Though perioperative pain neuroscience education (PPNE) positively influences patients' surgical outcomes, little is known about the mechanisms behind this treatment's success. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the potential mediating role of pain cognitions and pain sensitivity in the treatment effect of PPNE on postoperative quality of life in people undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy. This secondary analysis uses data from 120 participants of a randomized controlled trial who were randomized to receive either PPNE or perioperative biomedical education before undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy. Quality of life was assessed 1-year postsurgery using the short form 36-item health survey (SF36) physical and mental component scores. Potential mediators included pain cognitions (ie, kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing, and hypervigilance) and pain sensitivity (ie, endogenous nociceptive modulation), assessed 6 weeks postsurgery. Mediation models were constructed using structural equation modeling, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using 10,000 bootstrap samples. Analyses show a significant total effect for PPNE (estimate = .464, 95% CI [.105, .825]) and a significant indirect effect via pain catastrophizing on the SF36 physical component (estimate = .124, 95% CI [.001, .293]). No mediating effect was found through the remaining pain cognitions or pain sensitivity measures. Also, no potential mediators were identified for the treatment effect of PPNE on the SF36 mental component. Our findings suggest that pain catastrophizing mediates the treatment effect of PPNE on physical health-related quality of life in people undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy. PERSPECTIVE: This secondary analysis identified pain catastrophizing as a mediator for PPNE in people undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy. More so, its findings indicate that this educational intervention can enhance the postoperative physical health-related quality of life of these patients by addressing their catastrophizing thoughts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02630732).

In people with nonspecific chronic spinal pain (nCSP), disability and quality of life are associated with clinical, cognitive, psychophysical, and demographic variables. However, evidence regarding the interactions between these variables is only limited to this population. Therefore, this study aims to explore path models explaining the multivariate contributions of such variables to disability and quality of life in people with nCSP. This secondary analysis uses baseline data from a randomized controlled trial including 120 participants with nCSP. Structural equation modeling was used to explore path models for the Pain Disability Index (PDI), the Short Form 36-item physical (SF-36 PC), and mental (SF-36 MC) component scores. All models included sex, pain catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, hypervigilance, and pain intensity. Additionally, the PDI and SF-36 PC models included pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) at the dominant pain site (ie, neck or low back). Significant associations were found between sex, pain cognitions, pain intensity, and PPTs. Only pain catastrophizing significantly directly influenced the PDI (P <= .001) and SF-36 MC (P = .014), while the direct effects on the SF-36 PC from kinesiophobia (P = .008) and pain intensity (P = .006) were also significant. However, only the combined effect of all pain cognitions on the SF-36 PC was mediated by pain intensity (P = .019). Our findings indicate that patients' pain-related cognitions have an adverse effect on their physical healthrelated quality of life via a negative influence on their pain intensity in people with nCSP.

Chronic pain is the most prevalent disease worldwide, leading to substantial disability and socioeconomic burden. Therefore, it can be regarded as a public health disease and major challenge to scientists, clinicians and affected individuals. Behavioral lifestyle factors, such as, physical (in)activity, stress, poor sleep and an unhealthy diet are increasingly recognized as perpetuating factors for chronic pain. Yet, current management options for patients with chronic pain often do not address lifestyle factors in a personalized multimodal fashion. This state-of-the-art clinical perspective aims to address this gap by discussing how clinicians can simultaneously incorporate various lifestyle factors into a personalized multimodal lifestyle intervention for individuals with chronic pain. To do so the available evidence on (multimodal) lifestyle interventions targeting physical (in)activity, stress, sleep and nutritional factors, specifically, was reviewed and synthetized from a clinical point of view. First, advise is provided on how to design a personalized multimodal lifestyle approach for a specific patient. Subsequently, best-evidence recommendations on how to integrate physical (in)activity, stress, sleep and nutritional factors as treatment targets into a personalized multimodal lifestyle approach are outlined. Evidence supporting such a personalized multimodal lifestyle approach is growing, but further studies are needed.

OBJECTIVE: To explore whether preoperative pain intensity, pain cognitions, and quantitative sensory measures influence the established effectiveness of perioperative pain neuroscience education (PPNE) on health-related quality of life at 1 year after surgery for lumbar radiculopathy. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a triple-blinded randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Participants (n = 90) were Dutch-speaking adults (18-65 years) who were scheduled for surgery for lumbar radiculopathy in 3 Belgian hospitals. They were randomized (1:1) to receive PPNE (n = 41) or perioperative biomedical education (n = 49). Linear mixed models were built for health-related quality of life (ie, SF-6D utility values, Physical and Mental Component of the 36-item Short Form Health Survey) using the following independent variables: therapy, time, and preoperative scores for back and leg pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, hypervigilance, and quantitative sensory measures. RESULTS: The impact of PPNE on SF-6D utility values over time was influenced by kinesiophobia (F = 3.30, P = .02) and leg pain intensity (F = 3.48, P = .02). Regardless of the intervention, back pain intensity negatively influenced SF-6D values over time (F = 3.99, P = .009). The Physical Component scores were negatively impacted by back pain intensity (F = 9.08, P = .003) and were influenced over time by leg pain intensity (F = 2.87, P = .04). The Mental Component scores were negatively impacted by back pain intensity (F = 6.64, P = .01) and pain catastrophizing (F = 5.42, P = .02), as well as hypervigilance (F = 3.16, P = .03) and leg pain intensity (F = 3.12, P = .03) over time. CONCLUSION: PPNE may be more effective than perioperative biomedical education in improving postoperative health utility values in patients who reported higher kinesiophobia and leg pain intensity before surgery for lumbar radiculopathy.

OBJECTIVE:The present cross-sectional study aims to unravel associations of pain intensity and cognitions with quantitative sensory testing in people scheduled for surgery for lumbar radiculopathy. Additionally, insight will be provided into the presence of dysfunctional nociceptive processing and maladaptive pain cognitions in this population. DESIGN:Cross-sectional study. SETTING:Data from three hospitals in Belgium. SUBJECTS:The final sample comprised 120 participants with lumbar radiculopathy scheduled for surgery, included between March 2016 and April 2019. METHODS:Self-reported pain intensity was assessed on a visual analog scale, and pain cognitions were assessed with self-reported questionnaires (Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, and Pain Vigilance and Awareness Questionnaire). Quantitative sensory testing (detection thresholds, pain thresholds, temporal summation, and conditioned pain modulation) was evaluated, as well. RESULTS:Evidence was found for the presence of an impaired inhibitory response to nociceptive stimuli and maladaptive pain cognitions in this population. Kinesiophobia was found to be present to a maladaptive degree in the majority of the patients (n = 106 [88%]). Significant, but weak, associations between electrical pain thresholds at the sural nerves and leg pain intensity (sural nerve symptomatic side: r = -0.23; P = 0.01; non-symptomatic side: r = -0.22; P = 0.02) and kinesiophobia levels (sural nerve non-symptomatic side: r = -0.26; P = 0.006) were identified. CONCLUSIONS:Electrical detection thresholds and correlates for endogenous nociceptive facilitation and inhibition were not found to be related to any of the pain cognitions or to pain intensity in people scheduled to undergo surgery for lumbar radiculopathy.

This cross-sectional study explored associations between demographics, pain intensity and cognitions on the one hand and healthcare use (HCU) on the other hand in people undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy. HCU during the 2 months preceding surgery was evaluated using a retrospective questionnaire. Demographics included sex, age and level of education and equivalent income. Back and leg pain intensity were evaluated using a visual analogue scale. Pain cognitions were assessed with the Tampa scale of kinesiophobia, the pain catastrophizing scale and the pain vigilance and awareness questionnaire. The sample comprised 120 participants (52% males; 49 years (Quartile (Q)1-Q3: 37.3-57.43)). The number of visits to the general practitioner was associated with sex (incidence rate ratio (IRR) for males = 0.811; p = 0.050), pain catastrophizing (IRR = 1.010; p = 0.041), pain magnification (IRR = 1.058; p = 0.004) and leg pain intensity (IRR = 1.004; p = 0.038). The number of neurosurgeon visits was associated with level of education (IRR moderate education = 1.518; p = 0.016 (reference: low education)). Receiving zero physiotherapy visits was associated with higher back pain intensity (Beta = 0.018; p = 0.028). Highest level of analgesics used was associated with sex (IRR for males = 0.502; p = 0.047) and leg pain (IRR = 1.014; p = 0.034). Only the association between general practitioner visits and pain magnification remained significant in multivariable analyses (IRR = 1.061; p = 0.033). The results suggest a rather indirect relationship between HCU and demographics, pain intensity and cognitions, involving a potential interplay between several patient- and healthcare system-related factors.

Pain is an individualized experience for the person suffering from chronic pain. Significant strides have been made in the last few decades in understanding various biological changes that coincide with chronic pain. This state-of-the-art overview looks at the current evidence related to the biology of chronic pain and the implications these findings have on the delivery of pain neuroscience education (PNE). The paper summarizes the various (epi)genetic, neural, endocrine, and immune factors discovered and explored in the scientific literature concerning chronic pain. Each of these biological factors has various implications for the content and delivery of PNE. We discuss the future directions these biological factors have for the clinical implementation of PNE by linking the importance of behavior change, optimizing the learning environment, and using an individualized multimodal treatment approach with PNE. In addition, future directions for research of PNE based on these biological factors are provided with importance placed on individualized patient-centered care and how PNE can be used with traditional modes of care and growing trends with other care methods. PNE was originally and continues to be rooted in understanding chronic pain biology and how that understanding can improve patient care and outcomes.

(1) Background: Dysregulation in serotonergic and noradrenergic systems may be implicated in the neurobiophysiological mechanisms underlying pain-related cognitive impairment in chronic whiplash-associated disorders (CWAD). This study aimed to unravel the role of serotonergic and noradrenergic descending pathways in cognitive functioning at rest and in response to exercise in people with CWAD. (2) Methods: 25 people with CWAD were included in this double-blind, randomized, controlled crossover study. Endogenous descending serotonergic and noradrenergic inhibitory mechanisms were modulated by using a single dose of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (Citalopram) or a selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (Atomoxetine). Cognitive performance was studied at rest and in response to exercise (1) without medication intake; (2) after intake of Citalopram; and (3) after intake of Atomoxetine. (3) Results: After Atomoxetine intake, selective attention improved compared with the no medication day (p < 0.05). In contrast, a single dose of Citalopram had no significant effect on cognitive functioning at rest. When performing pairwise comparisons, improvements in selective attention were found after exercise for the no medication condition (p < 0.05). In contrast, after intake of Citalopram or Atomoxetine, selective and sustained attention worsened after exercise. (4) Conclusions: A single dose of Atomoxetine improved selective attention only in one Stroop condition, and a single dose of Citalopram had no effect on cognitive functioning at rest in people with CWAD. Only without medication intake did selective attention improve in response to exercise, whereas both centrally acting medications worsened cognitive performance in response to a submaximal aerobic exercise bout in people with CWAD.

BACKGROUND:Perioperative education should be improved to decrease unfavourable outcomes after lumbar surgery. This trial aimed to compare effectiveness in terms of pain, quality of life, pain cognition, surgical experience, healthcare use, work resumption, and cost-effectiveness of perioperative pain neuroscience education (PPNE) vs traditional biomedical education (perioperative biomedical education [PBE]) in people undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy. METHODS:In this multicentre RCT (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02630732), patients undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy in three Belgian hospitals were randomised to receive PPNE or PBE. Both groups received one preoperative and one postoperative one-to-one education session and a booklet (balanced interventions), with an essentially different content (PPNE: biopsychosocial; PBE: biomedical). Pain was the primary outcome (Visual Analogue Scales+quantitative sensory testing). Assessments were at 3 days, 6 weeks, and 6 and 12 months after surgery. RESULTS:Between March 2016 and April 2020, participants were randomly assigned to PPNE (n=58) or PBE (n=62). At 12 months, PPNE did not lead to significantly better pain outcomes, but it did result in more favourable 36-item Short Form Health Survey physical component (additional increase: 46.94; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.16-79.73; medium effect), Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (additional decrease: 3.15; 95% CI: 0.25-6.04; small effect), and Pain Catastrophising Scale (additional decrease: 6.18; 95% CI: 1.97-10.39; medium effect) scores. Females of the PPNE group showed higher probability for work resumption (95% vs 60% in the PBE group). PPNE was cost-effective compared with PBE (incremental costs: €-2732; incremental quality-adjusted life years: 0.012). CONCLUSIONS:Perioperative pain neuroscience education showed superior clinical and cost-effectiveness than perioperative biomedical education in people undergoing surgery for lumbar radiculopathy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT02630732.

BACKGROUND:Currently, evidence regarding fear avoidance beliefs as potential predictors for lumbar surgery outcomes seems insufficient and strong conclusions are not yet available.OBJECTIVE:This systematic review aimed to evaluate the predictive value of preoperative fear avoidance beliefs for postoperative pain intensity, functional status, and health-related quality of life following surgery for lumbar degenerative disease.STUDY DESIGN:Systematic review and best evidence synthesis.METHODS:An extensive search was performed in PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane library for articles published up until October 2021. Two independent reviewers performed the screening, data extraction, and quality assessment, with a third independent reviewer consulting to resolve any disagreement. Observational studies that included patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative disease, as well as evaluated fear avoidance beliefs (i.e., pain-related fear, pain catastrophizing, pain anxiety) in relation to a surgical outcome measure (i.e., pain intensity, functional status and health-related quality of life) were included in the review. The CHARMS- and QUIPS-tools were used for data extraction and quality assessment, respectively. A best evidence synthesis was performed resulting in conclusions regarding strong, moderate, conflicting, and limited levels of evidence.RESULTS:A total of 24 studies (n = 17,881) were included in this review. Following best evidence synthesis, 3 included studies reported no significant predictive value of preoperative pain-related fear for postoperative pain intensity resulting in moderate evidence for this relationship. Moderate evidence was also found indicating no significant predictive value of preoperative pain-related fear for postoperative functional status, as 6 out of 8 relevant studies reported this result. Only one study reported on the predictive value of preoperative pain catastrophizing for postoperative health-related quality of life, resulting in limited evidence for the absence of this predictive relationship. All other relationships were found to have conflicting evidence.LIMITATIONS:To evaluate surgical outcome, only patient-reported outcome measures as used by spine registries were included. Thus, our findings cannot be extrapolated to all surgery outcomes following lumbar degenerative disease and should only be interpreted in relation to postoperative pain intensity, functional status, or health-related quality of life.CONCLUSION:Best evidence synthesis showed moderate evidence indicating that preoperative pain-related fear is not a significant predictor for postoperative pain and function following surgery for lumbar degenerative disease. Additionally, limited evidence was found for a lack of predictive value of preoperative pain catastrophizing for postoperative health-related quality of life. As current evidence regarding the predictive value of preoperative fear avoidance beliefs following such a surgery is mixed, further research is required before more definitive conclusions can be made.

The primary goal of this study was to compare the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of people with lumbar radiculopathy to age- and sex-adjusted population norms. Additionally, it aimed to explore the associations between the HRQoL difference scores and measures related to pain cognitions, pain intensity, and endogenous nociceptive modulation. Using answers from the Short Form 36-item Health Survey and UK population norms, SF-6D difference scores were calculated. A one-sample t test was used to assess the SF-6D difference scores. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to assess the associations between SF-6D difference scores and pain intensity [Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain], pain cognitions [Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), Pain Vigilance and Awareness Questionnaire (PVAQ)], and correlates for endogenous nociceptive modulation using quantitative sensory testing. One hundred and twenty people with lumbar radiculopathy scheduled for surgery were included in this study. The mean SF-6D difference score of − 0.26 [SD = 0.09] was found to be significantly less than 0 [95%CI: − 0.27 to − 0.24]. Univariate analyses showed a significant influence from PCS, TSK, and PVAQ on the SF-6D difference scores. The final multivariate regression model included PCS and PVAQ, with only PCS maintaining a statistically significant regression coefficient [b = − 0.002; 95% CI: − 0.004 to − 0.001]. People diagnosed with lumbar radiculopathy report significantly lower HRQoL scores when compared with age- and sex-adjusted UK norm values. Even though all examined pain cognitions were found to have a significant association, pain catastrophizing showed the most significant relation to the SF-6D difference scores. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier No. NCT02630732. Date of registration: November 25, 2015.

BACKGROUND:Pain neuroscience education (PNE) combined with cognition-targeted exercises is an effective treatment for people with chronic spinal pain (CSP). However, it is unclear why some patients benefit more from this treatment. We expect that patients with more pronounced maladaptive pain cognitions, such as kinesiophobia, might show poorer treatment responses. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to assess the influence of baseline kinesiophobia levels on the treatment outcomes of PNE combined with cognition-targeted exercises in people with CSP. This study was a secondary analysis of a multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. METHODS:Outcome measures included a numeric rating scale for pain (NRS), the Pain Disability Index (PDI), quality of life (Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Health Survey [SF-36]), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and Pain Vigilance and Awareness Questionnaire (PVAQ). Regression models were built using treatment (PNE plus cognition-targeted exercises or neck/back school plus general exercises), baseline scores on the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), and time (in months) as independent variables. RESULTS:A significant 3-way interaction effect was found for the models of PDI, PCS, PVAQ, and the SF-36 mental domain, with estimates of -0.01, -0.01, -0.01, and 0.07, respectively. A significant effect of baseline TSK scores was found for the physical domain of the SF-36 (estimate = -3.16). For the NRS, no significant effect of baseline TSK scores was found. CONCLUSION:Our findings indicate that PNE plus cognition-targeted exercises can successfully decrease the unfavorable influence of pretreatment kinesiophobia on disability, mental health, pain catastrophizing, and hypervigilance over time in people with CSP. Nevertheless, higher scores in pretreatment kinesiophobia might still be a key factor for the lack of improvement in pain catastrophizing and hypervigilance following treatment. Regardless of the followed treatment program, pretreatment kinesiophobia was also shown to significantly influence physical health in people with CSP. IMPACT:This study provides novel insight into the unfavorable influence of kinesiophobia on treatment outcomes in people with CSP, and how PNE plus cognition-targeted exercises can limit this impact. Because this is one of the first studies to research possible predictors of this experimental treatment, its findings motivate further exploration of other possible influencing factors for treatment success of PNE plus cognition-targeted exercises. LAY SUMMARY:People with chronic spinal pain and high levels of fear of movement were found to have worse treatment outcomes compared to people with low levels of fear of movement. However, our experimental treatment, which includes pain neuroscience education combined with exercise therapy that reintroduces specific movements patients might fear, can decrease this negative influence of fear of movement in these patients.

Pain neuroscience education (PNE) and motivational interviewing (MI) have been widely implemented and tested in the field of chronic pain management, and both strategies have been shown to be effective in the short term (small effect sizes) for the management of chronic pain. PNE uses contemporary pain science to educate patients about the biopsychosocial nature of the chronicity of their pain experience. The goal of PNE is to optimize patients' pain beliefs/perceptions to facilitate the acquisition of adaptive pain-coping strategies. MI, on the other hand, is a patient-centered communication style for eliciting and enhancing motivation for behavior change by shifting the patient away from a state of indecision or uncertainty. Conceptually, PNE and MI appear to be complementary interventions, with complementary rather than overlapping effects; MI primarily improves cognitive and behavioral awareness and, potentially, adherence to treatment principles, whereas PNE potentially increases pain knowledge/beliefs, awareness, and willingness to explore psychological factors that are potentially associated with pain. Therefore, combining PNE with MI might lead to improved outcomes with larger and longer-lasting effect sizes. The combined use of PNE and MI in patients having chronic pain is introduced here, along with a description of how clinicians might be able to integrate PNE and MI in the treatment of patients experiencing chronic pain. Clinical trials are needed to examine whether combining PNE with MI is superior to PNE or MI alone for improving pain and quality of life in patients having chronic pain.

Data Synthesis Sixty-one studies (n=7201) were included. A large number of fear-related search terms were used but only 3 fear constructs (kinesiophobia, fear-avoidance beliefs, fear of falling) were measured in the included studies. Multidisciplinary and psychological interventions as well as exercise reduced kinesiophobia. Fear-avoidance beliefs were reduced by the aforementioned interventions, manual therapy, and electrotherapy. A multidisciplinary intervention reduced the fear of falling. There was moderate evidence of multidisciplinary interventions and exercise to reduce kinesiophobia. There was moderate evidence of manual therapy and electrotherapy to reduce fear-avoidance beliefs.

Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP) is a major and highly prevalent health problem. Given the high number of papers available, clinicians might be overwhelmed by the evidence on CLBP management. Taking into account the scale and costs of CLBP, it is imperative that healthcare professionals have access to up-to-date, evidence-based information to assist them in treatment decision-making. Therefore, this paper provides a state-of-the-art overview of the best evidence non-invasive rehabilitation for CLBP. Taking together up-to-date evidence from systematic reviews, meta-analysis and available treatment guidelines, most physically inactive therapies should not be considered for CLBP management, except for pain neuroscience education and spinal manipulative therapy if combined with exercise therapy, with or without psychological therapy. Regarding active therapy, back schools, sensory discrimination training, proprioceptive exercises, and sling exercises should not be considered due to low-quality and/or conflicting evidence. Exercise interventions on the other hand are recommended, but while all exercise modalities appear effective compared to minimal/passive/conservative/no intervention, there is no evidence that some specific types of exercises are superior to others. Therefore, we recommend choosing exercises in line with the patient's preferences and abilities. When exercise interventions are combined with a psychological component, effects are better and maintain longer over time.