Treatment outcome in individuals with chronic pain: is the Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire (PSOCQ) a useful tool? Jenny StrongCorresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author, a, Kym Westburya, Glen Smithb, Ian McKenziec and William Ryan

The efficacy of psychological treatments emphasising a self-management approach to chronic pain has been demonstrated by substantial empirical research. Nevertheless, high drop-out and relapse rates and low or unsuccessful engagement in self-management pain rehabilitation programs have prompted the suggestion that people vary in their readiness to adopt a self-management approach to their pain. The Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire (PSOCQ) was developed to assess a patient's readiness to adopt a self-management approach to their chronic pain. Preliminary evidence has supported the PSOCQ's psychometric properties. The current study was designed to further examine the psychometric properties of the PSOCQ, including its reliability, factorial structure and predictive validity. A total of 107 patients with an average age of 36.2 years (SD = 10.63) attending a multi-disciplinary pain management program completed the PSOCQ, the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) and the West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory (WHYMPI) pre-admission and at discharge from the program. Initial data analysis found inadequate internal consistencies of the precontemplation and action scales of the PSOCQ and a high correlation (r = 0.66, P < 0.01) between the action and maintenance scales. Principal component analysis supported a two-factor structure: 'Contemplation' and 'Engagement'. Subsequent analyses revealed that the PSEQ was a better predictor of treatment outcome than the PSOCQ scales. Discussion centres upon the utility of the PSOCQ in a clinical pain setting in light of the above findings, and a need for further research. (C) 2002 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

mu O-conotoxin MrVIB selectively blocks Na(v)1.8 sensory neuron specific sodium channels and chronic pain behavior without motor deficits

The tetroclotoxin-resistant voltage-gated sodium channel (VGSC) Na(v)1.8 is expressed predominantly by damage-sensing primary afferent nerves and is important for the development and maintenance of persistent pain states. Here we demonstrate that mu O-conotoxin MrVIB from Conus marmoreus displays substantial selectivity for Na(v)1.8 and inhibits pain behavior in models of persistent pain. In rat sensory neurons, submicromolar concentrations of MrVIB blocked tetroclotoxin-resistant current characteristic of Na(v)1.8 but not Na(v)1.9 or tetroclotoxin-sensitive VGSC currents. MrVIB blocked human Nav1.8 expressed in Xenopus oocytes with selectivity at least 10-fold greater than other VGSCs. In neuropathic and chronic inflammatory pain models, allodynia and hyperalgesia were both reduced by intrathecal infusion of MrVIB (0.03-3 nmol), whereas motor side effects occurred only at 30-fold higher doses. In contrast, the nonselective VGSC blocker lignocaine displayed no selectivity for allodynia and hyperalgesia versus motor side effects. The actions of MrVIB reveal that VGSC antagonists displaying selectivity toward Na(v)1.8 can alleviate chronic pain behavior with a greater therapeutic index than nonselective antagonists.

Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations

Objective. To provide recommendations for the core outcome domains that should be considered by investigators conducting clinical trials of the efficacy and effectiveness of treatments for chronic pain. Development of a core set of outcome domains would facilitate comparison and pooling of data, encourage more complete reporting of outcomes, simplify the preparation and review of research proposals and manuscripts, and allow clinicians to make informed decisions regarding the risks and benefits of treatment. Methods. Under the auspices of the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT), 27 specialists from academia. governmental agencies, and the pharmaceutical industry participated in a consensus meeting and identified core outcome domains that should be considered in clinical trials of treatments for chronic pain. Conclusions. There was a consensus that chronic pain clinical trials should assess outcomes representing six core domains: (1) pain, (2) physical functioning, (3) emotional functioning, (4) participant ratings of improvement and satisfaction with treatment, (5) symptoms and adverse events, (6) participant disposition (e.g. adherence to the treatment regimen and reasons for premature withdrawal from the trial). Although consideration should be given to the assessment of each of these domains, there may be exceptions to the general recommendation to include all of these domains in chronic pain trials. When this occurs, the rationale for not including domains should be provided. It is not the intention of these recommendations that assessment of the core domains should be considered a requirement for approval of product applications by regulatory agencies or that a treatment must demonstrate statistically significant effects for all of the relevant core domains to establish evidence of its efficacy. (C) 2003 International Association for the Study of Pain.

Unraveling the barriers to reconceptualization of the problem in chronic pain: The actual and perceived ability of patients and health professionals to understand the neurophysiology

To identify why reconceptualization of the problem is difficult in chronic pain, this study aimed to evaluate whether (1) health professionals and patients can understand currently accurate information about the neurophysiology of pain and (2) health professionals accurately estimate the ability of patients to understand the neurophysiology of pain. Knowledge tests were completed by 276 patients with chronic pain and 288 professionals either before (untrained) or after (trained) education about the neurophysiology of pain. Professionals estimated typical patient performance on the test. Untrained participants performed poorly (mean +/- standard deviation, 55% +/- 19% and 29% +/- 12% for professionals and patients, respectively), compared to their trained counterparts (78% +/- 21% and 61% +/- 19%, respectively). The estimated patient score (46% +/- 18%) was less than the actual patient score (P < .005). The results suggest that professionals and patients can understand the neurophysiology of pain but professionals underestimate patients' ability to understand. The implications are that (1) a poor knowledge of currently accurate information about pain and (2) the underestimation of patients' ability to understand currently accurate information about pain represent barriers to reconceptualization of the problem in chronic pain within the clinical and lay arenas. (C) 2003 by the American Pain Society.

A pain neuromatrix approach to patients with chronic pain

This paper presents an approach to rehabilitation of pain patients. The fundamental principles of the approach are (i) pain is an output of the brain that is produced whenever the brain concludes that body tissue is in danger and action is required, and (ii) pain is a multisystem output that is produced when an individual-specific cortical pain neuromatrix is activated. When pain becomes chronic, the efficacy of the pain neuromatrix is strengthened via nociceptive and non-nociceptive mechanisms, which means that less input, both nociceptive and non-nociceptive, is required to produce pain. The clinical approach focuses on decreasing all inputs that imply that body tissue is in danger and then on activating components of the pain neuromatrix without activating its output. Rehabilitation progresses to increase exposure to threatening input across sensory and non-sensory domains. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Experimental hand pain delays recognition of the contralateral hand: Evidence that acute and chronic pain have opposite effects on information processing?

Recognising the laterality of a pictured hand involves making an initial decision and confirming that choice by mentally moving one's own hand to match the picture. This depends on an intact body schema. Because patients with complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (CRPS1) take longer to recognise a hand's laterality when it corresponds to their affected hand, it has been proposed that nociceptive input disrupts the body schema. However, chronic pain is associated with physiological and psychosocial complexities that may also explain the results. In three studies, we investigated whether the effect is simply due to nociceptive input. Study one evaluated the temporal and perceptual characteristics of acute hand pain elicited by intramuscular injection of hypertonic saline into the thenar eminence. In studies two and three, subjects performed a hand laterality recognition task before, during, and after acute experimental hand pain, and experimental elbow pain, respectively. During hand pain and during elbow pain, when the laterality of the pictured hand corresponded to the painful side, there was no effect on response time (RT). That suggests that nociceptive input alone is not sufficient to disrupt the working body schema. Conversely to patients with CRPS1, when the laterality of the pictured hand corresponded to the non-painful hand, RT increased similar to 380 ms (95% confidence interval 190 ms-590 ms). The results highlight the differences between acute and chronic pain and may reflect a bias in information processing in acute pain toward the affected part.