Back, chest and abdominal pain: How good are spinal signs at identifying musculoskeletal causes of back, chest or abdominal pain?

Background: Spinal signs found in association with atypical chest and abdominal pain may suggest the pain is referred from the thoracic spine. However, the prevalence of such signs in these conditions has rarely been compared with that in those without pain. In this study, the prevalence of spinal signs and dysfunction in patients with back, chest and abdominal pain is compared with that in pain free controls. The aim of the study is to determine the significance of spinal findings in patients with such pain. Methods: A general practitioner blinded to the patients' histories performed a cervical and thoracic spinal examination on general practice patients with back, chest and/or abdominal pain and on controls without pain. Thoracic intervertebral dysfunction was diagnosed on the basis of movement and palpation findings. Results: Seventy three study patients plus 24 controls, were examined. For cervical spinal signs, pain in the back, chest and/or abdomen was associated with pain with active movements and overpressure at end range and with loss of movement range. For thoracic spinal signs, this association held for pain with active movements and overpressure, but not with loss of movement range. The prevalence of thoracic intervertebral dysfunction was 25.0% in controls, 65.5% with chest/abdominal pain, 72.0% with back pain and 79.0% with back pain with chest/abdominal pain. This prevalence was higher with chest pain than with abdominal pain. Conclusions: The results show an association, but not a causal link between thoracic intervertebral dysfunction and atypical chest/abdominal pain. A spinal examination should be performed routinely assessing these conditions. The minimum examination for the detection of intervertebral dysfunction is testing for pain with spinal movements and palpation for tenderness. The interpretation of positive signs requires knowledge of their prevalence in pain free controls and in patients with visceral disease

The effect of musculoskeletal pain on motor activity and control

Aberrant movement patterns and postures are obvious to clinicians managing patients with musculoskeletal pain. However, some changes in motor function that occur in the presence of pain are less apparent. Clinical and basic science investigations have provided evidence of the effects of nociception on aspects of motor function. Both increases and decreases in muscle activity have been shown, along with alterations in neuronal control mechanisms, proprioception, and local muscle morphology. Various models have been proposed in an attempt to provide an explanation for some of these changes. These include the vicious cycle and pain adaptation models. Recent research has seen the emergence of a new model in which patterns of muscle activation and recruitment are altered in the presence of pain (neuromuscular activation model). These changes seem to particularly affect the ability of muscles to perform synergistic functions related to maintaining joint stability and control. These changes are believed to persist into the period of chronicity. This review shows current knowledge of the effect of musculoskeletal pain on the motor system and presents the various proposed models, in addition to other shown effects not covered by these models. The relevance of these models to both acute and chronic pain is considered. It is apparent that people experiencing musculoskeletal pain exhibit complex motor responses that may show some variation with the time course of the disorder. (C) 2001 by the American Pain Society.

Standardizing assessment of adverse effects in rheumatology clinical trials. Status of OMERACT Toxicity Working Group March 2000: Towards a common understanding of comparative toxicity/safety profiles for antirheumatic therapies

This paper describes the background and current status of an OMERACT facilitated effort to improve the consistency of adverse event reporting in rheumatology clinical trials, The overall goal is the development of an adverse event assessment tool that would provide a basis for use of common terminology and improve the consistency of reporting severity of side effects within rheumatology clinical trials and during postmarketing surveillance. The resulting Rheumatology Common Toxicity Criteria Index encompassed the following organ systems: allergic/immunologic, cardiac, ENT, gastrointestinal, musculoskeletal, neuropsychiatric, ophthalmologic, pulmonary and skin/integument. Before this tool is widely accepted, its validity, consistency, and feasibility need to be assessed in clinical trials.