Physical therapy · 2021
Evidence of Bilateral Localized, but Not Widespread, Pressure Pain Hypersensitivity in Patients With Upper Extremity Tendinopathy/Overuse Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fernández-de-Las-Peñas César, Navarro-Santana Marcos J, Cleland Joshua A, Arias-Buría José L, Plaza-Manzano Gustavo
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The presence of altered nociceptive pain processing in patients with upper extremity tendinopathy/overuse injury is conflicting. Our aim was to compare pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) in symptomatic and distant pain-free areas between patients with upper extremity tendinopathy/overuse injury and controls.
METHODS: Five databases were searched from inception to October 15, 2020. The authors selected case-control studies comparing PPTs between individuals with upper extremity tendinopathy/overuse injury and pain-free controls. Data were extracted for population, diagnosis, sample size, outcome, and type of algometer. Results were extracted by 3 reviewers. The methodological quality/risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale) and evidence level (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach) were assessed. Meta-analyses of symptomatic, segment-related, and distant pain-free areas were compared.
RESULTS: The search identified 807 publications with 19 studies (6 shoulder, 13 elbow) eligible for inclusion. The methodological quality ranged from fair (48%) to good (37%). Patients exhibited lower bilateral PPTs than controls at the symptomatic area (affected side: MD = -175.89 kPa [95% CI = -220.30 to -131.48 kPa]; nonaffected side: MD = -104.50 kPa [95% CI = -142.72 to -66.28 kPa]) and the segment-related area (affected side: MD = -150.63 kPa [95% CI = -212.05 to -89.21 kPa]; nonaffected side: MD = -170.34 kPa [95% CI = - 248.43 to -92.25]) than controls. No significant differences in PPTs over distant pain-free areas were observed.
CONCLUSION: Low to moderate quality evidence suggests bilateral hypersensitivity to pressure pain at the symptomatic and contralateral/mirror areas in patients with upper extremity tendinopathies/overuse injury. Moderate quality of evidence supports bilateral pressure pain sensitivity in the segment-related area (neck) in lateral epicondylalgia, but not in subacromial impingement syndrome. No evidence of widespread pressure pain hyperalgesia was reported.
IMPACT: Early identification of people with altered pain modulation could guide clinicians in treatment strategies. This review shows that there is a complex interplay between peripheral and central pain mechanisms in upper extremity tendinopathies/overuse injuries and that there likely are different subgroups of patients with upper extremity conditions.
METHODS: Five databases were searched from inception to October 15, 2020. The authors selected case-control studies comparing PPTs between individuals with upper extremity tendinopathy/overuse injury and pain-free controls. Data were extracted for population, diagnosis, sample size, outcome, and type of algometer. Results were extracted by 3 reviewers. The methodological quality/risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale) and evidence level (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach) were assessed. Meta-analyses of symptomatic, segment-related, and distant pain-free areas were compared.
RESULTS: The search identified 807 publications with 19 studies (6 shoulder, 13 elbow) eligible for inclusion. The methodological quality ranged from fair (48%) to good (37%). Patients exhibited lower bilateral PPTs than controls at the symptomatic area (affected side: MD = -175.89 kPa [95% CI = -220.30 to -131.48 kPa]; nonaffected side: MD = -104.50 kPa [95% CI = -142.72 to -66.28 kPa]) and the segment-related area (affected side: MD = -150.63 kPa [95% CI = -212.05 to -89.21 kPa]; nonaffected side: MD = -170.34 kPa [95% CI = - 248.43 to -92.25]) than controls. No significant differences in PPTs over distant pain-free areas were observed.
CONCLUSION: Low to moderate quality evidence suggests bilateral hypersensitivity to pressure pain at the symptomatic and contralateral/mirror areas in patients with upper extremity tendinopathies/overuse injury. Moderate quality of evidence supports bilateral pressure pain sensitivity in the segment-related area (neck) in lateral epicondylalgia, but not in subacromial impingement syndrome. No evidence of widespread pressure pain hyperalgesia was reported.
IMPACT: Early identification of people with altered pain modulation could guide clinicians in treatment strategies. This review shows that there is a complex interplay between peripheral and central pain mechanisms in upper extremity tendinopathies/overuse injuries and that there likely are different subgroups of patients with upper extremity conditions.