Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 13 de 13
Filter
Add more filters










Publication year range
1.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38484833

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence and moderators of dropout rates among adults with knee or hip osteoarthritis participating in exercise randomized controlled trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES: Two authors searched Embase, CINAHL, PsycARTICLES, and PubMed up to 01/09/2023. STUDY SELECTION: We included RCTs of exercise interventions in people with knee or hip osteoarthritis that reported dropout rates. DATA EXTRACTION: Dropout rates from exercise and control conditions and exerciser/participant, provider, and design/implementation related moderators. DATA SYNTHESIS: In total, 209 RCTs involving 277 exercise arms in 13,102 participants were included (mean age at study level=64 years; median prevalence of men participants=26.8%). The trim-and-fill-adjusted prevalence of dropout across all RCTs was 17.5% (95% CI=16.7%-18.2%), which is comparable with dropout observed in control conditions (trim-and-fill-adjusted odds ratio=0.89; 95% CI=0.71-1.12, P=.37). Higher prevalence of antidepressant use at study-level predicted higher dropout (R2=0.75, P=.002, N RCTs=6, n exercisers=412). Supervision by an exercise professional was associated with lower dropout rates, with a trim-and-fill-adjusted rate of 13.2% (95% CI=11.7%-14.9%) compared with 20.8% without supervision (95% CI=18.3%-23.5%) (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Dropout rates for exercise in RCTs are comparable with control conditions, suggesting that exercise is a generally well-accepted intervention. However, interventions should be supervised by an exercise professional, such as a physiotherapist or exercise physiologist, to further minimize the risk of dropout. Health professionals should consider participants' use of antidepressants as a risk factor for dropout from exercise.

2.
Anat Rec (Hoboken) ; 307(2): 248-272, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36594663

ABSTRACT

Pain is one of the most prevalent and long-term adverse effects described by people who have undergone breast cancer surgery. Non-helpful perceptions and thoughts about pain may contribute to the transition of acute to persistent pain. Adding educational interventions to the current physical therapy program in this population may help to improve or prevent persistent pain. Pain neuroscience education (PNE) is a type of educational intervention that addresses the experience of pain in a broader sense by explaining pain not only from a biomedical perspective, but also from a psychological and social perspective. A double-blinded randomized controlled trial (EduCan trial) investigated whether PNE, in addition to a standard physiotherapy program immediately after surgery for breast cancer, was more effective on somatosensory functioning in the short (4 months postoperatively) and long term (18 months postoperatively), than providing a biomedical explanation for pain. Somatosensory functioning was evaluated using a self-reported questionnaire as well as a comprehensive quantitative sensory testing evaluation. The findings of this study revealed that adding six sessions of PNE to a standard physical therapy program (n = 184) did not result in a significantly different course of somatosensory functioning up to 18 months postoperatively as compared to biomedical pain education. These findings provide an interesting basis for future research into who should receive PNE after surgery for breast cancer (e.g., patient profiling or phenotyping) and how we can tailor it to the individual to increase its effectiveness.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Pain , Physical Therapy Modalities/education
3.
J Occup Rehabil ; 33(4): 757-765, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37171771

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of pain neuroscience education compared to biomedical pain education after breast cancer surgery on (1) work status, (2) time until work resumption, and (3) change in return-to-work expectations up to 18 months post-surgery. METHODS: Participants were randomly assigned to either pain neuroscience education (intervention group) or biomedical pain education (control group) in addition to a standard physical therapy program after surgery for breast cancer. The first four months following surgery, one to two physiotherapy sessions and three educational sessions were scheduled. After, two educational sessions and two physiotherapy sessions were held at six and eight months postoperatively. All outcomes were assessed at four, six, eight, 12 and 18 months postoperatively. RESULTS: At 12 months, in the intervention group, 71% of the women returned to work compared to 53% in the control group (18% points difference, 95%CI:-0.1 to 35;p = 0.07). At 18 months, the differences decreased to 9% points, 95%CI:-26 to 7;p = 0.35). Neither time until work resumption (p = 0.46) nor change in estimation of own ability to return to work up to 18 months postoperatively (p = 0.21) significantly differed between both groups. CONCLUSION: No significant differences were found regarding return to work outcomes between women receiving pain neuroscience education versus biomedical pain education after breast cancer surgery. Further research is warranted to explore the potential role of pain neuroscience education in return-to-work interventions following breast cancer surgery.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Pain , Physical Therapy Modalities
4.
Pain ; 164(7): 1489-1501, 2023 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36637138

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Pain is one of the most common and long-lasting side effects reported by women surgically treated for breast cancer. Educational interventions may optimize the current physical therapy modalities for pain prevention or relief in this population. Pain neuroscience education (PNE) is an educational intervention that explains the pain experience not only from a biomedical perspective but also the psychological and social factors that contribute to it. Through a double-blinded randomized controlled trial (EduCan trial) it was investigated if PNE, in addition to the standard physiotherapy program immediately after breast cancer surgery, was more effective over the course of 18 months postoperatively than providing a biomedical explanation for pain. Primary outcome was the change in pain-related disability (Pain Disability Index, 0-70) over 12 months. Secondary outcomes included change in pain intensity, upper limb function, physical activity level, and emotional functioning over 4, 6, 8, 12, and 18 months postoperatively. Multivariate linear models for repeated (longitudinal) measures were used to compare changes. Preoperative and postoperative moderators of the change in pain-related disability were also explored. Of 184 participants randomized, the mean (SD) age in the PNE and biomedical education group was 55.4 (11.5) and 55.2 (11.4) years, respectively. The change in pain-related disability from baseline to 12 months postoperatively did not differ between the 2 groups (PNE 4.22 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.40-7.03], biomedical 5.53 [95% CI: 2.74-8.32], difference in change -1.31 [95% CI: -5.28 to 2.65], P = 0.516). Similar results were observed for all secondary outcomes. Future research should explore whether a more patient-tailored intervention would yield better results.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Pain , Mastectomy , Emotions , Physical Therapy Modalities
5.
Disabil Rehabil ; 45(11): 1865-1876, 2023 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35617510

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Pain and sensory disturbances are common side effects of breast cancer treatment. Differential somatosensory functioning may reflect distinct pathophysiological backgrounds and therapeutic needs. Aim was to examine whether questionnaires evaluating signs and symptoms related to somatosensory functioning correlate sufficiently with quantitative sensory testing (QST) in breast cancer survivors to warrant consideration for somatosensory profiling in clinical practice. METHODS: One year after breast cancer surgery, 147 women underwent QST and completed following questionnaires: Douleur Neuropathique en 4 questions (DN4), Central Sensitization Inventory, Margolis Pain Diagram and Visual Analog Scales (VAS). Associations between the questionnaires and QST were evaluated using Spearman correlation coefficients (rs). RESULTS: Significant but weak (rs < 0.30) correlations were found between total DN4 score and QST results at the inner upper arm for detection of sharp stimuli (rs = 0.227), cold stimuli (rs = -0.186), and painful heat stimuli (rs = 0.179), as well as between QST evaluating conditioned pain modulation and the Margolis Pain Diagram on one hand (rs = 0.176) and minimum-maximum pain intensity differences (VAS) on the other (rs = -0.170). CONCLUSION: Questionnaires evaluating signs and symptoms related to somatosensory functioning are insufficient for somatosensory profiling. Although somatosensory profiling may be valuable in a mechanism-based management, more research on the most appropriate clinical tools is needed.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONClinicians should be able to recognize that patients with persistent pain or sensory disturbances following breast cancer surgery may have a component of altered somatosensory processing as a significant contributor to their complaint in order to address it appropriately.Somatosensory profiling has yet to be implemented into clinical practice.No evidence-based recommendations can be made on the use of self-reported questionnaires to assess somatosensory processing in a breast cancer population based on the findings of this study.It is suggested to combine information on how individuals process and experience somatosensory stimulation with information from the patient interview or questionnaires to consider which biological, psychological and/or social factors may drive or sustain these neurophysiological processes.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Cancer Survivors , Humans , Female , Pain Threshold/physiology , Pain Threshold/psychology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Pain , Surveys and Questionnaires
6.
Physiother Theory Pract ; 39(9): 2000-2014, 2023 Sep 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35378054

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Pain after breast cancer surgery is a common and disabling problem. A reliable and valid questionnaire to assess pain-related disability is the Pain Disability Index (0-70). However, properties of the Dutch version (PDI-DLV) have never been investigated in this population. OBJECTIVE: To assess psychometric properties of the PDI-DLV after breast cancer surgery. METHODS: For reliability, relative and absolute reliability were calculated with a one-week test-retest interval, as well as internal consistency. Moreover, content and construct validity were examined to evaluate validity. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three women were included. Relative reliability was good (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.80). Standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change (absolute reliability) were 5.57 and 15.45 points, respectively. The mean difference between two measurements was -1.98 points, with 95% limits of agreement equal to 13.19 and -17.15. The within-subjects coefficient of variation was 59%. Internal consistency was confirmed (α = 0.87). The PDI-DLV was scored as understandable and complete (content validity). Construct validity was supported by confirmation of more than 75% of the tested hypotheses and of the one-factor model. CONCLUSION: The PDI-DLV is a valid questionnaire to assess pain-related disability 1 year after breast cancer surgery. Although absolute reliability is disputable, its good relative reliability allows evaluating changes between subjects.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of Results , Language , Neck Pain , Surveys and Questionnaires , Disability Evaluation
7.
Disabil Rehabil ; 45(25): 4165-4174, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36398698

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Understanding the enablers of and barriers to physical activity (PA) participation in people with fibromyalgia (PwF) is an essential first step to developing effective PA interventions. This systematic review examined correlates of PA across the socio-ecological model (i.e., intra-personal, inter-personal, environmental, and policy level) in PwF. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL were searched from inception until 12 July 2022. Keywords included "physical activity" or "exercise" and "fibromyalgia" or "fibrositis." Summary coding was used to quantify the PA correlates. RESULTS: Out of 74 PA correlates retrieved from 39 articles (n = 9426), co-morbid depression and higher pain intensity were found to be consistent (i.e., reported in four or more articles) barriers to PA in PwF, while higher self-efficacy and better endurance were found to be consistent enablers to PA. Despite the abundance of evidence for the PA benefits for PwF, we only found consistent evidence for PA correlates at the intrapersonal level. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals should consider mental and physical health barriers when promoting PA in PwF. There remains a need to better understand social, environmental, and policy-related factors associated with PA participation in PwFImplications for rehabilitationCo-morbid depression is a notable barrier to physical activity participation in people with fibromyalgia.Experienced pain intensity should be considered as a barrier when promoting physical activity for people with fibromyalgia.Rehabilitation professionals should facilitate self-efficacy in physical activity interventions for people with fibromyalgia.Rehabilitation professionals should promote endurance when motivating people with fibromyalgia towards an active lifestyle.


Subject(s)
Fibromyalgia , Humans , Exercise , Comorbidity , Life Style , Self Efficacy
8.
Support Care Cancer ; 30(5): 4465-4475, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35112213

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Knowledge regarding risk factors for pain in the long term after surgery for breast cancer may be of great value in preventing this prevalent and debilitating side effect. Despite the biopsychosocial nature of pain, the predictive value of both pre- and postoperative biopsychosocial functioning for long-term pain intensity and pain-related disability has not yet been studied. METHODS: One hundred sixty-six women planned for unilateral breast cancer surgery were included in this prospective cohort study. Pre- and postoperative outcomes related to pain, psychosocial, and somatosensory functioning (questionnaires and quantitative sensory testing) were evaluated as risk factors for pain intensity (visual analog scale) and pain-related disability (pain disability index) 1 year after surgery for breast cancer. Both bivariable and stepwise linear regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: The most consistent biopsychosocial risk factors were symptoms related to altered central somatosensory functioning (central sensitization inventory), psychological symptoms, and social support (psychological symptoms and support subscale of McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire). Results also showed that a pre- and postoperative disturbed functioning of the somatosensory nervous system in the surgical area could provide additional information regarding pain intensity or pain-related disability in the long term after surgery for breast cancer. CONCLUSION: This study revealed several biopsychosocial characteristics that might be used to identify women more vulnerable to have pain and pain-related disability in the long term after surgery for breast cancer, allowing for more effective pain management and prevention.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Disability Evaluation , Female , Humans , Pain , Pain, Postoperative/epidemiology , Pain, Postoperative/etiology , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Risk Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires
9.
Pain Med ; 23(6): 1162-1175, 2022 05 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34908144

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Quantitative sensory testing (QST) consists of noninvasive psychophysical assessment techniques to evaluate the functioning of the somatosensory nervous system. Despite the importance of reliability for the correct use of QST results in research and clinical practice, the relative and absolute intra- and inter-rater reliability of a comprehensive QST protocol to evaluate the functioning of both the peripheral and central somatosensory nervous system in a breast cancer population has not yet been investigated. SETTING: University Hospitals, Leuven, Belgium. SUBJECTS: Thirty women at least 6 months after unilateral breast cancer surgery. METHODS: The protocol included nine static and dynamic QST methods (mechanical pain-detection thresholds, pressure pain thresholds, thermal pain-detection thresholds for heat and cold, temporal summation, and conditioned pain modulation [CPM]) performed in the surgical area and in more distant regions. Absolute and relative intra-rater reliability (60-minute interval) and inter-rater reliabilty (1-week interval) were evaluated with intraclass correlation coefficients, standard error of measurement, and Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: Moderate to excellent relative intra-rater reliability and inter-rater reliability were found for the evaluation of mechanical thresholds, pressure pain thresholds, and temporal summation. The reliability of the CPM paradigm was considered weak. Systematic bias between raters was noticed for the detection of mechanical and cold stimuli at the non-affected trunk and for CPM. CONCLUSIONS: Except for the evaluation of CPM, the QST protocol was found suitable for identifying differences between subjects (relative reliability) and for individual follow-up after breast cancer surgery (limited systematic bias) during a 1-week time frame. Additional research is required to determine the measurement properties that influence CPM test stability to establish a more reliable CPM test paradigm.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Pain , Pain Measurement/methods , Pain Threshold/physiology , Reproducibility of Results
11.
Clin J Pain ; 37(7): 538-564, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33883413

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Quantitative sensory testing (QST) is a noninvasive technique to evaluate functioning of the somatosensory system. In many women surgically treated for breast cancer (BC), somatosensory functioning is disturbed with high prevalence of sensory loss and/or pain. The aims of this systematic review were (1) to summarize literature about QST methods; (2) to summarize the results within women surgically treated for BC (patients and survivors); (3) to compare QST results between women surgically treated for BC with and without pain; and (4) to compare the results between women surgically treated for BC and women without history of BC. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted up to February 2020. Included studies had to report on QST methods (mechanical or thermal detection-pain thresholds, pressure pain thresholds [PPT], temporal summation [TS], or conditioned pain modulation [CPM]) in women over 18 years with-without pain, who had undergone unilateral surgery for BC. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies were included. Discrepancies in QST methods were greatest for TS and CPM. A local disturbance in thermal detection and an increased pain facilitation were found in BC survivors with pain in the surgical area. BC survivors with upper limb pain had significantly lower PPT at the surgical area and PPT were also significantly lower compared with women without history of BC, at affected and nonaffected sides for both local and remote body regions. DISCUSSION: Standardized QST incorporating assessments of CPM is warranted in order to draw conclusions about neurobiological mechanisms of pain and somatosensory disturbances after surgical treatment for BC and to enhance mechanism-based management of these sequelae.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Arm , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Pain , Pain Measurement , Pain Threshold
12.
Clin Rehabil ; 35(10): 1364-1382, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33813914

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To synthesize the evidence on the effectiveness of pain science education on pain, psychological factors and physical functioning in adults who underwent surgery. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search of English articles using PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Library. REVIEW METHODS: The search strategy was constructed as follows: (((pain) AND (education)) OR (pain education)) AND (surgery). Only controlled quantitative studies in adults reporting outcome(s) on pain, psychological factors and/or physical functioning were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tools. P-values and corresponding effect sizes for interaction-effect (time × group) portrayed the difference in change over time between groups were of interest. The last search was conducted on February 28, 2021. RESULTS: Nine papers (n = 1078) were deemed eligible for this review. Two randomized controlled trials showed significant interaction effects. Breast cancer patients who had received one preoperative pain science education session showed a significant increase in postoperative pain compared to controls (P-value = 0.0394). Furthermore, psychological factors (pain catastrophizing and kinesiophobia) decreased in participants who had received pain science education before total knee arthroplasty, while this was not the case in the control group (P-value < 0.001, ƞ2p:0.11). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, pain science education did not result in any significant postoperative effects on pain, psychological factors and/or physical functioning compared to controls. There is currently no strong evidence for the implementation of pain science education in the perioperative period.Registration number: PROSPERO: ID 161267, registration number CRD42020161267.


Subject(s)
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee , Pain, Postoperative , Adult , Humans , Preoperative Care
13.
BMJ Open ; 9(1): e025742, 2019 01 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30612114

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Over the past decades, awareness on the importance of educational interventions in cancer pain management has increased. However, education is often restricted to biomedical pain management instructions. A more modern educational approach, also known as pain neuroscience education (PNE), explains pain from a biopsychosocial perspective. We hypothesise that this more comprehensive educational approach in the early treatment phase of breast cancer will lead to more beneficial effects for cancer pain management. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to investigate the effectiveness of this PNE intervention, in addition to best evidence physical therapy modalities for treatment and prevention of pain, physical, emotional and work-related functioning after breast cancer surgery, compared with a traditional biomedical educational intervention. METHODS: A double-blinded randomised controlled trial has been started in November 2017 at the University Hospitals of Leuven. Immediately after breast cancer surgery, all participants (n=184) receive a 12-week intensive standard physical therapy programme. They receive three additional refresher sessions at 6, 8 and 12 months postsurgery. In addition, participants receive three educational sessions during the first-month postsurgery and three 'booster sessions' at 6, 8 and 12 months postsurgery. In the intervention group, the content of the education sessions is based on the modern PNE approach. Whereas in the control group, the education is based on the traditional biomedical approach. The primary outcome parameter is pain-related disability 1 year after surgery. Secondary outcomes related to other dimensions of pain, physical, emotional and work-related functioning at 1-week, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 18 months postsurgery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. This protocol has been approved by the ethical committee of the University Hospitals of Leuven. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed scientific journals and presentations at congresses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03351075.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/complications , Pain/prevention & control , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Physical Therapy Modalities/education , Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Double-Blind Method , Emotions , Female , Humans , Mastectomy , Pain/rehabilitation , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Work Capacity Evaluation
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...