Search

Objective To determine if impairment in motor imagery processes is present in Achilles tendinopathy (AT), as demonstrated by a reduced ability to quickly and accurately identify the laterality (left-right judgement) of a pictured limb. Additionally, this study aimed to use a novel data pooling approach to combine data collected at 3 different sites via meta-analytical techniques that allow exploration of heterogeneity. Design Multi-site case-control study. Methods Three independent studies with similar protocols were conducted by separate research groups. Each study-site evaluated left/right judgement performance for images of feet and hands using Recognise© software and compared performance between people with AT and healthy controls. Results from each study-site were independently collated, then combined in a meta-analysis. Results In total, 126 participants (40 unilateral, 22 bilateral AT cases, 61 controls) were included. There were no differences between AT cases and controls for hand image accuracy and reaction time. Contrary to the hypothesis, there were no differences in performance between those with AT and controls for foot image reaction time, however there were conflicting findings for foot accuracy, based on four separate analyses. There were no differences between the affected and unaffected sides in people with unilateral AT. Conclusions Impairments in motor imagery performance for hands were not found in this study, and we found inconsistent results for foot accuracy. This contrasts to studies in persistent pain of limbs, face and knee osteoarthritis, and suggests that differences in pathoetiology or patient demographics may uniquely influence proprioceptive representation.

Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Background There is evidence that people with persistent shoulder pain exhibit findings consistent with the presence of sensorimotor dysfunction. Sensorimotor impairments can manifest in a variety of ways, and further developing our understanding of sensorimotor dysfunction in shoulder pain may improve current models of care. The Fremantle Back Awareness Questionnaire (FreBAQ) has been developed to assess disturbed body perception specific to the back. The purpose of the present study was to develop a shoulder-specific self-perception questionnaire and evaluate the questionnaire in people with persistent shoulder pain. Methods The Fremantle Shoulder Awareness Questionnaire (FreSHAQ-J) was developed by modifying the FreBAQ. One hundred and twelve consecutive people with persistent shoulder pain completed the FreSHAQ-J. Thirty participants completed the FreSHAQ-J again two-weeks later to assess test-retest reliability. Rasch analysis was used to assess the psychometric properties of the FreSHAQ-J. Associations between FreSHAQ-J total score and clinical status was explored using correlational analysis. Results The FreSHAQ-J has acceptable category order, unidimensionality, no misfitting items, and excellent test-retest reliability. The FreSHAQ-J was moderately correlated with disability and pain catastrophization. Conclusions The FreSHAQ-J fits the Rasch measurement model well and is suitable for use with people with shoulder pain. Given the relationship between the FreSHAQ-J score and clinical status, change in body perception may be worth assessing when managing patients with shoulder pain.

Yuh Yamashita,1,2 Tomohiko Nishigami,3 Akira Mibu,4 Katsuyoshi Tanaka,5 Benedict M Wand,6 Mark J Catley,7 Toshio Higashi1 1Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki, Nagasaki, 852-8520, Japan; 2Department of Rehabilitation, Morinaga Orthopedic Clinic, Saga, 849-0934, Japan; 3Department of Physical Therapy, Prefectural University of Hiroshima, Mihara, Hiroshima, 723-0053, Japan; 4Department of Nursing and Physical Therapy, Konan Women’s University, Kobe, Hyogo, 658-0001, Japan; 5Department of Rehabilitation, Tennouji-ku, Osaka, 543-0027, Japan; 6School of Physiotherapy, The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, WA, 6959, Australia; 7School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, 5001, AustraliaCorrespondence: Yuh YamashitaNagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-7-1, Sakamoto, Nagasaki, 852-8520, JapanTelFax +81 95 819 7994 Email yuhyou6@gmail.comPurpose: Contemporary theories of pain suggest that how the body is perceived is central to the emergence of pain. The Fremantle Back Awareness Questionnaire (FreBAQ) was developed to assess body-perception specific to the back in people with chronic low back pain. However, there is no comprehensive measure to quantify self-perception of the painful area in Japanese people with neck pain. This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of a self-perception questionnaire specific to the neck and evaluate the validity and reliability of the scale using Rasch analysis.Materials and Methods: The Fremantle Neck Awareness Questionnaire (FreNAQ-J) was developed by modifying the FreBAQ-J. One hundred people with chronic neck pain and fifty-six matched healthy controls completed the questionnaire. Rasch analysis was used to evaluate targeting, category order, unidimensionality, person fit, internal consistency, differential item functioning, and differential test functioning in the neck pain population. Validity was investigated by examining the relationship between the FreNAQ-J and clinical status.Results: People with chronic neck pain endorsed FreNAQ-J items with greater frequency than healthy controls. FreNAQ-J did not reject the null hypothesis of fitting the Rasch model, had acceptable internal consistency and good test–retest reliability. Summed FreNAQ-J scores were significantly correlated with pain intensity, disability, pain-related catastrophizing and fear of movement.Conclusion: The individual items of the FreNAQ-J can be validly summed to provide a score of self-perception. The FreNAQ-J is the first scale developed for comprehensively evaluating disturbed body perception in Japanese patients with chronic neck pain.Keywords: neck pain, neck-specific body-perception questionnaire, reliability and validity, Rasch analysis

Objective To perform a cross-cultural adaptation of the Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire for the Brazilian population (NPQ-BR). Methods A translation and cross-cultural adaptation study were conducted in 11 stages according to standard procedures. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was assessed using Cronbach’s Alpha test (α). Results Four translators, six experts, twenty-one patients and ten physiotherapists participated in the study. The NPQ-BR was obtained after seven versions. The expert committee adapted four out of twelve items (item 1, 3, 11, and 12) to adapt the content of the instrument to the Brazilian context. The pre-test phase showed good internal consistency (α = 0.63). The comparison of the correct answers of the questionnaire between the groups (physical therapist group mean = 7.0 ± 1.7; patient group mean = 3.7 ± 2.1; p < 0.01) confirmed the discriminative validity of the NPQ-BR. Conclusion The Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire was cross-culturally adapted into a Brazilian context and can be used to assess the level of neurophysiological knowledge of pain of Brazilian patients. The interpretation of the results of the NPQ-BR must be taken with caution due to the absence of a robust validation methodology of the instrument. RESUMO Objetivo Realizar a adaptação transcultural do Questionário Neurofisiológico de Dor (QND) para a população brasileira. Métodos Um estudo de tradução e adaptação transcultural foi conduzido em 11 estágios de acordo com procedimentos padronizados. Foi realizada estatística descritiva e inferencial. A consistência interna do questionário foi avaliada pelo teste de Alfa de Cronbach (α). Resultados Participaram do estudo quatro tradutores, seis especialistas, vinte e um pacientes e dez fisioterapeutas. A versão brasileira do QND foi obtida após sete versões. O comitê de especialistas adaptou quatro dos doze itens (item 1, 3, 11 e 12) para ajustar o conteúdo do instrumento ao contexto brasileiro. A fase de pré-teste evidenciou boa consistência interna (α = 0,63). A comparação dos acertos dos itens do questionário entre os grupos (média dos fisioterapeutas = 7,0 ± 1,7; média dos pacientes = 3,7 ± 2,1; p < 0,01) confirmou a validade discriminativa da versão brasileira do QND. Conclusão O Questionário Neurofisiológico de Dor revisado foi adaptado para o contexto brasileiro e pode ser utilizado para avaliar o nível de conhecimento neurofisiológico da dor de pacientes brasileiros. A interpretação dos resultados da versão brasileira do QND deve ser feita com cautela devido à ausência de metodologia robusta de validação do instrumento.

The Lumbar Spine Instability Questionnaire (LSIQ) is a self-report measure of 15 items. Previous studies have used the LSIQ as a measure of clinical instability; however, a comprehensive evaluation of its clinimetric properties has not been conducted.The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinimetric properties of the LSIQ in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (LBP).In this clinical measurement study, the authors included patients with nonspecific LBP presenting to primary care clinicians in Australia. Rasch analysis was conducted to assess item hierarchy, targeting, unidimensionality, person fit, internal consistency, and differential item functioning. The researchers assessed test-retest reliability of total scores and individual item scores, as well as convergent and divergent validity.A total of 107 participants with LBP (60 men and 47 women) were recruited. The results were variable. The LSIQ appeared to constitute a unidimensional measure, targeted the sample well, and showed adequate test-retest reliability. However, the scale had poor internal consistency, did not appear to function as an interval-level measure, and had unclear construct validity. Although no items appeared to be redundant, several items were biased by factors other than the proposed construct of the measure.The LSIQ does not seem to be ready to be implemented in clinical practice and may require theoretical reconsideration. Although the LSIQ provided satisfactory estimates for some clinimetric features, the authors do not consider the instrument to be useful as an interval-level measure but rather as an index. Future studies are needed to investigate whether the LSIQ could measure clinical instability or some other construct. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48(12):915-922. Epub 22 Jun 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7866.

Objective: The aim of this study was to construct and evaluate a summary score of reporting completeness based on the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR). Study Design and Setting: We included 200 reports published in 2013 randomly selected from the Physiotherapy Evidence Database. We summed the scores for the 12 items for the intervention and control groups for each trial to create a summary score from 0 to 24. Rasch analysis was used to investigate the item hierarchy, category function and reliability of the TIDieR checklist and determine the extent to which the summary score can be considered an interval-level measure. Results: The data fit the Rasch model suggesting the summary score is able to assess the completeness of reporting. The items appeared to target the study sample well (average report measure was 0.48 [0.87] compared to the average item measure of 0.0 [1.82]), and progressed in a logical manner, suggesting the summary score can be used as a single variable. The low internal consistency (0.62) suggests the summary score may only be able to discriminate between the least and most detailed reports. Conclusions: Our results support the use of the TIDieR summary score; however, we encourage the replication of our study in an independent data set. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Background: There is a growing interest in the role of disturbed body perception in people with persistent pain problems such as chronic low back pain (CLBP). A questionnaire, the Fremantle Back Awareness Questionnaire (FreBAQ), was recently developed as a simple and quick way of assessing disturbed perceptual awareness of the back in people with CLBP and appears to have acceptable psychometric properties. The aim of the present study was to develop a Japanese version of the FreBAQ (FreBAQ-J) and evaluate its psychometric properties in a sample of Japanese people with low back pain (LBP). Methods: Translation of the FreBAQ into Japanese was conducted using a forward-backward method. One hundred participants with LBP completed the resultant FreBAQ-J. A subset of the participants completed the FreBAQ-J again 2 weeks later. Validity was investigated by examining the relationship between the FreBAQ-J and clinical valuables. Rasch analysis was used to assess targeting, category ordering, unidimensionality, person fit, internal consistency, and differential item functioning. Results: The FreBAQ-J was significantly correlated with pain in motion, disability, pain-related catastrophizing, fear of movement, and anxiety symptomatology. The FreBAQ-J had acceptable internal consistency, a minor departure from unidimensionality, and good test-retest reliability, and was functional on the category rating scale. Conclusions: The FreBAQ-J has acceptable psychometric properties and is suitable for use in people with LBP. Participants with high levels of disturbed body perception are well targeted by the scale. The functioning of one item (item 8) was poor. Further study is warranted to confirm if this item should be excluded. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Background and Aims Higher chronic pain acceptance is associated with lower pain and disability. Clinician beliefs are associated with patients’ beliefs. This study therefore aimed to develop the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire for Clinicians (CPAQ-C) to measure clinicians’ beliefs regarding the importance of levels of acceptance in patients with chronic pain, and to examine the questionnaire’s psychometric properties. Methods Phase one: the CPAQ-C was adapted from the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire. Data on 162 completed questionnaires were analysed using Rasch analysis. Phase Two: the cohort completed the Healthcare Providers Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale, and the association (Pearson’s correlation co-efficient) between these questionnaires examined to assist CPAQ-C validation. Twenty-four participants completed the CPAQ-C one-week later. Test re-test reliability was examined using intraclass correlation co-efficient (2,1) and standard error of measurement. Phase Three: to examine responsiveness 17 clinicians attending a workshop on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy completed the CPAQ-C before and immediately after the workshop, and six-months later. The Skillings Mack test was used to determine whether CPAQ-C scores differed across different timepoints. Results Rasch analysis supported two subscales: activity engagement and pain willingness. Five poorly functioning items were excluded. There was good correlation between the CPAQ-C and Healthcare Providers Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (-.54). The CPAQ-C demonstrated good reliability (ICC (2,1): .81; standard error of measurement: 4.76). There was significant improvement in CPAQ-C scores following the workshop (p= Conclusions The CPAQ-C appears a valid, reliable and responsive measure of clinicians’ beliefs regarding the importance of levels of acceptance in patients with chronic pain. Implications Where the CPAQ-C reveals that clinicians have low perceived levels of importance regarding acceptance in patients with chronic pain those clinicians may benefit from specific education, however, this requires further examination.

Background Chronic pain, considered to be pain lasting more than three months, is a common and often difficult to treat condition that can significantly impact upon function and quality of life. Treatment typically includes pharmacological and non‐pharmacological approaches. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is an adjunct non‐pharmacological treatment commonly recommended by clinicians and often used by people with pain. Objectives To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of TENS to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine). To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the safety of TENS when used to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine). To identify possible sources of inconsistency in the approaches taken to evaluating the evidence related to TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) in the Cochrane Library with a view to recommending strategies to improve consistency in methodology and reporting. To highlight areas of remaining uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) with a view to recommending strategies to reduce any uncertainty. Methods Search methods We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), in the Cochrane Library, across all years up to Issue 11 of 12, 2018. Selection of reviews Two authors independently screened the results of the electronic search by title and abstract against inclusion/exclusion criteria. We included all Cochrane Reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of TENS in people with chronic pain. We included reviews if they investigated the following: TENS versus sham; TENS versus usual care or no treatment/waiting list control; TENS plus active intervention versus active intervention alone; comparisons between different types of TENS; or TENS delivered using different stimulation parameters. Data extraction and analysis Two authors independently extracted relevant data, assessed review quality using the AMSTAR checklist and applied GRADE judgements where required to individual reviews. Our primary outcomes included pain intensity and nature/incidence of adverse effects; our secondary outcomes included disability, health‐related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change. Main results We included nine reviews investigating TENS use in people with defined chronic pain or in people with chronic conditions associated with ongoing pain. One review investigating TENS for phantom or stump‐associated pain in people following amputation did not have any included studies. We therefore extracted data from eight reviews which represented 51 TENS‐related RCTs representing 2895 TENS‐comparison participants entered into the studies. The included reviews followed consistent methods and achieved overall high scores on the AMSTAR checklist. The evidence reported within each review was consistently rated as very low quality. Using review authors' assessment of risk of bias, there were significant methodological limitations in included studies; and for all reviews, sample sizes were consistently small (the majority of studies included fewer than 50 participants per group). Six of the eight reviews presented a narrative synthesis of included studies. Two reviews reported a pooled analysis. Primary and secondary outcomes One review reported a beneficial effect of TENS versus sham therapy at reducing pain intensity on a 0 to 10 scale (MD −1.58, 95% CI −2.08 to −1.09, P < 0.001, I² = 29%, P = 0.22, 5 studies, 207 participants). However the quality of the evidence was very low due to significant methodological limitations and imprecision. A second review investigating pain intensity performed a pooled analysis by combining studies that compared TENS to sham with studies that compared TENS to no intervention (SMD −0.85, 95% CI −1.36 to −0.34, P = 0.001, I² = 83%, P < 0.001). This pooled analysis was judged as offering very low quality evidence due to significant methodological limitations, large between‐trial heterogeneity and imprecision. We considered the approach of combining sham and no intervention data to be problematic since we would predict these different comparisons may be estimating different true effects. All remaining reviews also reported pain intensity as an outcome measure; however the data were presented in narrative review form only. Due to methodological limitation and lack of useable data, we were unable to offer any meaningful report on the remaining primary outcome regarding nature/incidence of adverse effects, nor for the remaining secondary outcomes: disability, health‐related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change for any comparisons. We found the included reviews had a number of inconsistencies when evaluating the evidence from TENS studies. Approaches to assessing risk of bias around the participant, personnel and outcome‐assessor blinding were perhaps the most obvious area of difference across included reviews. We also found wide variability in terms of primary and secondary outcome measures, and inclusion/exclusion criteria for studies varied with respect to including studies which assessed immediate effects of single interventions. Authors' conclusions We found the methodological quality of the reviews was good, but quality of the evidence within them was very low. We were therefore unable to conclude with any confidence that, in people with chronic pain, TENS is harmful, or beneficial for pain control, disability, health‐related quality of life, use of pain relieving medicines, or global impression of change. We make recommendations with respect to future TENS study designs which may meaningfully reduce the uncertainty relating to the effectiveness of this treatment in people with chronic pain., Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for chronic pain ‐ an overview of Cochrane Reviews Bottom line For people with chronic pain, this overview of Cochrane Reviews found it was not possible to confidently state whether TENS is effective in relieving pain compared to sham TENS, usual care/no treatment or when TENS is combined with another active treatment versus the active treatment alone. We were unable to find any reliable evidence that the effectiveness of TENS varies when using different delivery modes (e.g. different frequency, intensity or electrode placement). Background Chronic pain (pain for longer than three months) is associated with a range of common conditions and can be difficult to treat effectively. TENS is a common treatment for pain conditions and involves using a small battery‐operated unit to apply low‐intensity electrical current to the body using electrodes attached to the skin. This is suggested to relieve pain. TENS has been previously investigated by a number of Cochrane Reviews. Review question By identifying relevant Cochrane Reviews on TENS for common chronic pain conditions, we investigated whether TENS is effective in reducing pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine). Study characteristics As of November 2018, we found nine reviews eligible for inclusion. Seven reviews specifically investigated TENS for the treatment of pain/function in a variety of chronic conditions in adults. We also included one review investigating a range of electrotherapy modalities for neck pain and one review examining non‐pharmacological interventions in people with spinal cord injury. Both of these reviews included studies investigating TENS. Though the included reviews were of high quality, we found the quality of the evidence presented within the reviews to be very low. Key findings We are unable to confidently state whether TENS is effective in relieving pain in people with chronic pain. This is due to the very low quality of the evidence, and the overall small numbers of participants included in studies in the reviews. Issues with quality, study size and lack of data meant we were unable to draw any conclusion on TENS‐associated harms or side‐effects or the effect of TENS on disability, health‐related quality of life, use of pain‐relieving medicines or people's impression of how much TENS changed their condition.

Purpose: The Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) is one of the most recommended questionnaires to assess disability. Some previous studies support the assumption that the RMDQ is a unidimensional measure; however, recent studies have suggested that this measure has more than one domain and should be considered as a multidimensional scale. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyse the structure of the RMDQ in a large sample of patients with low back pain using two different statistical approaches. Methods: We analysed existing datasets from previous clinical studies. We assessed unidimensionality using Rasch analysis of item fit statistics and through principle component analysis of residuals. We also performed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to test the hypothesis of a 3-factor solution. Results: We included data from 2826 patients with non-specific low back pain. The average age of all participants included was 46.4 years, and half of the participants were women (50.1%). The Rasch analysis model showed that the RMDQ is unidimensional, with only two items demonstrating slight excessive positive outfit. Results from the CFA suggested poor fit to the data of a 3-factor solution. Conclusions: We recommend that the RMDQ should still be used as a unidimensional scale for measuring disability as the only construct. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

BackgroundThe pain threshold is traditionally conceptualised as a boundary that lies between painful and non-painful events, suggesting a reasonably stable relationship between stimulus and response. In two previous experiments, participants received laser stimuli of various intensities and rated each stimulus on the Sensation and Pain Rating Scale (SPARS), which includes ranges for rating painful and non-painful events and clearly defines the presumed boundary between them. In the second experiment, participants also provided ratings on the conventional 0-100 Numerical Rating Scale for pain (NRS) and a new rating scale for non-painful events. Those data showed the SPARS to have a curvilinear stimulus-response relationship, reflecting that several different intensities may be rated as painful and non-painful in different trials. This suggests that participants were uncertain about painfulness over a range of intensities and calls into question the idea of a boundary between non-painful and painful events. The current study aimed to determine the number of different stimulus intensities across which each participant provided ‘painful’ and ‘non-painful’ reports in different trials.MethodsWe undertook novel exploratory analyses on data from the aforementioned two experiments (n = 19, 11 female, 18-31 years old; n = 7, 5 female, 21-30 years old). We used the binomial test to formally determine the width of this ‘zone of uncertainty’ about painfulness, using ratings on the SPARS and the comparator scales, and data visualisation to assess whether trial-to-trial change in stimulus intensity influences ratings.ResultsWe found that the width of the zone of uncertainty varied notably between individuals and that the zone was non-continuous for most participants. Plots of group-level data concealed the inter-individual variability apparent in the individual plots, but still showed a wide zone of uncertainty on both the SPARS and the NRS, but a narrow zone on the scale for non-painful events. There was no evidence that trial-to-trial change in stimulus intensity influenced ratings.ConclusionsThe variability revealed by this study has important design implications for experiments that include initial calibration of repeatedly delivered stimuli. The variability also stands to inflate the size of sample that is required for adequate statistical powering of experiments, and provides rationale for the use of statistical approaches that account for individual variability in studies of pain. Finally, the high variability implies that, if experimental stimuli are to be used in clinical phenotyping, many trials may be required to obtain results that represent a single patient’s actual response profile.

In experiments on pain, participants are frequently exposed to nonpainful and painful stimuli; however, the conventional pain-rating scales lack a nonpainful range and a clear point of transition from nonpainful to painful events. The Sensation and Pain Rating Scale (SPARS) assesses the full stimulus intensity range, extending from no sensation (rating: –50) to worst pain imaginable (rating: +50), and it explicitly identifies pain threshold (rating: 0). Here, we tested the SPARS in 2 experiments by using laser heat stimuli to establish its stimulus–response characteristics (Experiment 1, N = 19, 13 stimulus intensities applied 26 times each across a 1–4 J range), and compared it to 0 to 100 scales that assess nonpainful (0: no sensation, 100: pain) and painful (0: no pain, 100: worst pain imaginable) events (Experiment 2, N = 7, 9 stimulus intensities applied 36 times each across a 1.5–4.5 J range). Despite high inter- and intraindividual variations, we found a reasonably consistent curvilinear stimulus–response relationship (the curve flattens around pain threshold), with stable response characteristics across the range of the scale. The SPARS ratings transformed to a 0 to 100 range tended to be lower than the 0 to 100 pain rating scale in the noxious stimulus intensity range and greater than the 0 to 100 nonpainful sensation scale in the non-noxious stimulus range, likely reflecting differences in scale dimensionality. The SPARS overcomes limitations in scale range inherent to conventional pain rating scales. As such, it is well suited to experimental studies that must quantify a wider range of perceptual intensity or distinguish between painful and nonpainful events. Perspective This article presents the stimulus–response characteristics of a new scale designed to allow participants to rate a range of nonpainful and painful stimuli. The scale could be useful for research that involves exposing participants to a range of stimulation intensities or requires a clear distinction between nonpainful and painful events.

Background Interest in measurement of tactile acuity in musculoskeletal practice has emerged following its link to functional reorganization of the somatosensory cortex in ongoing pain states. Several tactile acuity measurement methods have been described but have not been thoroughly investigated in the cervical region. Objective This study examined reliability, concurrent validity and responsiveness of four tests of tactile acuity—Two-point discrimination, Point-to-point, Graphesthesia, and Localisation tests—at the cervical region. Method Forty-two healthy participants were included. In Part 1 (n = 22), participants' tactile acuity was assessed at two time points, 30 min apart, to determine the test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of each of the tests. In Part 2 (n = 20), participants received five daily tactile training sessions, delivered via a vibro-tactile device. Tactile acuity was assessed pre- and post-training to examine responsiveness of each test. Results Two-point discrimination demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.85, SEM = 3.7 mm), Point-to-point and Localisation tests demonstrated good reliability (ICC = 0.60, SEM = 2.8 mm; ICC = 0.60, SEM = 8.8%), and Graphesthesia demonstrated fair reliability (ICC = 0.48, SEM = 1.9/20). There was no significant correlation among measures. Only Graphesthesia failed to show responsiveness to change following training. Conclusion The reliability of Two-point discrimination appears superior to other examined tests of tactile acuity, however measurement variability should be considered. Two-point discrimination, Point-to-point, and Localisation tests appear responsive to change, although testing in clinical samples is needed. The lack of concurrent validity among tests suggests that they cannot be used interchangeably.

This article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund. Impaired tactile acuity in people with chronic pain conditions has been suggested to reflect altered cortical representation of the painful body part, and treatments that aim to improve tactile acuity in these conditions have shown clinical benefit. Whether abnormalities in tactile acuity are a consistent feature of chronic pain remains largely unknown. The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate the literature and use meta-analysis to establish whether tactile acuity is altered in people with chronic non-neuropathic pain. We systematically searched the literature for studies that investigated tactile acuity in people with chronic non-neuropathic pain and compared it to an appropriate control group. Sixteen studies, reporting data from 5 chronic pain conditions, were included. Data were available for 18 chronic pain populations (n = 484) and 15 control populations (n = 378). Our results suggest that tactile acuity is diminished in arthritis, complex regional pain syndrome, and chronic low back pain but not in burning mouth syndrome. The strength of the available evidence is weakened by somewhat inconsistent results and the high risk of bias observed in all of the included studies. Perspective: This systematic review synthesizes the evidence for tactile acuity deficits in people with chronic non-neuropathic pain. The findings suggest that tactile acuity deficits may be characteristic of chronic pain. That tactile acuity training may be of benefit to chronic pain disorders suggests that clinical trials of this possibility appear warranted.

Objective. Chronic pain from rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions is associated with cortical changes and altered tactile acuity. Tactile acuity is considered a clinical signature of primary somatosensory representation. The two-point discrimination (TPD) threshold is increasingly used both clinically and in research. Remarkably, the reliability and precision of the measure at commonly used sites has not been determined. This study aimed to determine the utility, intra- and inter-rater reliability, bias and variability of TPD threshold assessment at the neck, back, hand and foot using mechanical callipers. Methods. Intra- and inter-rater reliability of TPD was assessed at the back, neck, hand and foot of 28 healthy young adults by 28 clinicians. Each clinician received training in the assessment of TPD using mechanical callipers and following a standardized protocol. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland Altman plots were used to assess reliability, bias and variability. Results. Intra-rater assessments in all four regions and inter-rater assessments at the neck and foot were reliable (ICC range 0.79 0.86), but large variability was seen in all assessments. Inter-rater assessment of the back (ICC = 0.66) and hand (ICC = 0.62) was deemed unreliable. Negligible systematic bias suggested learning did not affect reliability. Conclusion. Individual clinicians are able to reliably assess TPD threshold at the neck, back, hand and foot using mechanical callipers. Measures obtained by different clinicians were only reliable for the neck and foot. Large variability was observed in all assessments, which suggests clinicians should be cautious when interpreting changes in tactile acuity in individual patients. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Upregulation of defensive reflexes such as the nociceptive flexion reflex (NFR) has been attributed to sensitisation of peripheral and spinal nociceptors and are often considered biomarkers of pain. Experimental modulation of defensive reflexes raises the possibility that they might be better conceptualised as markers of descending cognitive control. Despite strongly held views on both sides and several narrative reviews, there has been no attempt to evaluate the evidence in a systematic manner. We undertook a meta-analytical systematic review of the extant English-language literature from inception. Thirty-six studies satisfied our a priori criteria. Seventeen were included in the meta-analysis. Reflexive threshold was lower in people with clinical pain than it was in pain-free controls, but reflex size, latency and duration were unaffected. The pattern of difference was not consistent with sensitisation of nociceptive neurones, as these changes were not isolated to the affected body-part, but was more consistent with top-down cognitive control reflective of heightened protection of body tissue. The pattern of modulation is dependent on potentially complex evaluative mechanisms. We offer recommendations for future investigations and suggest that defensive reflex threshold may reflect a biomarker of a broader psychological construct related to bodily protection, rather than sensitisation of primary nociceptors, spinal nociceptors or pain. SBW was supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award, Maurice de Rohan Scholarship, Ian Gould Scholarship and an Australian Bicentennial Scholarship. LG was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (PBBEP1-144848). GLM was supported by a Principal Research Fellowship from the National Health & Medical Research Council of Australia (ID 1061279); this work was supported by a project grant from the National Health & Medical Research Council of Australia to GLM (ID 1008017).

We aimed to develop a questionnaire that assesses the impact of pelvic pain on women, regardless of diagnosis, that has high utility, sound psychometric performance, easy scoring, and high reliability. Two studies, with 3 separate cohorts, were undertaken. Both studies were completed online. Studies included women with self-reported pelvic pain. Women were eligible to participate regardless of whether their pelvic pain was undiagnosed, self-diagnosed, or diagnosed by a clinician. Study 1 used a 3-round "patient-as-expert" Delphi technique. These rounds defined the 10 aspects of life with the self-reported greatest impact on the lives of women with pelvic pain, which formed the questionnaire. Study 2 used Rasch analysis to assess the psychometric properties of the resultant 10-item questionnaire. To assess its reliability, a subgroup completed the questionnaire 3 times over a 3-week period. In study 1, 443 women with pelvic pain participated. The resultant 10-item questionnaire consisted of 8 Likert questions and 2 supplemental, nonscored questions. In study 2, 1203 women with pelvic pain completed the questionnaire. Rasch analysis showed that the questionnaire targeted the pelvic pain population well, had appropriate Likert categories, constituted a unidimensional scale, and showed internal consistency. Twenty-seven women with pelvic pain completed the reliability trial. Test-retest reliability was high (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.91, P < 0.001). The resultant Pelvic Pain Impact Questionnaire assesses the life impact of pelvic pain. It uses patient-generated language, is easily administered and scored, has very strong psychometric properties, and it is suitable for research and clinical settings across primary, secondary, and tertiary care. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

This is the post-print version of the final paper published in The Journal of Pain. The published article is available from the link below. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. Copyright @ 2013 The American Pain Society. Graded motor imagery (GMI) is becoming increasingly used in the treatment of chronic pain conditions. The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize all evidence concerning the effects of GMI and its constituent components on chronic pain. Systematic searches were conducted in 10 electronic databases. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of GMI, left/right judgment training, motor imagery, and mirror therapy used as a treatment for chronic pain were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Six RCTs met our inclusion criteria, and the methodological quality was generally low. No effect was seen for left/right judgment training, and conflicting results were found for motor imagery used as stand-alone techniques, but positive effects were observed for both mirror therapy and GMI. A meta-analysis of GMI versus usual physiotherapy care favored GMI in reducing pain (2 studies, n = 63; effect size, 1.06 [95% confidence interval, .41, 1.71]; heterogeneity, I2 = 15%). Our results suggest that GMI and mirror therapy alone may be effective, although this conclusion is based on limited evidence. Further rigorous studies are needed to investigate the effects of GMI and its components on a wider chronic pain population. NHMRC

A growing body of literature associates musculoskeletal disorders with cortical reorganisation. One condition in which reorganisation is established and treatments that 'train the brain' are being widely used is chronic back pain. Recent evidence suggests that treatments that involve tactile training are more effective if they incorporate multisensory mechanisms, most obviously vision. With regard to back pain however, we must first determine if tactile function is enhanced by incorporating other modalities. A series of three cross-over experiments were conducted in healthy pain-free subjects to determine whether tactile acuity is enhanced when participants can see the skin of their back during testing. An initial randomised cross-over experiment suggested tactile acuity was significantly enhanced when participants could see their backs (t(25) = similar to 4.226, p < 0.001, r = 0.65). However, a second replication experiment was not corroborative. Both the second (F(3,66) = 1.00, p = 0.398) and third (t(9) = 0.969, p = 0.358) experiments suggested that seeing the back did not significantly affect tactile acuity, confirming that our initial results were likely due to chance. The principle that visual feedback improves tactile acuity at the hand does not apply to the back. These results strongly suggest that attempts to enhance tactile training by incorporating vision will not offer the benefit to treatment of back pain that has been observed for treatment of hand pain. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Objectives To provide sex- and age-specific normative values for health-related fitness of 9–17-year-old Australians. Methods A systematic literature search was undertaken to identify peer-reviewed studies reporting health-related fitness data on Australian children since 1985—the year of the last national fitness survey. Only data on reasonably representative samples of apparently healthy (free from known disease or injury) 9–17-year-old Australians, who were tested using field tests of health-related fitness, were included. Both raw and pseudo data (generated using Monte Carlo simulation) were combined with sex- and age-specific normative centile values generated using the Lambda Mu and Sigma (LMS) method. Sex- and age-related differences were expressed as standardised effect sizes. Results Normative values were displayed as tabulated percentiles and as smoothed centile curves for nine health-related fitness tests based on a dataset comprising 85347 test performances. Boys typically scored higher than girls on cardiovascular endurance, muscular strength, muscular endurance, speed and power tests, but lower on the flexibility test. The magnitude of the age-related changes was generally larger for boys than for girls, especially during the teenage years. Conclusion This study provides the most up-to-date sex- and age-specific normative centile values for the health-related fitness of Australian children that can be used as benchmark values for health and fitness screening and surveillance systems. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Neural representations, or neurotags, refer to the idea that networks of brain cells, distributed across multiple brain areas, work in synergy to produce outputs. The brain can be considered then, a complex array of neurotags, each influencing and being influenced by each other. The output of some neurotags act on other systems, for example, movement, or on consciousness, for example, pain. This concept of neurotags has sparked a new body of research into pain and rehabilitation. We draw on this research and the concept of a cortical body matrix - a network of representations that subserves the regulation and protection of the body and the space around it - to suggest important implications for rehabilitation of sports injury and for sports performance. Protective behaviours associated with pain have been reinterpreted in light of these conceptual models. With a particular focus on rehabilitation of the injured athlete, this review presents the theoretical underpinnings of the cortical body matrix and its application within the sporting context. Therapeutic approaches based on these ideas are discussed and the efficacy of the most tested approaches is addressed. By integrating current thought in pain and cognitive neuroscience related to sports rehabilitation, recommendations for clinical practice and future research are suggested. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Pain is an experience that powerfully influences the way we interact with our environment. What is less clear is the influence that pain has on the way we perceive our environment. We investigated the effect that the anticipation of experimental pain (THREAT) and its relief (RELIEF) has on the visual perception of space. Eighteen (11F) healthy volunteers estimated the distance to alternating THREAT and RELIEF stimuli that were placed within reachable space. The results determined that the estimated distance to the THREAT stimulus was significantly underestimated in comparison to the RELIEF stimulus. We conclude that pain-evoking stimuli are perceived as closer to the body than otherwise identical pain-relieving stimuli, an important consideration when applied to our decisions and behaviors in relation to the experience of pain. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

A growing body of literature suggests that alterations in brain structure and function are a feature of chronic back pain. Tactile acuity is considered a clinical signature of primary somatosensory representation and offers a simple measure of cortical reorganisation. Clinical interpretation of test scores from an individual patient is hampered by variance in published normative values and less than ideal inter-rater reliability. These problems might be mitigated in people with unilateral back pain by using the patient as their own control and comparing tactile acuity at the painful site to performance at the corresponding position on the non-painful side. The first step in exploring this approach is to quantify the normal sideto- side difference in healthy populations. We pooled data from three previous studies that measured lumbar tactile acuity bilaterally in healthy controls using similar protocols. We calculated the mean and variance of the absolute error between sides, the standard error of measurement and the reliable change index (RCI). The mean difference between sides was 3.2 mm ( 5.2) when assessed vertically and 1.9 mm ( 3.2) when assessed horizontally. The standard error of measurement was 4.2 mm when assessed vertically and 2.7 mm when assessed horizontally. The RCI suggests that differences of greater than 13 mm when assessed horizontally and 17 mm when assessed vertically equate to 95% confidence that a difference truly exists. Several assumptions related to the application of this approach need to be investigated further. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Background The Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) is used by physical therapists in clinical practice and in research. However, current understanding of the PSEQ's measurement properties is incomplete, and investigators cannot be confident that it provides unbiased information on patient self-efficacy. Objective The aims of this study were: (1) to investigate the scale properties of the PSEQ using Rasch analysis and (2) to determine whether age, sex, pain intensity, pain duration, and pain-related disability bias function of the PSEQ. Design This was a retrospective study; data were obtained from 3 existing studies. Methods Data were combined from more than 600 patients with low back pain of varying duration. Rasch analysis was used to evaluate targeting, category ordering, unidimensionality, person fit, internal consistency, and item bias. Results There was evidence of adequate category ordering, unidimensionality, and internal consistency of the PSEQ. Importantly, there was no evidence of item bias. Limitations The PSEQ did not adequately target the sample; instead, it targeted people with lower self-efficacy than this population. Item 7 was hardest for participants to endorse, showing excessive positive misfit to the Rasch model. Response strings of misfitting persons revealed older participants and those reporting high levels of disability. Conclusions The individual items of the PSEQ can be validly summed to provide a score of self-efficacy that is robust to age, sex, pain intensity, pain duration, and disability. Although item 7 is the most problematic, it may provide important clinical information and requires further investigation before its exclusion. Although the PSEQ is commonly used with people with low back pain, of whom the sample in this study was representative, the results suggest it targets patients with lower self-efficacy than that observed in the current sample.

Background: High-quality clinical evidence suggests that although acupuncture appears superior to usual care in the management of chronic low back pain, there is little meaningful difference between true and sham acupuncture. This suggests that the benefits of acupuncture are mediated by the placebo response. An alternative explanation is that sham acupuncture is an active treatment and shares a mechanism of action with traditionally applied acupuncture. One plausible candidate for this mechanism is improvement in self-perception mediated through the sensory discrimination like qualities of acupuncture. We aimed to compare the effects of acupuncture with a sensory discrimination training component to acupuncture without. Conclusions: Our findings are consistent with the idea that acupuncture may offer specific benefit that is not dependent on precisely where the needles are inserted so much as that the patient attends to where they are inserted. If so, the location of the needles might be better focused on the painful area and the need for penetration of the skin may be mitigated. Methods: 25 people with chronic low back pain were enroled in a randomised cross-over experiment. We compared the effect of acupuncture delivered when sensory discrimination is optimised to acupuncture delivered when it is not, on movement-related back pain immediately after each intervention. Results: We found that the average pain intensity after participants had received acupuncture with sensory discrimination training (2.8±2.5) was less than when they received acupuncture without sensory discrimination training (3.6±2.0). This difference was statistically significant (after adjustment; mean difference=−0.8, 95% CI −1.4 to −0.3; p=0.011). Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Pain is fundamental to survival, as are our perceptions of the environment. It is often assumed that we see our world as a read-out of the sensory information that we receive; yet despite the same physical makeup of our surroundings, individuals perceive differently. What if we ‘‘see’’ our world differently when we experience pain? Until now, the causal effect of experimental pain on the perception of an external stimulus has not been investigated. Eighteen (11 female) healthy volunteers participated in this randomised repeated-measures experiment, in which participants estimated the distance to a switch placed on the table in front of them. We varied whether or not the switch would instantly stop a stimulus, set to the participant’s pain threshold, being delivered to their hand, and whether or not they were required to reach for the switch. The critical result was a strong interaction between reaching and pain [F(1, 181) = 4.8, P = 0.03], such that when participants experienced pain and were required to reach for a switch that would turn off the experimental stimulus, they judged the distance to that switch to be closer, as compared to the other 3 conditions (mean of the true distance 92.6%, 95% confidence interval 89.7%–95.6%). The judged distance was smaller than estimates in the other 3 conditions (mean ± SD difference >5.7% ± 2.1%, t(181) >3.5, P < 0.01 for all 3 comparisons). We conclude that the perception of distance to an object is modulated by the behavioural relevance of the object to ongoing pain. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

The Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire (NPQ) was devised to assess how an individual conceptualizes the biological mechanisms that underpin his or her pain. Despite its widespread use, its psychometric properties have not been comprehensively interrogated. Rasch analysis was undertaken on NPQ data from a convenience sample of 300 spinal pain patients, and test-retest reliability was as- sessed in a sample of 45 low back pain patients. The NPQ effectively targeted the ability of the sample and had acceptable internal consistency and test-retest reliability. However, some items functioned er- ratically for persons of differingabilities or were psychometrically redundant. The NPQ wasreanalyzed with 7 questionable items excluded, and superior psychometric properties were observed. These find- ings suggest that the NPQ could be improved but future prospective studies including qualitative mea- sures areneeded. In summary, the NPQ isa useful tool for assessing apatient's conceptualization ofthe biological mechanisms that underpin his or her pain and for evaluating the effects of cognitive inter- ventions in clinical practice and research. These findings suggest that it has adequate psychometric properties for use with chronic spinal pain patients. Perspective: Rasch analysis was used to analyze the NPQ. Despite several limitations, these results suggest that it is a useful tool with which to assess a patient's conceptualization of the biological mechanisms that underpin his or her pain and to evaluate the effects of cognitive interventions in clinical practice and research. a 2013 by the American Pain Society