Search

Objectives To estimate the internal consistency, test–retest reliability and comparability of paper and computer versions of the Finnish version of the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK-FIN) among patients with chronic pain. In addition, patients’ personal experiences of completing both versions of the TSK-FIN and preferences between these two methods of data collection were studied. Design Test–retest reliability study. Paper and computer versions of the TSK-FIN were completed twice on two consecutive days. Participants The sample comprised 94 consecutive patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain participating in a pain management or individual rehabilitation programme. The group rehabilitation design consisted of physical and functional exercises, evaluation of the social situation, psychological assessment of pain-related stress factors, and personal pain management training in order to regain overall function and mitigate the inconvenience of pain and fear-avoidance behaviour. Results The mean TSK-FIN score was 37.1 [standard deviation (SD) 8.1] for the computer version and 35.3 (SD 7.9) for the paper version. The mean difference between the two versions was 1.9 (95% confidence interval 0.8 to 2.9). Test–retest reliability was 0.89 for the paper version and 0.88 for the computer version. Internal consistency was considered to be good for both versions. The intraclass correlation coefficient for comparability was 0.77 (95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.85), indicating substantial reliability between the two methods. Conclusion Both versions of the TSK-FIN demonstrated substantial intertest reliability, good test–retest reliability, good internal consistency and acceptable limits of agreement, suggesting their suitability for clinical use. However, subjects tended to score higher when using the computer version. As such, in an ideal situation, data should be collected in a similar manner throughout the course of rehabilitation or clinical research.

We examined the relative impact of baseline anxiety, depression and fear of movement on health related quality of life at 12-month follow-up after a multidisciplinary pain management programme. One hundred and eleven patients who had chronic musculoskeletal pain (mean age 45 years, 65% women) attended during 2003–2005 a multidisciplinary three-phase pain management programme with a total time frame of six to seven months, totalling 19 days. The Beck Anxiety Inventory was used to rate anxiety, the Beck Depression Inventory depression, the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia fear of movement. The generic 15D questionnaire was used to assess health related quality of life. Baseline data were collected at admission, follow-up data at 12 months. Mean health related quality of life increased significantly from baseline to 12-month follow-up. Anxiety at baseline predicted significant negative change in the health related quality of life, depression predicted significant positive change in the health related quality of life. Fear of movement did not predict any significant change in the health related quality of life. We concluded that patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain and mild to moderate depression benefit from a multidisciplinary pain management programme in contrast to anxious patients. The findings imply further research with bigger sample sizes, other than HRQoL outcome measures as well as with other groups of patients.

Objective The aim of this study was to clarify the association of fear of movement and physical activity among patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Methods The sample comprised 93 patients participating in a multidisciplinary pain management programme. The purpose of the programme was to regain overall functioning by means of physical and functional exercises, education and personal pain management training. Tampa Scale of Kinesio-phobia and Leisure Time Physical Activity questionnaires were completed at baseline, and at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups. Results At baseline, low and medium kinesiophobia groups showed more leisure-time physical activity than did the high kinesiophobia group (p = 0.024). At a 6-month follow-up the high kinesiophobia group had increased their physical activity index to the level of the low and medium kinesiophobia groups and maintained that change to 12-month follow-up. The effect sizes of the change in the physical activity index and pain intensity at the 12-month follow-up were both moderate (0.56) in the high kinesiophobia group. Conclusion The change in physical activity and kinesiophobia was associated with the level of baseline kinesiophobia. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation seems to produce favourable effects in terms of physical activity and pain among the high kinesiophobia patients.

[Abstract.] Objectives: To create reference values for the general Finnish population using the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK-FIN), to study gender differences in the TSK-FIN, to assess the internal consistency of the TSK-FIN, to estimate the prevalence of high levels of kinesiophobia in Finnish men and women, and to examine the association between kinesio-phobia and leisure-time physical activity and the impact of co-morbidities on kinesiophobia. Methods: The study population comprised 455 men and 579 women. Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire about their socio-demographic factors, leisure-time physical activity, co-morbidities and kinesiophobia. Results: The mean TSK-FIN score was significantly higher for men (mean 34.2, standard deviation (SD) 6.9) compared with women (mean 32.9, SD 6.5), with an age-adjusted p=0.004 for the difference between men and women. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.72, indicating substantial internal consistency. Men over 55 years of age and women over 65 years of age had a higher (p

We describe a middle-aged patient, in whom a rare subluxation of the costotransversal joint caused a severe axillary pain. Diagnosis was not achieved by imaging studies or electroneuromyography, but instead simply by palpation. A good treatment outcome was obtained by manipulation.

The aim of the present study was to develop a reliable assessment of pain behaviour performed during the execution of a range of functional assessment measures. For the initial reliability study 18 subjects (consecutive referrals) were assessed. Subjects were observed and videotaped during a variety of physical tasks and demonstrations of pain behaviour were recorded; the videotapes were scored by two independent observers on two occasions. The relationships between pain behaviour, distress and physical function and impairment were also investigated in a group of 51 patients with chronic back pain. Self-report of disability and pain intensity were assessed using the Finnish version of Oswestry disability questionnaire and the pain visual analogue scale (VAS). Depression and somatic perception were assessed using the modified Zung and modified somatic perception questionnaire. The Tampa scale for kinesiophobia was used to evaluate fear of movement and (re)injury. The results of the intra- and interobserver reliability study demonstrate good to excellent levels of agreement. The exception was facial expression (kappa 0.29), which was excluded from the final instrument. There was a strong correlation between pain behaviour and subjective pain report and disability (p < 0.01). The correlations between total pain behaviour and performance of physical function tasks is striking (p < 0.01). Subjective disability was analysed by means of multiple regression analysis. Pain measured on the VAS was the most important variable explaining 36% of the variance, pain behaviour and pain combined explained 48% of the variance for self reported disability. In conclusion, this functional videobased assessment of pain behaviour is a reliable measure of pain behaviour. The total scores for pain behaviour correlate with tasks that involve the back; tests involving upper limbs were not affected. This test is suitable for the assessment of those with pain problems specifically involving the back. Furthermore, in the group studied pain and pain behaviour were the two most important determinants of self-reported disability.