Skip to main content

Pain and Disability Following Exercise-Induced Injury in Prognostic and Intervention Studies: The Why May Be More Important Than the How.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Bishop, MD; George, SZ
Published in: Clin J Pain
March 1, 2023

OBJECTIVES: In preclinical prognostic studies, the description of expected outcomes during an informed consent process indicates that the extent of pain and disability experienced and recovery time is unknown. In intervention studies, the consent process suggests that pain and disability will definitely occur and a treatment provided. Our objective was to determine whether study design (prognosis or intervention) was associated with the severity of pain intensity and disability reports from a preclinical model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We pooled pain and disability outcomes from prognostic and intervention studies using an exercise-induced muscle injury model of pain. Pain intensity, disability, and fear of pain were collected by validated self-report measures. Pain and disability data were z-transformed for pooled analyses and compared across the study design. RESULTS: Data from 310 people were included. The primary findings were that self-reported pain intensity and disability were: (1) higher in prognostic studies than in the intervention studies and (2) associated with fear of pain. A secondary finding was that fear of pain was lower in the intervention compared with the prognostic studies. DISCUSSION: Although there are other possible explanations, we speculate that these results could be related to the uncertainty inherent to providing informed consent for a prognostic study. In light of these findings, we recommend that informed consent language be more carefully considered when pain is induced in a controlled manner. Incorporating informed consent language commonly used in prognostic studies could result in higher pain intensity and disability ratings in studies that use preclinical models to test the efficacy of pain interventions.

Duke Scholars

Published In

Clin J Pain

DOI

EISSN

1536-5409

Publication Date

March 1, 2023

Volume

39

Issue

3

Start / End Page

119 / 126

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Self Report
  • Research Design
  • Prognosis
  • Low Back Pain
  • Humans
  • Anesthesiology
  • 3209 Neurosciences
  • 3202 Clinical sciences
  • 1109 Neurosciences
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Bishop, M. D., & George, S. Z. (2023). Pain and Disability Following Exercise-Induced Injury in Prognostic and Intervention Studies: The Why May Be More Important Than the How. Clin J Pain, 39(3), 119–126. https://doi.org/10.1097/AJP.0000000000001097
Bishop, Mark D., and Steven Z. George. “Pain and Disability Following Exercise-Induced Injury in Prognostic and Intervention Studies: The Why May Be More Important Than the How.Clin J Pain 39, no. 3 (March 1, 2023): 119–26. https://doi.org/10.1097/AJP.0000000000001097.
Bishop, Mark D., and Steven Z. George. “Pain and Disability Following Exercise-Induced Injury in Prognostic and Intervention Studies: The Why May Be More Important Than the How.Clin J Pain, vol. 39, no. 3, Mar. 2023, pp. 119–26. Pubmed, doi:10.1097/AJP.0000000000001097.

Published In

Clin J Pain

DOI

EISSN

1536-5409

Publication Date

March 1, 2023

Volume

39

Issue

3

Start / End Page

119 / 126

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Self Report
  • Research Design
  • Prognosis
  • Low Back Pain
  • Humans
  • Anesthesiology
  • 3209 Neurosciences
  • 3202 Clinical sciences
  • 1109 Neurosciences