Heritability of musculoskeletal pain and pain sensitivity phenotypes: 2 generations of the Raine Study.

ABSTRACT: There is a need to better understand biological factors that increase the risk of persistent musculoskeletal (MSK) pain and heightened pain sensitivity. Knowing the heritability (how genes account for differences in people's traits) can enhance the understanding of genetic vs environmental influences of pain and pain sensitivity. However, there are gaps in current knowledge, including the need for intergenerational studies to broaden our understanding of the genetic basis of pain. Data from Gen1 and Gen2 of the Raine Study were used to investigate the heritability of MSK pain and pressure and cold pain sensitivity. Participants included parents (Gen1, n = 1092) and their offspring (Gen2, n = 688) who underwent a battery of testing and questionnaires including pressure and cold pain threshold testing and assessments of physical activity, sleep, MSK pain, mental health, and adiposity. Heritability estimates were derived using the Sequential Oligogenic Linkage Analysis Routines software. Heritability estimates for MSK pain and pressure pain sensitivity were significant, accounting for between 0.190 and 0.289 of the variation in the phenotype. By contrast, heritability of cold pain sensitivity was not significant. This is the largest intergenerational study to date to comprehensively investigate the heritability of both MSK pain and pain sensitivity, using robust statistical analysis. This study provides support for the heritability of MSK pain and pain sensitivity to pressure, suggesting the need for further convergence of genetic and environmental factors in models for the development or maintenance of these pain disorders.

Changes in daily mental health service use and mortality at the commencement and lifting of COVID-19 'lockdown' policy in 10 UK sites: a regression discontinuity in time design.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate changes in daily mental health (MH) service use and mortality in response to the introduction and the lifting of the COVID-19 'lockdown' policy in Spring 2020. DESIGN: A regression discontinuity in time (RDiT) analysis of daily service-level activity. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Mental healthcare data were extracted from 10 UK providers. OUTCOME MEASURES: Daily (weekly for one site) deaths from all causes, referrals and discharges, inpatient care (admissions, discharges, caseloads) and community services (face-to-face (f2f)/non-f2f contacts, caseloads): Adult, older adult and child/adolescent mental health; early intervention in psychosis; home treatment teams and liaison/Accident and Emergency (A&E). Data were extracted from 1 Jan 2019 to 31 May 2020 for all sites, supplemented to 31 July 2020 for four sites. Changes around the commencement and lifting of COVID-19 'lockdown' policy (23 March and 10 May, respectively) were estimated using a RDiT design with a difference-in-difference approach generating incidence rate ratios (IRRs), meta-analysed across sites. RESULTS: Pooled estimates for the lockdown transition showed increased daily deaths (IRR 2.31, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.87), reduced referrals (IRR 0.62, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.70) and reduced inpatient admissions (IRR 0.75, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83) and caseloads (IRR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.91) compared with the pre lockdown period. All community services saw shifts from f2f to non-f2f contacts, but varied in caseload changes. Lift of lockdown was associated with reduced deaths (IRR 0.42, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.66), increased referrals (IRR 1.36, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.60) and increased inpatient admissions (IRR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.42) and caseloads (IRR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12) compared with the lockdown period. Site-wide activity, inpatient care and community services did not return to pre lockdown levels after lift of lockdown, while number of deaths did. Between-site heterogeneity most often indicated variation in size rather than direction of effect. CONCLUSIONS: MH service delivery underwent sizeable changes during the first national lockdown, with as-yet unknown and unevaluated consequences.

What does best practice care for musculoskeletal pain look like? Eleven consistent recommendations from high-quality clinical practice guidelines: systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To identify common recommendations for high-quality care for the most common musculoskeletal (MSK) pain sites encountered by clinicians in emergency and primary care (spinal (lumbar, thoracic and cervical), hip/knee (including osteoarthritis [OA] and shoulder) from contemporary, high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). DESIGN: Systematic review, critical appraisal and narrative synthesis of MSK pain CPG recommendations. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Included MSK pain CPGs were written in English, rated as high quality, published from 2011, focused on adults and described development processes. Excluded CPGs were for: traumatic MSK pain, single modalities (eg, surgery), traditional healing/medicine, specific disease processes (eg, inflammatory arthropathies) or those that required payment. DATA SOURCES: Four scientific databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Physiotherapy Evidence Database) and four guideline repositories. RESULTS: 6232 records were identified, 44 CPGs were appraised and 11 were rated as high quality (low back pain: 4, OA: 4, neck: 2 and shoulder: 1). We identified 11 recommendations for MSK pain care: ensure care is patient centred, screen for red flag conditions, assess psychosocial factors, use imaging selectively, undertake a physical examination, monitor patient progress, provide education/information, address physical activity/exercise, use manual therapy only as an adjunct to other treatments, offer high-quality non-surgical care prior to surgery and try to keep patients at work. CONCLUSION: These 11 recommendations guide healthcare consumers, clinicians, researchers and policy makers to manage MSK pain. This should improve the quality of care of MSK pain.

The relationship beween posture and back muscle endurance in industrial workers with flexion-related low back pain.

This preliminary cross-sectional study was undertaken to determine if there were measurable relationships between posture, back muscle endurance and low back pain (LBP) in industrial workers with a reported history of flexion strain injury and flexion pain provocation. Clinical reports state that subjects with flexion pain disorders of the lumbar spine commonly adopt passive flexed postures such as slump sitting and present with associated dysfunction of the spinal postural stabilising musculature. However, to date there is little empirical evidence to support that patients with back pain, posture their spines differently than pain-free subjects. Subjects included 21 healthy industrial workers and 24 industrial workers with flexion-provoked LBP. Lifestyle information, lumbo-pelvic posture in sitting, standing and lifting, and back muscle endurance were measured. LBP subjects had significantly reduced back muscle endurance (P < 0.01). LBP subjects sat with less hip flexion, (P = 0.05), suggesting increased posterior pelvic tilt in sitting. LBP subjects postured their spines significantly closer to their end of range lumbar flexion in 'usual' sitting than the healthy controls (P < 0.05). Correlations between increased time spent sitting, physical inactivity and poorer back muscle endurance were also identified. There were no significant differences found between the groups for the standing and lifting posture measures. These preliminary results support that a relationship may exist between flexed spinal postures, reduced back muscle endurance, physical inactivity and LBP in subjects with a history of flexion injury and pain.