Search

Abstract. Introduction:. The effect of pain education (PE) on pain intensity and function diminishes after a few months in people with chronic low back pain (CLBP). One possible explanation is the return of underlying fears and worries related to the condition. Objective:. To explore topics related to participants' beliefs and feelings that might explain why fears and worries persist after a PE-grounded intervention for CLBP. Methods:. We conducted a qualitative study involving semistructured interviews with participants from the active arm of a randomised controlled trial who received an individualised PE-grounded intervention for adults with CLBP. We used reflexive thematic analysis with an inductive approach. Results:. Twenty participants were interviewed (9 women and 11 men, median age = 54 years, median pain duration = 4 years, 13 reporting at least 30% pain reduction on the trial primary outcome). Three themes were identified: 1) “Are you implying my pain is not real?”: a few participants believed the validity of their pain was being questioned. 2) “You don't understand, my pain is different”: most participants considered the influence of an altered nervous system but did not exclude the possibility of having structural and biomechanical influences for the persistence of their back pain. 3) “I am unsure how to fit it into my daily life”: fear and worries persisted when participants could not figure out how to apply an alternative way of making sense of pain in their daily lives. Conclusion:. Patients' perceptions about PE should be monitored and might be addressed with communication strategies, educational content that matches patients' characteristics, and reinforcements over time.

Abstract Introduction Clinician time and resources may be underutilised if the treatment they offer does not match patient expectations and attitudes. We developed a questionnaire (AxEL-Q) to guide clinicians toward elements of first-line care that are pertinent to their patients with low back pain. Methods We used guidance from the COSMIN consortium to develop the questionnaire and evaluated it in a sample of people with low back pain of any duration. Participants were recruited from the community, were over 18 years and fluent in English. Statements that represented first-line care were identified. Semantic scales were used to measure attitude towards these statements. These items were combined to develop the questionnaire draft. Construct validity was evaluated with exploratory factor analysis and hypotheses testing, comparing to the Back Beliefs Questionnaire and modified Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire. Reliability was evaluated and floor and ceiling effects calculated. Results We recruited 345 participants, and had complete data for analysis for 313 participants. The questionnaire draft was reduced to a 3-Factor questionnaire through exploratory factor analysis. Factor 1 comprised 9 items and evaluated Attitude toward staying active, Factor 2 comprised 4 items and evaluated Attitude toward low back pain being rarely caused by a serious health problem, Factor 3 comprised 4 items and evaluated Attitude toward not needing to know the cause of back pain to manage it effectively. There was a strong inverse association between each factor and the Back Beliefs Questionnaire and a moderate positive association with the modified Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire. Each independent factor demonstrated acceptable internal consistency; Cronbach α Factor 1 = 0.92, Factor 2 = 0.91, Factor 3 = 0.90 and adequate interclass correlation coefficients; Factor 1 = 0.71, Factor 2 = 0.73, Factor 3 = 0.79. Conclusion This study demonstrates acceptable construct validity and reliability of the AxEL-Q, providing clinicians with an insight into the likelihood of patients following first-line care at the outset.

Abstract Background This systematic review aimed to investigate whether the administration of hypnotic medicines, z-drugs, melatonin or benzodiazepines, reduced pain intensity postoperatively. Methods Medline, Embase, Cinahl, Psych info, Central and PubMed databases were searched, from inception to February 2020 to identify relevant trials. The search was extended, post hoc, to include meta-Register of Controlled Trials, the Web of Science and the conference booklets for the 14th, 15th, and 16th International Association for the Study of Pain conferences. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts and cross-checked the extracted data. Results The search retrieved 5546 articles. After full-text screening, 15 trials were included, which had randomised 1252 participants. There is moderate-quality evidence that in the short-term [WMD − 1.06, CI − 1.48 to − 0.64, p ≤ .01] and low-quality evidence that in the medium-term [WMD − 0.90, CI − 1.43 to − 0.37, p ≤ .01] postoperative period oral zolpidem 5/10 mg with other analgesic medicines reduced pain intensity compared to the same analgesic medicines alone. There is low-quality evidence that melatonin was not effective on postoperative pain intensity compared to placebo. The results of benzodiazepines on pain intensity were mixed. The authors reported no significant adverse events. Conclusions There is promising evidence that the hypnotic medicine zolpidem, adjuvant to other analgesics, is effective at achieving a minimally clinically important difference in pain intensity postoperatively. There is no consistent effect of melatonin or benzodiazepines on postoperative pain intensity. Readers should interpret these results with some caution due to the lack of data on safety, the small number of trials included in the pooled effects and their sample sizes. Systematic review registration The protocol for this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO ID= CRD42015025327 .