AcaWiki - User contributions [en]

A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain

2009-10-06T16:43:24Z

199.94.15.169:

{{Summary
|title=A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain
|authors=Joachim Scholz, Richard Mannion, Daniela Hord, Robert Griffin, Bhupendra Rawal, Hui Zheng, Daniel Scoffings, Amanda Phillips, Jianli Guo, Rodney Laing, Salahadin Abdi, Isabelle Decosterd, Clifford Woolf,
|journal=PLoS Med
|pub_date=2009/04
|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1000047
|doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000047
|subject=Medicine
|tags=pain, tool, author plos medicine
|summary=-
==Background==

Pain, although unpleasant, is essential for survival. Whenever the body is damaged, nerve cells detecting the injury send an electrical message via the spinal cord to the brain and, as a result, action is taken to prevent further damage. Usually pain is short-lived, but sometimes it continues for weeks, months, or years. Long-lasting (chronic) pain can be caused by an ongoing, often inflammatory condition (for example, arthritis) or by damage to the nervous system itself—experts call this “neuropathic” pain. Damage to the brain or spinal cord causes central neuropathic pain; damage to the nerves that convey information from distant parts of the body to the spinal cord causes peripheral neuropathic pain. One example of peripheral neuropathic pain is “radicular” low back pain (also called sciatica). This is pain that radiates from the back into the legs. By contrast, axial back pain (the most common type of low back pain) is confined to the lower back and is non-neuropathic.

==Why Was This Study Done?==

Chronic pain is very common—nearly 10% of American adults have frequent back pain, for example—and there are many treatments for it, including rest, regulated exercise (physical therapy), pain-killing drugs (analgesics), and surgery. However, the best treatment for any individual depends on the exact nature of their pain, so it is important to assess their pain carefully before starting treatment. This is usually done by scoring overall pain intensity, but this assessment does not reflect the characteristics of the pain (for example, whether it occurs spontaneously or in response to external stimuli) or the complex biological processes involved in pain generation. An assessment designed to take such factors into account might improve treatment outcomes and could be useful in the development of new therapies. In this study, the researchers develop and test a new, standardized tool for the assessment of chronic pain that, by examining many symptoms and signs, aims to distinguish between pain subtypes.

==What Did the Researchers Do and Find?==

One hundred thirty patients with several types of peripheral neuropathic pain and 57 patients with non-neuropathic (axial) low back pain completed a structured interview of 16 questions and a standardized bedside examination of 23 tests. Patients were asked, for example, to choose words that described their pain from a list provided by the researchers and to grade the intensity of particular aspects of their pain from zero (no pain) to ten (the maximum imaginable pain). Bedside tests included measurements of responses to light touch, pinprick, and vibration—chronic pain often alters responses to harmless stimuli. Using “hierarchical cluster analysis,” the researchers identified six subgroups of patients with neuropathic pain and two subgroups of patients with non-neuropathic pain based on the patterns of symptoms and signs revealed by the interviews and physical tests. They then used “classification tree analysis” to identify the six questions and ten physical tests that discriminated best between pain subtypes and combined these items into a tool for a Standardized Evaluation of Pain (StEP). Finally, the researchers asked whether StEP, which took 10–15 minutes, could identify patients with radicular back pain and discriminate them from those with axial back pain in an independent group of 137 patients with chronic low back pain. StEP, they report, accurately diagnosed these two conditions and was well accepted by the patients.

==What Do These Findings Mean?==

These findings indicate that a standardized assessment of pain-related signs and symptoms can provide a simple, quick diagnostic procedure that distinguishes between radicular (neuropathic) and axial (non-neuropathic) low back pain. This distinction is crucial because these types of back pain are best treated in different ways. In addition, the findings suggest that it might be possible to identify additional pain subtypes using StEP. Because these subtypes may represent conditions in which different pain mechanisms are acting, classifying patients in this way might eventually enable physicians to tailor treatments for chronic pain to the specific needs of individual patients rather than, as at present, largely guessing which of the available treatments is likely to work best.

'''The original author of this summary is [[http://www.plosmedicine.org/ PLOS Medicine]]'''
|journal_volume=6
|pub_open_access=Yes
}}

A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain

2009-10-06T16:42:50Z

199.94.15.169:

{{Summary
|title=A Novel Tool for the Assessment of Pain: Validation in Low Back Pain
|authors=Joachim Scholz, Richard Mannion, Daniela Hord, Robert Griffin, Bhupendra Rawal, Hui Zheng, Daniel Scoffings, Amanda Phillips, Jianli Guo, Rodney Laing, Salahadin Abdi, Isabelle Decosterd, Clifford Woolf,
|journal=PLoS Med
|pub_date=2009/04
|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1000047
|doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000047
|subject=Medicine
|tags=pain, tool, author plos medicine
|summary=-
==Background==

Pain, although unpleasant, is essential for survival. Whenever the body is damaged, nerve cells detecting the injury send an electrical message via the spinal cord to the brain and, as a result, action is taken to prevent further damage. Usually pain is short-lived, but sometimes it continues for weeks, months, or years. Long-lasting (chronic) pain can be caused by an ongoing, often inflammatory condition (for example, arthritis) or by damage to the nervous system itself—experts call this “neuropathic” pain. Damage to the brain or spinal cord causes central neuropathic pain; damage to the nerves that convey information from distant parts of the body to the spinal cord causes peripheral neuropathic pain. One example of peripheral neuropathic pain is “radicular” low back pain (also called sciatica). This is pain that radiates from the back into the legs. By contrast, axial back pain (the most common type of low back pain) is confined to the lower back and is non-neuropathic.

==Why Was This Study Done?==

Chronic pain is very common—nearly 10% of American adults have frequent back pain, for example—and there are many treatments for it, including rest, regulated exercise (physical therapy), pain-killing drugs (analgesics), and surgery. However, the best treatment for any individual depends on the exact nature of their pain, so it is important to assess their pain carefully before starting treatment. This is usually done by scoring overall pain intensity, but this assessment does not reflect the characteristics of the pain (for example, whether it occurs spontaneously or in response to external stimuli) or the complex biological processes involved in pain generation. An assessment designed to take such factors into account might improve treatment outcomes and could be useful in the development of new therapies. In this study, the researchers develop and test a new, standardized tool for the assessment of chronic pain that, by examining many symptoms and signs, aims to distinguish between pain subtypes.

==What Did the Researchers Do and Find?==

One hundred thirty patients with several types of peripheral neuropathic pain and 57 patients with non-neuropathic (axial) low back pain completed a structured interview of 16 questions and a standardized bedside examination of 23 tests. Patients were asked, for example, to choose words that described their pain from a list provided by the researchers and to grade the intensity of particular aspects of their pain from zero (no pain) to ten (the maximum imaginable pain). Bedside tests included measurements of responses to light touch, pinprick, and vibration—chronic pain often alters responses to harmless stimuli. Using “hierarchical cluster analysis,” the researchers identified six subgroups of patients with neuropathic pain and two subgroups of patients with non-neuropathic pain based on the patterns of symptoms and signs revealed by the interviews and physical tests. They then used “classification tree analysis” to identify the six questions and ten physical tests that discriminated best between pain subtypes and combined these items into a tool for a Standardized Evaluation of Pain (StEP). Finally, the researchers asked whether StEP, which took 10–15 minutes, could identify patients with radicular back pain and discriminate them from those with axial back pain in an independent group of 137 patients with chronic low back pain. StEP, they report, accurately diagnosed these two conditions and was well accepted by the patients.

==What Do These Findings Mean?==

These findings indicate that a standardized assessment of pain-related signs and symptoms can provide a simple, quick diagnostic procedure that distinguishes between radicular (neuropathic) and axial (non-neuropathic) low back pain. This distinction is crucial because these types of back pain are best treated in different ways. In addition, the findings suggest that it might be possible to identify additional pain subtypes using StEP. Because these subtypes may represent conditions in which different pain mechanisms are acting, classifying patients in this way might eventually enable physicians to tailor treatments for chronic pain to the specific needs of individual patients rather than, as at present, largely guessing which of the available treatments is likely to work best.

'''The original author of this summary is [[http://www.plosmedicine.org/|LOS Medicine]]'''
|journal_volume=6
|pub_open_access=Yes
}}

Form:Summary

2009-10-06T16:13:41Z

199.94.15.169:

<div class="floatright plainlinks" style="margin-left: 10px;">
{{#imagelink: Post.png||acawiki}}
</div>
<noinclude>
Thanks for contributing a summary to AcaWiki!
'''What is the title of the paper?'''{{#forminput:Summary}}
</noinclude><includeonly>
{{{for template|Summary}}}
{{{info|add title=Add a Summary|edit title=Edit Summary|page name=<Summary[title]>}}}
''Required fields in red. If you can furnish further bibliographic information please do so. You can find this information directly on the paper or searching for a record on [http://scholar.google.com/ Google Scholar].''
----
{| class="formtable"
! Title*
| {{{field|title|mandatory}}}
|-
! Authors*
| {{{field|authors|mandatory|autocomplete on property=Author}}} ''First Name Last Name, First Name Last Name ''
----
|-
! Journal or Book:
|{{{field|journal|mandatory|autocomplete on property=Journal}}} <noinclude>Volume Number: {{{field|journal_volume|size=5}}}</noinclude>
|-
! Publication Date:
| {{{field|pub_date|input type=text}}} ''year or yyyy/mm/dd''
|-
! Online URL:
| {{{field|url|list|input type=text}}}
|-
! DOI:
| {{{field|doi}}} ''Digital Object Identifier''
|-
! Subject:
| {{{field|subject}}} ''Enter subject or use tags.
|-
! Tags:
| {{{field|tags|list|input type=text|autocomplete on property=Tag}}}
|-
<noinclude>! ISSN:
| {{{field|issn}}}
''International Standard Serial Number''</noinclude>
|-
<noinclude>! Published in an Open Access journal:
| {{{field|pub_open_access}}}</noinclude>
|}
----
'''Summary:''' ''Please include an objective summary of the main findings from the paper here. You may want to include a high-level summary of the theoretical background, methods, and results.''

{{{field|summary|input type=textarea|rows=12}}}

'''Theoretical and practical relevance:''' ''You may want to write about the implications of this research for theory and/or the real world. You may also want to link to any news stories or blog posts about the article here.''

{{{field|relevance|input type=textarea|rows=5}}}

{{{end template}}}

{{{standard input|minor edit}}} {{{standard input|watch}}}

{{{standard input|save}}} {{{standard input|preview}}} {{{standard input|changes}}} {{{standard input|cancel}}}
</includeonly>

Please do not post copyrighted material; you can read our [[Posting Guidelines]]. If you need help adding your summaries feel free to [mailto:admin@acawiki.org contact us]. You may also import [[Special:BibTexImport| BibTeX]].''