote the importance of each goal. For the highest ranked goals, participants were asked to decompose their goal into functional postures and the number of minutes per posture to achieve this goal.

RESULTS

We approached 1,494 persons, of which 487 effectively completed this survey. The highest ranked goals were taking part in family and social activities (72.55%), pain reduction (91.18%) and household tasks (68.14%). Obtaining pain reduction was most often ranked first (55.75%), followed by improving sleep (12.25%) and taking part in family or social activities (11.00%). For all goals, walking was a crucial component.

CONCLUSIONS

The goals of chronic pain patients are in line with previously explored expectations, denoting the importance of achieving pain relief combined with improvements on the level of activities and participation. This survey indicates that rehabilitation programs should definitely focus on improving walking ability, due to its importance in underpinning overall goal achievement.

SIGNIFICANCE

Goals and expectations of chronic pain patients are in line with each other. Obtaining pain relief remains the highest ranked goal, however, goals on the level of activities and participation were also highly ranked. Walking seems to be the overall crucial component for goal achievement.

Assessment of functioning and disability in patients with low back pain - the low back pain assessment tool. Part 1: development

PURPOSE

To present the process used to develop the low back pain (LBP) assessment tool including evaluation of the initial content validity of the tool.

METHODS

The development process comprised the elements: definition of construct and content, literature search, item generation, needs assessment, piloting, adaptations, design, and technical production. The LBP assessment tool was developed to assess the construct "functioning and disability" as defined by the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Involvement of patients and health professionals was essential.

RESULTS

The elements were collapsed into five steps. In total, 18 patients and 12 health professionals contributed to the content and the design of the tool. The LBP assessment tool covered all ICF components shared among 63 ICF categories.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents the process used to develop the LBP assessment tool, which is the first tool to address all ICF components and integrate biopsychosocial perspectives provided by patients and health professionals in the same tool. Initial evaluation of content validity showed adequate reflection of the construct "functioning and disability". Further work on the way will evaluate comprehensiveness, acceptability, and degree of implementation of the LBP assessment tool to strengthen its use for clinical practice.Implications for RehabilitationA biopsychosocial and patients-centred approach is a strong foundation for identifying the many relevant aspects related to low back pain (LBP).Responding to a lack of tools to support a biopsychosocial and patients-centred approach the LBP assessment tool was developed using a robust, multi-step process with involvement of patients and health professionals.The LBP assessment tool is a strong candidate for a user-friendly tool to facilitate use of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health in routine clinical practice.

Development of a collaborative model of low back pain: report from the 2017 NASS consensus meeting

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Low back pain (LBP) is a multifactorial problem with complex interactions among many biological, psychological and social factors. It is difficult to fully appreciate this complexity because the knowledge necessary to do so is distributed over many areas of expertise that span the biopsychosocial domains.

PURPOSE

This study describes the collaborative modeling process, undertaken among a group of participants with diverse expertise in LBP, to build a model to enhance understanding and communicate the complexity of the LBP problem.

STUDY DESIGN

The study involved generating individual models that represented participants' understanding of the LBP problem using fuzzy cognitive mapping (FCM), and 4 subsequent phases of consultation and consensus with the participants to characterize and refine the interpretation of the FCMs.

METHODS

The phases consisted of: proposal of Categories for clustering of model Components; preliminary evaluation of structure, composition and focal areas of participant's FCMs; refinement of Categories and Components with consensus meeting; generation of final structure and composition of individual participant's FCMs. Descriptive statistics were applied to the structural and composition metrics of individual FCMs to aid interpretation.

RESULTS

From 38 invited contributors, 29 (76%) agreed to participate. They represented 9 disciplines and 8 countries. Participants' models included 729 Components, with an average of 25 (SD = 7) per model. After the final FCM refinement process (Components from separate FCMs that used similar terms were combined, and Components from an FCM that included multiple terms were separated), there were 147 Components allocated to ten Categories. Although individual models varied in their structure and composition, a common opinion emerged that psychological factors are particularly important in the presentation of LBP. Collectively, Components allocated to the "Psychology" Category were the most central in almost half (14/29) of the individual models.

CONCLUSIONS

The collaborative modeling process outlined in this paper provides a foundation upon which to build a greater understanding and to communicate the complexity of the LBP problem. The next step is to aggregate individual FCMs into a metamodel and begin disentangling the interactions among its Components. This will lead to an improved understanding of the complexity of LBP, and hopefully to improved outcomes for those suffering from this condition.