Efficacy of Radiofrequency as Therapy and Diagnostic Support in the Management of Musculoskeletal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Radiofrequency (RF) is a minimally invasive procedure used to interrupt or alter nociceptive pathways for treating musculoskeletal pain. It seems a useful tool to relieve chronic pain syndromes, even if, to date, solid evidence is still needed about the effectiveness of this therapy. By this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of RF in treating musculoskeletal pain. PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, and PEDro databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) presenting the following: patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain as participants; RF as intervention; placebo, anesthetic injection, corticosteroid injection, prolotherapy, conservative treatment, physiotherapy, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation as comparisons; and pain and functioning as outcomes. Continuous random-effect models with standardized mean difference (SMD) were used to compare the clinical outcomes. Overall, 26 RCTs were eligible and included in the systematic review. All of them analyzed the efficacy of RF in four different regions: cervical and lumbar spine, knee, sacroiliac (SI) joint, shoulder. The outcomes measures were pain, disability, and quality of life. A medium and large effect in favor of the RF treatment group (SMD < 0) was found for the shoulder according to the Visual Analogical Scale and for the SI joint according to the Oswestry Disability Index. A small effect in favor of the RF treatment group (SMD > 0) was found for the spine according to the 36-item Short Form Survey. Non-significant SMD was found for the other outcomes. RF represents a promising therapy for the treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain, especially when other approaches are ineffective or not practicable. Further studies are warranted to better deepen the effectiveness of RF for pain and joint function for each anatomical region of common application.

The presence and influence of mild depressive symptoms on post-operative pain perception following primary total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of mild depression on pain perception after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: Hamilton depression (HDRS) and numeric rating (NRS) scales were used to evaluate depression severity and pain perception at various intervals surrounding TKA. The Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee and pain scores (NRS) in patients with signs of mild depression (HDRS < 20 points) were compared to a control group of patients with no signs of depression (HDRS < 8 points). RESULTS: Prior to surgery, there were no statistical differences in pain perception (NRS) or individual components of HSS knee score including range of motion, pain, and function between patients with mild depression compared to controls. However, following surgery, patients with signs of mild depression were more likely to report more pain (p < 0.001) and have lower HSS scores even at 1 year post-operatively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A significant number of patients in this series undergoing routine primary TKA had signs of subclinical depression. These patients are more likely to report increased pain even at 1 year following surgery compared to patients without signs of depression preoperatively. Psychometric evaluation prior to surgery can help identify the at-risk patient and allow for proper management of patient expectations, thus improving clinical results and patients' satisfaction after TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective comparative study, II.

A systematic review of questionnaires to assess patient satisfaction with limb orthoses.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of patient satisfaction with orthosis is a key point for clinical practice and research, requiring questionnaires with robust psychometric properties. OBJECTIVES: To identify which validated questionnaires are used to investigate patient satisfaction with orthosis in limb orthotics and to analyse (1) their main fields of clinical application, (2) the orthosis-related features analysed by the questionnaires and (3) the strength of their psychometric properties. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: A literature search using MEDLINE (PubMed), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Scopus databases for original articles published within the last 20 years was performed. RESULTS: A total of 106 papers pertaining to various clinical fields were selected. The main features of patient satisfaction with orthosis analysed were as follows: aesthetic, ease in donning and doffing the device, time of orthotic use and comfort. CONCLUSION: Of the questionnaires used to investigate patient satisfaction with orthosis, only four are adequately validated for this purpose: two for generic orthotic use (Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology 2.0 and Client Satisfaction with Device of Orthotics and Prosthetic Users' Survey) and two for specific application with orthopaedic shoes (Questionnaire for the Usability Evaluation of orthopaedic shoes and Monitor Orthopaedic Shoes). Further development, refinement and validation of outcome measures in this field are warranted. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Given the importance of analysing patient satisfaction with orthosis (PSwO), appropriate instruments to assess outcome are needed. This article reviews the currently available instruments and reflects on how future studies could be focused on the development, refinement and validation of outcome measures in this field.