Traditionally, biomedical research in the field of pain has been conducted with male animals and subjects. Over the past 20–30 yr, it has been increasingly recognized that this narrow approach has missed an important variable: sex. An ever-increasing number of studies have established sex differences in response to pain and analgesics. These studies have demonstrated that the differences between the sexes appear to have a biological and psychological basis. We will provide brief review of the epidemiology, rodent, and human experimental findings. The controversies and widespread disagreement in the literature highlight the need for a progressive approach to the questions involving collaborative efforts between those trained in the basic and clinical biomedical sciences and those in the epidemiological and social sciences. In order for patients suffering from acute and/or chronic pain to benefit from this work, the approach has to involve the use or development of clinically relevant models of nociception or pain to answer the basic, but complex, question. The present state of the literature allows no translation of the work to our clinical decision-making.

Individuals with musculoskeletal pain exhibit abnormal movement patterns, including antalgic gait, postural dysfunction, increased thoracolumbar stiffness, decreased proprioception, and altered activation of abdominal and extensor muscles. Additionally, aberrant or increased biomechanical forces over time produce joint or structural damage that results in pain. A large body habitus resulting from excessive weight can accelerate these musculoskeletal complaints. Irrespective of age, obesity contributes to chronic musculoskeletal pain, impairment of mobility, and eventual physical disability. Potential mechanisms that may mediate the relationships between obesity-related pain and functional decline include skeletal muscle strength deterioration, systemic inflammation, and psychosocial characteristics (eg, pain catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, and depression). Treatment considerations for obese patients with musculoskeletal pain include assessment of kinesiophobia levels, biomechanical analysis, and pain medication use. Ideally, a multidisciplinary team of physicians, psychologists, and physical therapists should optimize the design of interventions specific to the patient. In some cases, the use of appropriate pain medications or intra-articular injectable agents may help control pain, fostering sustained activity, caloric expenditure, and weight loss. Morbid obesity is a medical condition that alters biomechanical forces on the tissues of the body. This condition provides the opportunity to examine accelerated development of musculoskeletal pain syndromes and etiology. The proposed therapeutic interventions can have multiple benefits in the obese population including weight loss, improved psychological outlook and self-efficacy, reduced kinesiophobia levels, reduced risk of functional dependence, and improved quality of life.

BackgroundThe past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of cervical spine joint procedures including joint injections, nerve blocks and radiofrequency ablation to treat chronic neck pain, yet many aspects of the procedures remain controversial.MethodsIn August 2020, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine and the American Academy of Pain Medicine approved and charged the Cervical Joint Working Group to develop neck pain guidelines. Eighteen stakeholder societies were identified, and formal request-for-participation and member nomination letters were sent to those organizations. Participating entities selected panel members and an ad hoc steering committee selected preliminary questions, which were then revised by the full committee. Each question was assigned to a module composed of 4–5 members, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and the Committee Chairs on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee after revisions. We used a modified Delphi method whereby the questions were sent to the committee en bloc and comments were returned in a non-blinded fashion to the Chairs, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached. Before commencing, it was agreed that a recommendation would be noted with >50% agreement among committee members, but a consensus recommendation would require ≥75% agreement.ResultsTwenty questions were selected, with 100% consensus achieved in committee on 17 topics. Among participating organizations, 14 of 15 that voted approved or supported the guidelines en bloc, with 14 questions being approved with no dissensions or abstentions. Specific questions addressed included the value of clinical presentation and imaging in selecting patients for procedures, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for blocks, diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks and intra-articular joint injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for designating a block as positive, how many blocks should be performed before radiofrequency ablation, the orientation of electrodes, whether larger lesions translate into higher success rates, whether stimulation should be used before radiofrequency ablation, how best to mitigate complication risks, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and trials, and the indications for repeating radiofrequency ablation.ConclusionsCervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with medial branch blocks being more predictive than intra-articular injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of false-negatives (ie, lower overall success rate). Clinical trials should be tailored based on objectives, and selection criteria for some may be more stringent than what is ideal in clinical practice.

Pregabalin has significant effects on the pain associated with DPN as well as secondary endpoints that affect patients' quality of life.

Objective Examine whether individual, geographic, and economic phenotypes predict missing data on specific drug involvement in overdose deaths, manifesting inequities in overdose mortality data, which is a key data source used in measuring the opioid epidemic. Materials and Methods We combined national data sources (mortality, demographic, economic, and geographic) from 2014–2016 in a multi-method analysis of missing drug classification in the overdose mortality records (as defined by the use of ICD-10 T50.9 on death certificates). We examined individual disparities in decedent-level multivariate logistic regression models, geographic disparities in spatial analysis (heat maps), and economic disparities in a combination of temporal trend analyses (descriptive statistics) and both decedent- and county-level multivariate logistic regression models. Results Our analyses consistently found higher rates of unclassified overdoses in decedents of female gender, White race, non-Hispanic ethnicity, with college education, aged 30–59 and those from poorer counties. Despite the fact that unclassified drug overdose death rates have reduced over time, gaps persist between the richest and poorest counties. There are also striking geographic differences both across and within states. Discussion Given the essential role of mortality data in measuring the scale of the opioid epidemic, it is important to understand the individual and community inequities underlying the missing data on specific drug involvements. Knowledge of these inequities could enhance our understanding of the opioid crisis and inform data-driven interventions and policies with more equitable resource allocations. Conclusion Multiple individual, geographic, and economic disparities underlie unclassified overdose deaths, with important implications for public health informatics and addressing the opioid crisis.

Background The past two decades have witnessed a surge in the use of cervical spine joint procedures including joint injections, nerve blocks and radiofrequency ablation to treat chronic neck pain, yet many aspects of the procedures remain controversial. Methods In August 2020, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine and the American Academy of Pain Medicine approved and charged the Cervical Joint Working Group to develop neck pain guidelines. Eighteen stakeholder societies were identified, and formal request-for-participation and member nomination letters were sent to those organizations. Participating entities selected panel members and an ad hoc steering committee selected preliminary questions, which were then revised by the full committee. Each question was assigned to a module composed of 4–5 members, who worked with the Subcommittee Lead and the Committee Chairs on preliminary versions, which were sent to the full committee after revisions. We used a modified Delphi method whereby the questions were sent to the committee en bloc and comments were returned in a non-blinded fashion to the Chairs, who incorporated the comments and sent out revised versions until consensus was reached. Before commencing, it was agreed that a recommendation would be noted with >50% agreement among committee members, but a consensus recommendation would require ≥75% agreement. Results Twenty questions were selected, with 100% consensus achieved in committee on 17 topics. Among participating organizations, 14 of 15 that voted approved or supported the guidelines en bloc, with 14 questions being approved with no dissensions or abstentions. Specific questions addressed included the value of clinical presentation and imaging in selecting patients for procedures, whether conservative treatment should be used before injections, whether imaging is necessary for blocks, diagnostic and prognostic value of medial branch blocks and intra-articular joint injections, the effects of sedation and injectate volume on validity, whether facet blocks have therapeutic value, what the ideal cut-off value is for designating a block as positive, how many blocks should be performed before radiofrequency ablation, the orientation of electrodes, whether larger lesions translate into higher success rates, whether stimulation should be used before radiofrequency ablation, how best to mitigate complication risks, if different standards should be applied to clinical practice and trials, and the indications for repeating radiofrequency ablation. Conclusions Cervical medial branch radiofrequency ablation may provide benefit to well-selected individuals, with medial branch blocks being more predictive than intra-articular injections. More stringent selection criteria are likely to improve denervation outcomes, but at the expense of false-negatives (ie, lower overall success rate). Clinical trials should be tailored b...

No abstract

The self-report ORT was not a valid test for the prediction of future aberrant behaviors in this academic pain management population. The original risk categories (low, medium, high) were not supported in the either the self-reported version or the enhanced version; however, the enhanced data were able to differentiate between high- and low-risk patients. Unfortunately, without technological automation, the enhanced ORT suffers from practical limitations. The self-report ORT may not be a valid tool in current pain populations; however, modification into a binary (high/low) score system needs further study.