4.7 Article

Chronic musculoskeletal pain rarely presents in a single body site: results from a UK population study

Journal

RHEUMATOLOGY
Volume 46, Issue 7, Pages 1168-1170

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kem118

Keywords

chronic; multi-site; musculoskeletal; pain; community survey; prevalence; treatment; planning

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institute for Health Research [PC6/CSA04/03] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. To investigate the frequency and health impact of chronic multi-site musculoskeletal pain, in a representative UK sample. Method. Population postal questionnaire survey, using 16 general practices in the southeast of England, nationally representative urban/rural, ethnic and socioeconomic mix. A random selection of 4049 registered patients, aged 18 or over, were sent a questionnaire. The main outcome measures were chronic pain location, identified using a pain drawing; distress, pain intensity and disability as measured by the GHQ12 and the Chronic Pain Grade. Results. A total of 2445 patients (60%) responded to the survey (44% male, mean age 52yrs); 45% had chronic musculoskeletal pain. Of those with chronic pain, three quarters had pain in multiple sites (two or more sites). Variables significantly predicting this were: age under 55, [odds ratio (OR) 0.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4, 0.6]; psychological distress (OR 1.8, Cl at 95% 1.4, 2.2) and high pain intensity (OR 5.2, Cl at 95% 4.1, 6.7). Only 33% of multi-site pain distributions conformed to the American College of Rheumatology definition of chronic widespread pain. Conclusions. Multi-site chronic pain is more common than single-site chronic pain and is commonly associated with other problems. Indiscriminate targeting of research and care for chronic musculoskeletal pain on single sites may often be inappropriate.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available