Abstract
BackgroundValidated clinician outcome scores are considered less associated with psychosocial factors than patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs). This belief may lead to misconceptions if both instruments are related to similar factors.QuestionsWe asked: In patients with chronic shoulder pain, what biopsychosocial factors are associated (1) with PROMs, and (2) with clinician-rated outcome measurements?MethodsAll new patients between the ages of 18 and 65 with chronic shoulder pain from a unilateral shoulder injury admitted to a Swiss rehabilitation teaching hospital between May 2012 and January 2015 were screened for potential contributing biopsychosocial factors. During the study period, 314 patients were screened, and after applying prespecified criteria, 158 patients were evaluated. The median symptom duration was 9 months (interquartile range, 5.5–15 months), and 72% of the patients (114 patients) had rotator cuff tears, most of which were work injuries (59%, 93 patients) and were followed for a mean of 31.6 days (SD, 7.5 days). Exclusion criteria were concomitant injuries in another location, major or minor upper limb neuropathy, and inability to understand the validated available versions of PROMs. The PROMs were the DASH, the Brief Pain Inventory, and the Patient Global Impression of Change, before and after treatment (physiotherapy, cognitive therapy and vocational training). The Constant-Murley score was used as a clinician-rated outcome measurement. Statistical models were used to estimate associations between biopsychosocial factors and outcomes.ResultsGreater disability on the DASH was associated with psychological factors (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Pain Catastrophizing Scale combined coefficient, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.25–1.03; p = 0.002) and social factors (language, professional qualification combined coefficient, −6.15; 95% CI, −11.09 to −1.22; p = 0.015). Greater pain on the Brief Pain Inventory was associated with psychological factors (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Pain Catastrophizing Scale combined coefficient, 0.076; 95% CI, 0.021–0.13; p = 0.006). Poorer impression of change was associated with psychological factors (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia coefficient, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87–0.99; p = 0.026) and social factors (education, language, and professional qualification coefficient, 6.67; 95% CI, 2.77–16.10; p < 0.001). Worse clinician-rated outcome was associated only with psychological factors (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (depression only), Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia combined coefficient, −0.35; 95% CI, −0.58 to −0.12; p = 0.003).ConclusionsDepressive symptoms and catastrophizing appear to be key factors influencing PROMs and clinician-rated outcomes. This study suggests revisiting the Constant-Murley score.Level of EvidenceLevel III, prognostic study.
Highlights
Patients and MethodsThere are various factors that can affect the results of treatment after shoulder injuries and there is no general consensus regarding which are the most decisive [11, 16]
Greater disability on the DASH was associated with psychological factors (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Pain Catastrophizing Scale combined coefficient, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.25–1.03; p = 0.002) and social factors
Psychosocial Factors Related to Shoulder Outcome Instruments 2031 factors (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia coefficient, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87–0.99; p = 0.026) and social factors
Summary
Patients and MethodsThere are various factors that can affect the results of treatment after shoulder injuries and there is no general consensus regarding which are the most decisive [11, 16]. There is no general consensus regarding to what degree psychological distress or social factors may affect medical or surgical treatments [21, 31, 32, 44]. Studies have shown that kinesiophobia and catastrophic thinking were the most important factors related to disability for patients with an upper-extremity-specific disability [8], while psychological distress affects patient-reported scores of shoulder function [32, 35]. Validated clinician outcome scores are considered less associated with psychosocial factors than patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs). This belief may lead to misconceptions if both instruments are related to similar factors. This work was performed at: Clinique Romande de Readaptation SuvaCare
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.