Central Sensitization in Patients Attending Physical Therapy for Musculoskeletal Disorders

L. A., H. D., W. B, S. D., O. C, Louw H, Farrell K
{"title":"Central Sensitization in Patients Attending Physical Therapy for Musculoskeletal Disorders","authors":"L. A., H. D., W. B, S. D., O. C, Louw H, Farrell K","doi":"10.26420/physmedrehabilint.2021.1194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Study Design: Survey study. Objective: To determine what percentage of patients attending physical therapy with musculoskeletal pain present with central sensitization and which patient factors may be predictive of central sensitization. Background: Treating pain, especially chronic pain is clinically challenging. It has been suggested that pain be sub-classified as either nociceptive, peripheral neuropathic or central sensitization, to aid clinical decision-making to inform the treatment approach for specific pain conditions. Methods: A convenience sample of adult patients (18-65) attending PT for musculoskeletal pain were asked to complete a demographic questionnaire and the central sensitization inventory. Results: Two-hundred and forty-five patients completed the central sensitization inventory, resulting in a mean score of 26.88 ± 15.54. The majority of the patients were classified as “low” in regard to central sensitization scores and nearly one in five patients (n = 39; 17.3%) were classified as “high” in regard to central sensitization scores. The variables of ‘being disabled’ (β = 13.73), ‘currently experiencing feelings of depression’ (β = 9.35), and ‘identifying as female’ (β = 3.60), had the largest partial effects on central sensitization as individual variables. Conclusions: Approximately one in five patients attending PT for musculoskeletal pain present with a central sensitization inventory score of > 40, suggesting presence of central sensitization. Patients that reported feeling disabled, experiencing feelings of depression and ‘identifying as female’ were more likely to score > 40 on the central sensitization inventory. Central sensitization is relatively common in patients attending PT for musculoskeletal pain and various patient characteristics may suggest higher potential CSI scores at intake.","PeriodicalId":90945,"journal":{"name":"Physical medicine and rehabilitation international","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical medicine and rehabilitation international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26420/physmedrehabilint.2021.1194","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study Design: Survey study. Objective: To determine what percentage of patients attending physical therapy with musculoskeletal pain present with central sensitization and which patient factors may be predictive of central sensitization. Background: Treating pain, especially chronic pain is clinically challenging. It has been suggested that pain be sub-classified as either nociceptive, peripheral neuropathic or central sensitization, to aid clinical decision-making to inform the treatment approach for specific pain conditions. Methods: A convenience sample of adult patients (18-65) attending PT for musculoskeletal pain were asked to complete a demographic questionnaire and the central sensitization inventory. Results: Two-hundred and forty-five patients completed the central sensitization inventory, resulting in a mean score of 26.88 ± 15.54. The majority of the patients were classified as “low” in regard to central sensitization scores and nearly one in five patients (n = 39; 17.3%) were classified as “high” in regard to central sensitization scores. The variables of ‘being disabled’ (β = 13.73), ‘currently experiencing feelings of depression’ (β = 9.35), and ‘identifying as female’ (β = 3.60), had the largest partial effects on central sensitization as individual variables. Conclusions: Approximately one in five patients attending PT for musculoskeletal pain present with a central sensitization inventory score of > 40, suggesting presence of central sensitization. Patients that reported feeling disabled, experiencing feelings of depression and ‘identifying as female’ were more likely to score > 40 on the central sensitization inventory. Central sensitization is relatively common in patients attending PT for musculoskeletal pain and various patient characteristics may suggest higher potential CSI scores at intake.
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
参加肌肉骨骼疾病物理治疗的患者的中枢致敏
研究设计:调查研究。目的:确定接受物理治疗的肌肉骨骼疼痛患者中枢性致敏的比例,以及哪些患者因素可以预测中枢性致敏。背景:治疗疼痛,特别是慢性疼痛在临床上具有挑战性。有人建议将疼痛分为伤害性、外周神经性或中枢致敏性,以帮助临床决策,为特定疼痛状况的治疗方法提供信息。方法:方便抽样的成年患者(18-65岁)参加PT肌肉骨骼疼痛被要求完成人口统计问卷和中心致敏性量表。结果:245例患者完成了中心致敏性量表,平均得分为26.88±15.54。大多数患者在中枢致敏评分方面被归类为“低”,近五分之一的患者(n = 39;17.3%)在中枢致敏评分方面被归为“高”。“残疾”(β = 13.73)、“目前感到抑郁”(β = 9.35)和“认为自己是女性”(β = 3.60)这些变量作为个体变量对中枢敏化的部分影响最大。结论:大约五分之一因肌肉骨骼疼痛接受PT治疗的患者存在中枢致敏性评分为bbbb40,表明存在中枢致敏性。报告感觉残疾、经历抑郁和“自我认同为女性”的患者更有可能在中枢致敏性量表上获得bb40分。中枢致敏在因肌肉骨骼疼痛而接受PT治疗的患者中相对常见,不同的患者特征可能表明在摄入时潜在的CSI评分更高。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Study of Red Ginseng Preparation HRG80 for Relieving Muscle Pain/Soreness and Supporting the Neuromuscular Performance of Elite Weightlifters in Intense Resistance Exercise: An Open-Label, Randomized, Crossover Trial Decannulation Timing is an Expression of Neurological Recovery Time: The Need to Define a Performance within a Time Frame Vincer EMO Project: Physical Activity for Haemophilic Patients. How We Faced Up SARS COV2 Pandemic Risk Assessment System of Fall in the Elderly Using Artificial Intelligence and Cloud Computing Short Wave Diathermy (SWD) Therapy in Patients with Adhesive Capsulitis of Shoulder
×
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