Defining Growing Pains: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Up to one third of children may be diagnosed with growing pains, but considerable uncertainty surrounds how to make this diagnosis. The objective of this study was to detail the definitions of growing pains in the medical literature. METHODS: Scoping review with 8 electronic databases and 6 diagnostic classification systems searched from their inception to January 2021. The study selection included peer-reviewed articles or theses referring to "growing pain(s)" or "growth pain(s)" in relation to children or adolescents. Data extraction was performed independently by 2 reviewers. RESULTS: We included 145 studies and 2 diagnostic systems (ICD-10 and SNOMED). Definition characteristics were grouped into 8 categories: pain location, age of onset, pain pattern, pain trajectory, pain types and risk factors, relationship to activity, severity and functional impact, and physical examination and investigations. There was extremely poor consensus between studies as to the basis for a diagnosis of growing pains. The most consistent component was lower limb pain, which was mentioned in 50% of sources. Pain in the evening or night (48%), episodic or recurrent course (42%), normal physical assessment (35%), and bilateral pain (31%) were the only other components to be mentioned in more than 30% of articles. Notably, more than 80% of studies made no reference to age of onset in their definition, and 93% did not refer to growth. Limitations of this study are that the included studies were not specifically designed to define growing pains. CONCLUSIONS: There is no clarity in the medical research literature regarding what defines growing pain. Clinicians should be wary of relying on the diagnosis to direct treatment decisions.

Family history of pain and risk of musculoskeletal pain in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Emerging evidence suggests that musculoskeletal (MSK) pain should be viewed from a biopsychosocial perspective and consider the influence of family factors. We conducted a review with meta-analysis to provide summary estimates of effect of family history of pain on childhood MSK pain and explore whether specific family pain factors influence the strength of the association (PROSPERO CRD42018090130). Included studies reported associations between family history of pain and nonspecific MSK pain in children (age <19 years). The outcome of interest was MSK pain in children. We assessed the methodological quality using a modified version of the Quality in Prognosis Studies instrument and quality of evidence for the main analyses using the GRADE criteria. After screening of 7281 titles, 6 longitudinal and 23 cross-sectional studies were included. Moderate quality evidence from 5 longitudinal studies (n = 42,131) showed that children with a family history of MSK pain had 58% increased odds of experiencing MSK pain themselves (odds ratio [OR] 1.58, 95% confidence interval 1.20-2.09). Moderate quality evidence from 18 cross-sectional studies (n = 17,274) supported this finding (OR 2.02, 95% 1.69-2.42). Subgroup analyses showed that the relationship was robust regardless of whether a child's mother, father, or sibling experienced pain. Odds were higher when both parents reported pain compared with one ([mother OR = 1.61; father OR = 1.59]; both parents OR = 2.0). Our findings show moderate quality evidence that children with a family history of pain are at higher risk of experiencing MSK pain. Understanding the mechanism by which this occurs would inform prevention and treatment efforts.

Is there an association between diabetes and neck and back pain? A systematic review with meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Approximately half of the population will experience either low back pain or neck pain, at some point in their lives. Previous studies suggest that people with diabetes are more likely to present with chronic somatic pain, including shoulder, knee and spinal pain. This study aimed to systematically review and appraise the literature to explore the magnitude as well as the nature of the association between diabetes and back, neck, or spinal (back and neck) pain. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT: A systematic search was performed using the Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Web of Science electronic databases. Studies which assessed the association between diabetes and back or neck pain outcomes, in participants older than 18 years of age were included. Two independent reviewers extracted data on the incidence of pain and reported associations. RESULTS: Eight studies were included in the meta-analyses. Meta-analyses showed that people with diabetes are more likely to report low back pain [5 studies; n: 131,431; odds ratio (OR): 1.35; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.20 to 1.52; p<0.001] and neck pain (2 studies; n: 6,560; OR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.47; p = 0.01) compared to those without diabetes. Results from one longitudinal cohort study suggested that diabetes is not associated with the risk of developing future neck, low back or spinal pain. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes is associated with low back and neck individually, and spinal pain. The longitudinal analysis showed no association between the conditions. Our results suggest that diabetes co-exists with back pain; however, a direct causal link between diabetes and back pain was not established. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration CRD42016050738.

Are perinatal factors associated with musculoskeletal pain across the lifespan? A systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal conditions are common health issues with great impact on individuals. Although many factors have been associated with the development of musculoskeletal pain, such as perinatal factors, its aetiology is still poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: To systematically investigate whether perinatal factors can increase the risk of having musculoskeletal pain across the lifespan. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science and EMBASE databases were searched from their inception to December 2017. Descriptors used in our search strategy were related to "perinatal factors" and "musculoskeletal pain". There were no language, age, sex or date restrictions. Meta-analysis was used to pool the estimates of association between perinatal factors and musculoskeletal pain. RESULTS: Among the six articles included in this systematic review, three were extracted for the meta-analysis. The pooled of three and two studies showed no association between chronic musculoskeletal pain and low birth weight (OR 1.8, 95% CI 0.9-3.8, I2 = 0; n = 157) or pre-term birth (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.0-4.5; I2 = 78%; n = 374) in adults, respectively. Overall, the quality of evidence after applying the GRADE approach was very low across all the studies. CONCLUSION: In adults, our meta-analysis showed no association between birth weight or pre-term birth and musculoskeletal pain, and the quality of the evidence was very low. Thus, the very low quality of evidence and limited number of studies do not suggest a direct clear association. Further high-quality longitudinal studies accounting for more relevant confounders are needed to better understand the complex mechanism that may operate between perinatal factors and musculoskeletal pain.

Contributions of birthweight, annualised weight gain and BMI to back pain in adults: a population-based co-twin control study of 2754 Australian twins.

PURPOSE: To investigate associations between anthropometric measures (birthweight, weight gain and current BMI) and back pain; and to determine whether these associations differ between those born with low or full birthweight. METHODS: The cross-sectional associations between the lifetime prevalence of back pain and anthropometric measures (birthweight, weight gain and current BMI) among 2754 adult twins were investigated in three stages: total sample; within-pair case-control for monozygotic and dizygotic twins together; and within-pair case-control analysis separated by dizygotic and monozygotic. Results were expressed as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Birthweight was not associated with back pain (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.99-1.00), but a weak association was found between weight gain (OR 1.01; CI 1.00-1.01) or current BMI (OR 1.02; 95% CI 1.00-1.05) and back pain in the total sample analysis. These associations did not remain significant after adjusting for genetics. The associations did not differ between those whose were born with low or full birthweight. CONCLUSION: Birthweight was not associated with prevalence of back pain in adulthood. Weight gain and current BMI were weakly associated with back pain prevalence in the total sample analysis but did not differ between those born with low or full birthweight. However, the small-magnitude association only just achieved significance and appeared to be confounded by genetics and the early shared environment. Our results suggest that a direct link between these predictors and back pain in adults is unlikely. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

What is the effect of health coaching on physical activity participation in people aged 60 years and over? A systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Physical inactivity is common in older age, yet increased activity benefits older people in terms of preventing chronic disease and maximising independence. Health coaching is a behaviour change intervention that has been shown to increase physical activity in clinical populations. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the effect of health coaching on physical activity, mobility, quality of life and mood in older people. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, PEDro, SPORTDiscus, LILACS and CINAHL databases were used to identify randomised controlled trials which evaluated the effect of health coaching on physical activity (primary outcome) among people aged 60+. Secondary outcomes were mobility, quality of life and mood. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs, Hedges' g) with 95% CIs from random effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: 27 eligible trials were included. Health coaching had a small, statistically significant effect on physical activity (27 studies; SMD = 0.27; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.37; p<0.001). There was no evidence of an effect of health coaching on mobility (eight studies; SMD = 0.10; 95% CI -0.03 to 0.23; p=0.13), quality of life (eight studies; SMD = 0.07; 95% CI -0.06 to 0.20; p<0.05) or mood (five studies; SMD = 0.02; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.16; p=0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Health coaching significantly increased physical activity in people aged 60+. There was no evidence of an effect of health coaching on quality of life, mobility and mood, so different approaches may be required to impact on these outcomes.

Does sedentary behavior increase the risk of low back pain? A population-based co-twin study of Spanish twins.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between sedentary lifestyle and low back pain (LBP) remains unclear and previous research has not accounted for genetic and early environmental factors. PURPOSE: Our aim was to investigate if sedentary behavior is associated with the lifetime prevalence of persistent LBP and the risk of developing persistent LBP, care-seeking due to LBP, and activity limiting LBP when genetics and early environmental factors are accounted for. STUDY DESIGN: Both cross-sectional and longitudinal designs with a within-pair twin case-control were implemented. PATIENT SAMPLE: There were 2,148 twins included in the cross-sectional analysis whereas 1,098 twins free of persistent LBP at baseline were included in the longitudinal analysis. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sedentary behavior was the explanatory variable. Lifetime prevalence of LBP was the outcome variable in the cross-sectional analysis. The incidence of persistent LBP, care-seeking due to LBP, and activity limiting LBP were the outcome variables for the longitudinal analysis. METHODS: This observational study was supported by a grant in 2012. No competing interests were declared. RESULTS: In the cross-sectional analysis, sedentary behavior was slightly associated with an increased prevalence of persistent LBP in females but not in males. This association was not apparent when genetics and early environmental factors were accounted for. We acknowledge that the small sample included in the co-twin analyses have yielded wide confidence intervals, and that caution should be exercised when interpreting and an association may not be ruled out. In the longitudinal analysis, sedentary behavior did not significantly increase the risk of persistent LBP, care-seeking due to LBP, or activity limiting LBP. CONCLUSIONS: Sedentary behavior is associated with concurrent LBP. However, this association is weak; it only appears in females and decreases when accounting for genetics. Future studies using a twin design with larger samples should be conducted to further test these findings.

Are obesity and body fat distribution associated with low back pain in women? A population-based study of 1128 Spanish twins.

PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between different measures of obesity and chronic low back pain (LBP) using a within-pair twin case-control design that adjusts for genetics and early shared environment. METHODS: A cross-sectional association between lifetime prevalence of chronic LBP and different measures of obesity (body mass index-BMI; percent body fat; waist circumference; waist-hip ratio) was investigated in 1128 female twins in three stages: (i) total sample analysis; (ii) within-pair case-control analysis for monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins together; (iii) within-pair case-control analysis separated by DZ and MZ. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: BMI (OR 1.12; 95% CI 1.02-1.26) and percent body fat (OR 1.15; 95% CI 1.01-1.32) were weakly associated with lifetime prevalence of chronic LBP in the total sample analysis but were absent when shared environment and genetic factors were adjusted for using the within-pair case-control analysis. Greater waist-hip ratios were associated with smaller prevalence estimates of chronic LBP in the within-pair case-control analysis with both MZ and DZ twins (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.47-0.94). However, this association did not remain after the full adjustment for genetic factors in the MZ within-pair case-control analysis. CONCLUSIONS: BMI, percent of fat mass and greater depositions of fat and mass around the hips are associated with increases in chronic LBP prevalence in women but these associations are small and appear to be confounded by the effects of genetics and early shared environment. Therefore, our results do not support a causal direct relationship between obesity and chronic LBP.

The relationship between obesity, low back pain, and lumbar disc degeneration when genetics and the environment are considered: a systematic review of twin studies.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The relationships between obesity and low back pain (LBP) and lumbar disc degeneration (LDD) remain unclear. It is possible that familial factors, including genetics and early environment, affect these relationships. PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between obesity-related measures (eg, weight, body mass index [BMI]) and LBP and LDD using twin studies, where the effect of genetics and early environment can be controlled. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review with meta-analysis. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases were searched from the earliest records to August 2014. All cross-sectional and longitudinal observational twin studies identified by the search strategy were considered for inclusion. Two investigators independently assessed the eligibility, conducted the quality assessment, and extracted the data. Metaanalyses (fixed or random effects, as appropriate) were used to pool studies' estimates of association. RESULTS: In total, 11 articles met the inclusion criteria. Five studies were included in the LBP analysis and seven in the LDD analysis. For the LBP analysis, pooling of the five studies showed that the risk of having LBP for individuals with the highest levels of BMI or weight was almost twice that of people with a lower BMI (odds ratio [OR] 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6-2.0; I(2)=0%). A dose-response relationship was also identified. When genetics and the effects of a shared early environment were adjusted for using a within-pair twin case-control analysis, pooling of three studies showed a reduced but statistically positive association between obesity and prevalence of LBP (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.1-2.1; I(2)=0%). However, the association was further diminished and not significant (OR 1.4; 95% CI 0.8-2.3; I(2)=0%) when pooling included two studies on monozygotic twin pairs only. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria for LDD. When familial factors were not controlled for, body weight was positively associated with LDD in all five cross-sectional studies. Only two cross-sectional studies investigated the relationship between obesity-related measures and LDD accounting for familial factors, and the results were conflicting. One longitudinal study in LBP and three longitudinal studies in LDD found no increase in risk in obese individuals, whether or not familial factors were controlled for. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this review suggest that genetics and early environment are possible mechanisms underlying the relationship between obesity and LBP; however, a direct causal link between these conditions appears to be weak. Further longitudinal studies using the twin design are needed to better understand the complex mechanisms underlying the associations between obesity, LBP, and LDD.