Exploring pain phenotypes in workers with chronic low back pain: Application of IMMPACT recommendations.

Lisa C Carlesso, Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme, William Shaw, Christian Larivière, Manon Choinière
{"title":"Exploring pain phenotypes in workers with chronic low back pain: Application of IMMPACT recommendations.","authors":"Lisa C Carlesso,&nbsp;Yannick Tousignant-Laflamme,&nbsp;William Shaw,&nbsp;Christian Larivière,&nbsp;Manon Choinière","doi":"10.1080/24740527.2020.1870103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a major cause of disability globally. Stratified care has been proposed as a means to improve prognosis and treatment but is generally based on limited aspects of pain, including biopsychosocial drivers. <b>Aims</b>: Following Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) recommendations, the present study explored pain phenotypes with a sample of workers with CLBP, a population for which no pain phenotypes have been derived to date. <b>Methods</b>: A cross-sectional design was used with a sample of 154 workers with CLBP attending a rehabilitation clinic, recruited in person and from social media. Latent class analysis was used to identify subgroups of patients with different pain profiles based on ten pain indicators (pain variability, pain intensity, pain quality, somatization, sleep quality, depression, fatigue, pain catastrophizing, neuropathic pain, and central sensitization). <b>Results</b>: The majority of the sample (85%) were recruited through social media. Both the two-class and three-class solutions were found to be satisfactory in distinguishing phenotypes of workers with CLBP. Three variables proved particularly important in distinguishing between the pain phenotypes-pain quality, fatigue, and central sensitization-with higher scores on these indicators associated with pain phenotypes with higher pain burden. Increased chronic pain self-efficacy, work-related support, and perceived work abilities were protective risk factors for being in a higher pain burden class. <b>Conclusions</b>: The present study is the first to explore IMMPACT recommendations for pain phenotyping with workers with CLBP. Future prospective research will be needed to validate the proposed pain phenotypes.</p>","PeriodicalId":53214,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Pain-Revue Canadienne de la Douleur","volume":"5 1","pages":"43-55"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/24740527.2020.1870103","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Pain-Revue Canadienne de la Douleur","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24740527.2020.1870103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Background: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a major cause of disability globally. Stratified care has been proposed as a means to improve prognosis and treatment but is generally based on limited aspects of pain, including biopsychosocial drivers. Aims: Following Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) recommendations, the present study explored pain phenotypes with a sample of workers with CLBP, a population for which no pain phenotypes have been derived to date. Methods: A cross-sectional design was used with a sample of 154 workers with CLBP attending a rehabilitation clinic, recruited in person and from social media. Latent class analysis was used to identify subgroups of patients with different pain profiles based on ten pain indicators (pain variability, pain intensity, pain quality, somatization, sleep quality, depression, fatigue, pain catastrophizing, neuropathic pain, and central sensitization). Results: The majority of the sample (85%) were recruited through social media. Both the two-class and three-class solutions were found to be satisfactory in distinguishing phenotypes of workers with CLBP. Three variables proved particularly important in distinguishing between the pain phenotypes-pain quality, fatigue, and central sensitization-with higher scores on these indicators associated with pain phenotypes with higher pain burden. Increased chronic pain self-efficacy, work-related support, and perceived work abilities were protective risk factors for being in a higher pain burden class. Conclusions: The present study is the first to explore IMMPACT recommendations for pain phenotyping with workers with CLBP. Future prospective research will be needed to validate the proposed pain phenotypes.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探讨慢性腰痛工人的疼痛表型:impact建议的应用。
背景:慢性腰痛(CLBP)是全球致残的主要原因。分层护理已被提出作为改善预后和治疗的一种手段,但通常是基于疼痛的有限方面,包括生物心理社会驱动因素。目的:根据临床试验中方法、测量和疼痛评估倡议(impact)的建议,本研究以患有CLBP的工人为样本探讨了疼痛表型,该人群迄今尚未获得疼痛表型。方法:采用横断面设计,对154名在康复诊所就诊的CLBP工人进行抽样,这些工人是亲自和从社交媒体上招募的。基于10个疼痛指标(疼痛变异性、疼痛强度、疼痛质量、躯体化、睡眠质量、抑郁、疲劳、疼痛灾难化、神经性疼痛和中枢致敏),使用潜在分类分析来确定不同疼痛特征的患者亚组。结果:大多数样本(85%)是通过社交媒体招募的。发现两类和三类溶液在区分CLBP工人表型方面都令人满意。三个变量被证明对区分疼痛表型特别重要——疼痛质量、疲劳和中枢敏化——在这些指标上得分越高,疼痛表型越重。慢性疼痛自我效能、工作相关支持和感知工作能力的增加是处于较高疼痛负担类别的保护性风险因素。结论:本研究首次探讨了impact对CLBP工人疼痛表型的建议。未来的前瞻性研究将需要验证提出的疼痛表型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
36
期刊最新文献
Prospective Preference Assessment for the Psilocybin for Enhanced Analgesia in Chronic nEuropathic PAIN (PEACE-PAIN) Trial. Assessing Quality of Referrals to a Community-Based Chronic Pain Clinic. The Influence of Loneliness on Pain Outcomes for Adolescents: A Cross-Sectional Survey. Chronic pain experiences of immigrant Indian women in Canada: A photovoice exploration. [Enhancing Chronic Pain Management: Exploring the Essential Contribution of Primary Care Nurses].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1