Myersludvigsen1765

The objective of this study was to conduct an updated systematic review of diagnostic criteria for myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) used in clinical trials of physical therapy interventions from 2007 to 2019.

MEDLINE and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) were searched using the following MeSH keywords "trigger points," "trigger point," "myofascial trigger point," "myofascial trigger points," "myofascial pain," and "myofascial pain syndrome." The MeSH keywords were combined by using Boolean operators "OR"/"AND." All physiotherapy clinical trials including patients with musculoskeletal conditions characterized by at least 1 active MTrP or latent MTrP in any body area were selected. We pooled data from an individual criterion and criteria combinations used to diagnose MTrPs. The protocol was developed in accordance with the PRISMA-P guidelines.

Of 478 possibly relevant publications, 198 met the inclusion criteria. Of these 198 studies, 129 studies (65.1%) stated specifically the diagnostic criteria t in the literature.

This systematic review was registered under the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, PROSPERO number CRD42018087420.

This systematic review was registered under the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, PROSPERO number CRD42018087420.

A literature review was conducted to compare placebo responses in a recent trial-which implemented an accurate pain reporting (APR) and placebo response reduction (PRR) training program-with placebo responses in similar previous trials in chronic lower back pain (CLBP) that did not use such training.

A literature search was performed to find parallel design, randomized, controlled trials of pharmacological treatments administered orally or through intravenous injection for CLBP. Studies were assessed for the proportion of placebo responders, defined as the proportion of patients in the placebo group with ≥30% reduction in pain intensity. A χ analysis was performed on the proportion of responders from the SPRINT trial and from other similar studies.

Of 844 studies identified in the initial screening process, 16 studies were included for comparison. The percentage of placebo responders was statistically significantly lower in the SPRINT study (19.1%) compared with other CLBP trials (38.0%) (P=0.003). Our als may effectively decrease the placebo response leading to increased assay sensitivity.

Little is known about the epidemiology of neuropathic pain in primary care patients consulting with low back-related leg pain. We aimed to describe prevalence, characteristics, and clinical course of low back-related leg pain patients with and without neuropathic pain, consulting with their family doctor in the United Kingdom.

This was a prospective cohort study. Data were collected using a standardized baseline clinical examination and self-report questionnaires at baseline, 4, 12, and 36 months. We identified cases of neuropathic pain using 3 definitions 2 based on clinical diagnosis (sciatica, with and without evidence of nerve root compression on magnetic resonance imaging), one on the self-report version of Leeds Assessment for Neurological Symptoms and Signs. Differences between patients with and without neuropathic pain were analyzed comparing each definition. Clinical course (mean pain intensity measured as the highest of leg or back pain intensity mean of 3 Numerical Rating Scales, each 0 to 10) was investigated using linear mixed models over 36 months.

Prevalence of neuropathic pain varied from 48% to 74% according to definition used. At baseline, patients with neuropathic pain had more severe leg pain intensity, lower pain self-efficacy, more patients had sensory loss than those without. Methylene Blue order Distinct profiles were apparent depending on neuropathic pain definition. Mean pain intensity reduced after 4 months (6.1 to 3.9 [sciatica]), most rapidly in cases defined by clinical diagnosis.

This research provides new information on the clinical course of neuropathic pain and a better understanding of neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain patients consulting in primary care.

This research provides new information on the clinical course of neuropathic pain and a better understanding of neuropathic pain in low back-related leg pain patients consulting in primary care.

Perceived injustice is a maladaptive cognitive appraisal of pain or injury, characterized by attributions of blame, unfairness, severity of loss, and irreparability of loss. Research suggests that perceived injustice may negatively affect pain outcomes by inhibiting the development of pain-related acceptance. The current study aimed to extend cross-sectional research by testing whether pain acceptance mediates the effects of perceived injustice on pain-related outcomes longitudinally.

Data was analyzed from a prospective study to examine the potential mediating role of pain acceptance on recovery 3 months after an episode of low back pain. Using Mechanical Turk, we recruited participants who experienced an episode of back pain within the preceding 2 weeks, 343 of whom completed measures of perceived injustice, pain acceptance, pain ratings, and quality of life at each of 3 timepoints (recruitment, 1 mo later, and 3 mo later). Path analyses were conducted to examine pain acceptance at 1 month as a potential mediator of the relationship between perceived injustice at recruitment and pain intensity, disability, and depressive symptoms at 3 months.

Results indicated that perceived injustice at recruitment was directly related to pain intensity, disability, and depressive symptoms 3 months later, and that pain acceptance partially mediated these relationships.

Although these findings provide further support for pain acceptance as a buffer for the deleterious effects of perceived injustice, they also highlight that adjunctive mechanisms should be investigated to provide more comprehensive clinical insight.

Although these findings provide further support for pain acceptance as a buffer for the deleterious effects of perceived injustice, they also highlight that adjunctive mechanisms should be investigated to provide more comprehensive clinical insight.