RESUMO

The Fear-Avoidance Components Scale (FACS) and the Fear of Daily Activities Questionnaire (FDAQ) assess fear-avoidance model components. However, the questionnaires are not available in Brazilian Portuguese. This study aimed to translate the original English FACS and FDAQ into Brazilian (Br) Portuguese and assess their measurement properties in patients with Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP). One hundred thirty volunteers with CLBP participated in this study. Structural validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and hypothesis testing for construct validity were analyzed. Results indicated a 2-factor solution for the FACS-Br, while the FDAQ-Br had a one-factor solution. Internal consistency showed acceptable Cronbach's alpha (alpha >.8). Suitable reliability was found for the FDAQ-Br (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient [ICC] = .98). For both FACS-Br factors, suitable reliability was found as well (ICC = .95 and .94). Hypothesis testing for construct validity confirmed more than 75% of the hypotheses proposed a priori for the FACS maladaptive pain/movement-related beliefs domain and the FDAQ-Br. In conclusion, the FACS-Br and FDAQ-Br demonstrated acceptable reliability, internal consistency, and structural validity measurement properties and their correlation (r < .50) suggests that the tools are not interchangeable measures.

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Placebo effects are responses capable of modulating pain and influencing treatment response. Two mechanisms are commonly related to placebo effects: expectations and conditioning. However, the research in this field is focused on laboratory studies with healthy participants. This study aims to identify whether a conditioning procedure with positive induced expectations about spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) will result in greater hypoalgesic effects in adults with chronic low back pain (CLBP) in a clinical trial design. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This trial will enrol 264 patients with non-specific CLBP, aged 18-60 years. Patients will undergo a calibration test to determine the thermal pain threshold for the hidden pain conditioning procedure. Afterward, they will be randomised to one of the three groups: hidden pain conditioning with positive induced expectations-group one (G1); positive expectations-group two (G2) and neutral expectations-group three (G3). Patients will receive instructions to manipulate the expectations. The pretreatment heat pain test will be performed before the SMT and after the intervention patients will undergo again the heat pain intensity test. However, only patients in G1 will receive hidden pain conditioning to reinforce the association between SMT and pain intensity reduction. All patients will undergo five sessions of SMT. The outcomes will be assessed immediately after the last session and at the 6 weeks and 3-month follow-ups. All statistical analyses will be conducted following intention-to-treat principles, and the treatment effects will be determined with linear mixed models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Federal University of São Carlos approved this research (Process n° 52359521.1.0000.5504). All participants will give written informed consent. Dissemination of the results will include publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at conferences. If positive expectations and classical conditioning improve outcomes, it may support the administration of such intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05202704.

Assuntos

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the effects of star-shape Kinesio taping (KT) compared with both sham KT and minimal intervention (MI) on pain intensity and postural control. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Outpatient physical therapy. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 120 people with chronic low back pain (CLBP) aged 18-60 years (N=120). INTERVENTIONS: Star-shape KT, sham KT (no tension), and MI (educational booklet for self-management counseling). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were pain intensity and center of pressure (COP) mean sway speed, and disability score (Oswestry Disability Index) was a secondary outcome. The outcomes were obtained immediately after initial KT application, on the seventh day of intervention and at the 1-month follow-up. Linear mixed-model analyses using Bonferroni post hoc analyses were applied to investigate between-group differences. The model included treatment, time, and treatment×time interaction as fixed effects. RESULTS: Pain intensity was significantly lower for the star-shape KT group than for the MI group (mean difference [MD], -1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.63 to -0.07) immediately after the intervention and on the seventh day of intervention (MD, -1.32; 95% CI, -2.56 to -0.07). No difference in pain intensity between star-shape KT vs sham-KT groups was observed. In addition, no significant between-group differences were observed for the COP mean sway speed and disability score at any of the follow-up times. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed no meaningful effect of star-shape KT intervention on pain intensity and postural control in people with CLBP compared with MI or sham KT. The observed reduction of 1.3 units between star-shape KT and MI groups was statistically different, but it could not be considered clinically relevant. The results of this trial suggest that benefits from KT are more likely attributable to contextual factors rather than specific taping parameters.

Assuntos

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The relationship between elevated inflammatory cytokine levels and peak pain intensity following acute musculoskeletal injury has not been fully elucidated in high risk subgroups. Identifying the role that these cytokines have on pain responses may help with developing tailored therapeutic approaches. METHODS: Data were collected from 54 participants who were vulnerable to a robust pain response and delayed recovery following musculoskeletal injury. Participants completed baseline active and resting pain measurements and a blood draw before an exercised induced shoulder muscle injury. Participants returned at 24 and 48 hours postinjury for follow-up pain measurements and blood draws. Blood plasma was analyzed for interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, and tumor necrosis factor α. Pearson bivariate correlations were performed between cytokines and pain measurements to identify candidate variables for stepwise multiple linear regression predicting pain intensity reports. RESULTS: Pearson bivariate correlation identified 13/45 correlations between inflammatory cytokines and resting pain intensity and 9/45 between inflammatory cytokines and active pain (P<0.05, r≥0.3 or r≤-0.3). This led to 5 stepwise multiple linear regression models, of which 4 met the statistical criterion (P<0.0167); including IL-10 baseline plasma concentrations predicting active pain (r=0.19) and resting pain (r=0.15) intensity 48 hours postinjury. IL-6 and IL-10 plasma concentrations at 48 hours were respectively associated with active and resting pain at 48 hours. DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that elevated concentrations of inflammatory cytokines, specifically IL-10 (at baseline and 48 h) and IL-6 (at 48 h), may play a role in heightened pain responses following exercise-induced muscle injury.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Objective: We aimed to empirically derive psychosocial and pain sensitivity subgroups using cluster analysis within a sample of individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) and to investigate derived subgroups for differences in pain and disability outcomes. Methods: Eighty female participants with CMP answered psychosocial and disability scales and were assessed for pressure pain sensitivity. A cluster analysis was used to derive subgroups, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to investigate differences between subgroups. Results: Psychosocial factors (kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing, anxiety, and depression) and overall pressure pain threshold (PPT) were entered into the cluster analysis. Three subgroups were empirically derived: cluster 1 (high pain sensitivity and high psychosocial distress; n = 12) characterized by low overall PPT and high psychosocial scores; cluster 2 (high pain sensitivity and intermediate psychosocial distress; n = 39) characterized by low overall PPT and intermediate psychosocial scores; and cluster 3 (low pain sensitivity and low psychosocial distress; n = 29) characterized by high overall PPT and low psychosocial scores compared to the other subgroups. Cluster 1 showed higher values for mean pain intensity (F(2,77) = 10.58, p < 0.001) compared with cluster 3, and cluster 1 showed higher values for disability (F(2,77) = 3.81, p = 0.03) compared with both clusters 2 and 3. Conclusions: Only cluster 1 was distinct from cluster 3 according to both pain and disability outcomes. Pain catastrophizing, depression, and anxiety were the psychosocial variables that best differentiated the subgroups. Overall, these results call attention to the importance of considering pain sensitivity and psychosocial variables to obtain a more comprehensive characterization of CMP patients' subtypes.

Assuntos