BackgroundObesity and musculoskeletal pain are strongly related, but there is emerging evidence that body fat, not body weight, may be a better indicator of risk. There is, therefore, a need to determine if body fat is associated with musculoskeletal pain as it may improve management strategies. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the association between body fat and musculoskeletal pain.MethodsSeven electronic databases were searched from inception to 8th January 2018. Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies investigating the association between measures of body fat and musculoskeletal pain were included. All included articles were assessed for methodological rigour using the Epidemiology Appraisal Instrument. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) and effect estimates were pooled for meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 10,221 citations were identified through the database searching, which after abstract and full-text review, yielded 28 unique articles. Fourteen studies were included in the meta-analyses, which found significant cross-sectional associations between total body fat mass and widespread pain (SMD 0.49, 95% CI 0.37–0.61, p < 0.001). Individuals with low-back pain and knee pain had a higher body fat percentage than asymptomatic controls (SMD 0.34, 95% CI 0.17–0.52, p < 0.001 and SMD 0.18, 95% CI 0.05–0.32, p = 0.009, respectively). Fat mass index was significantly, albeit weakly, associated with foot pain (SMD 0.05, 95% CI 0.03–0.06, p < 0.001). Longitudinal studies (n = 8) were unsuitable for meta-analysis, but were largely indicative of elevated body fat increasing the risk of incident and worsening joint pain. There was conflicting evidence for an association between body fat percentage and incident low-back pain (3 studies, follow-up 4–20 years). Increasing knee pain (1 study) and incident foot pain (2 studies) were positively associated with body fat percentage and fat mass index. The percentage of items in the EAI graded as ‘yes’ for each study ranged from 23 to 85%, indicating variable methodological quality of the included studies.ConclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis identified positive cross-sectional associations between increased body fat and widespread and single-site joint pain in the low-back, knee and foot. Longitudinal studies suggest elevated body fat may infer increased risk of incident and worsening joint pain, although further high-quality studies are required.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-018-2137-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objective. To determine, first, if fat mass index (FMI) or fat-free mass index (FFMI) and serum adipokines tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) are associated with prevalent (stage 2) foot pain, and, second, if they are predictive of future (stage 3) foot pain. Methods. A subset of participants ages ‡50 years (n 5 1,462) from the North West Adelaide Health Study were used for this study. Participants from this community cohort were asked in stage 2 (2004)(2005)(2006) and stage 3 (2008-2010) if they had foot pain, aching, or stiffness. In stage 2, serum adipokines and anthropometry were measured, while body composition was analyzed with dual x-ray absorptiometry. These variables, along with comorbidities and social history, were used in logistic regression analyses to determine if FMI, FFMI, and serum adipokines were associated with foot pain. Results. Prevalent foot pain was present in 20.2% of participants, and future foot pain in 36.4%. Following multivariate modeling, the odds of having pain at stage 2 increased by 8% for each FMI unit (odds ratio [OR] 1.08, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.04-1.12), while the odds of having pain at stage 3 increased by 6% for each FMI unit at stage 2 (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.11). TNF level, IL-6 level, and FFMI were not associated with pain. Conclusion. Increased FMI, but not body mass index, FFMI, or TNF or IL-6 level, was associated with both prevalent and future foot pain. These results suggest that body fat may be more important than body weight with respect to foot pain. The role played by other adipokines requires further investigation.

BackgroundThere is a well-recognised relationship between body weight, plantar pressures and foot pain, but the temporal association between these factors is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationships between increasing weight, plantar pressures and foot pain over a two-year period.MethodsFifty-one participants (33 women and 18 men) completed the two-year longitudinal cohort study. The sample had a mean (standard deviation (SD)) age of 52.6 (8.5) years. At baseline and follow-up, participants completed the Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index questionnaire, and underwent anthropometric measures, including body weight, body mass index, and dynamic plantar pressures. Within-group analyses examined differences in body weight, foot pain and plantar pressures between baseline and follow up, and multivariate regression analysis examined associations between change in body weight, foot pain and plantar pressure. Path analysis assessed the total impact of both the direct and indirect effects of change in body weight on plantar pressure and pain variables.ResultsMean (SD) body weight increased from 80.3 (19.3), to 82.3 (20.6) kg, p = 0.016 from baseline to follow up. The change in body weight ranged from −16.1 to 12.7 kg. The heel was the only site to exhibit increased peak plantar pressures between baseline and follow up. After adjustment for age, gender and change in contact time (where appropriate), there were significant associations between: (i) change in body weight and changes in midfoot plantar pressure (B = 4.648, p = 0.038) and functional limitation (B = 0.409, p = 0.010), (ii) plantar pressure change in the heel and both functional limitation (B = 4.054, p = 0.013) and pain intensity (B = 1.831, p = 0.006), (iii) plantar pressure change in the midfoot and both functional limitation (B = 4.505, p = 0.018) and pain intensity (B = 1.913, p = 0.015). Path analysis indicated that the effect of increasing body weight on foot-related functional limitation and foot pain intensity may be mediated by increased plantar pressure in the midfoot.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that as body weight and plantar pressure increase, foot pain increases, and that the midfoot may be the most vulnerable site for pressure-related pain.

Body composition and poor mental health are risk factors for developing foot pain, but the role of different fat deposits and psychological features related to chronic pain are not well understood. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between body composition, psychological health and foot pain. Eighty-eight women participated in this study: 44 with chronic, disabling foot pain (mean age 55.3 SD 7.0 years, BMI 29.5 SD 6.7 kg/m), and 44 age and BMI matched controls. Disabling foot pain was determined from the functional limitation domain of the Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index. Body composition was measured using dual X-ray absorptiometry and psychological health (catastrophisation, central sensitisation and depression) was measured using three validated questionnaires. Between-group analyses found that foot pain was not significantly associated with body composition variables, but was significantly associated with all psychological health measures (P < 0.001-0.047). Within-group analyses found that the severity of foot pain was significantly correlated with body composition measures: fat mass (total, android, gynoid, and visceral), fat-mass ratios [visceral/subcutaneous (VAT/SAT), visceral/android], fat-mass index (FMI), and depression. In multivariable analysis, VAT/SAT (β 1.27, 95% CI 0.28-2.27), FMI (β 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-0.25) and depression (β 0.06, 95% CI 0.00-0.12) were independently associated with foot pain severity. Psychological health, not body composition, was associated with prevalent foot pain. For women with foot pain, VAT/SAT, FMI and depression were associated with severity. Further work is needed to determine if a reduction in fat mass reduces the severity of foot pain.

No abstract

A podiatrist, working at an extended scope of practice and in collaboration with an orthopaedic surgeon, can successfully and efficiently assess and treat patients on an orthopaedic outpatient waiting list. Patients generally reported a high level of satisfaction with the process and would return to the clinic again if necessary. Hospital networks wanting to efficiently reduce waiting lists may endorse task substitution for appropriately skilled podiatrists.

BackgroundTo enhance the acute management of people with diabetic foot disease requiring admission, an extended scope of practice, podiatric high-risk foot coordinator position, was established at the Great Western Hospital, Swindon in 2010. The focus of this new role was to facilitate more efficient and timely management of people with complex diabetic foot disease. The aim of this project was to investigate the impact of the podiatric high-risk foot coordinator role on length of stay, rate of re-admission and bed cost.MethodThis study evaluated the difference in length of stay and rate of re-admission between an 11- month pre-pilot period (November 2008 to October 2009) and a 10-month pilot period (August 2010 to June 2011). The estimated difference in bed cost between the pre-pilot and pilot audits was also calculated. Inclusion criteria were restricted to inpatients admitted with a diabetic foot ulcer, gangrene, cellulitis or infection as the primary cause for admission. Eligible records were retrieved using ICD-10 (V9) coding via the hospital clinical audit department for the pre-pilot period and a unique database was used to source records for the pilot phase.ResultsFollowing the introduction of the podiatric high-risk foot coordinator, the average length of stay reduced from 33.7 days to 23.3 days (mean difference 10.4 days, 95% CI 0.0 to 20.8, p = 0.050). There was no statistically significant difference in re-admission rate between the two study periods, 17.2% (95% CI 12.2% to 23.9%) in the pre-pilot phase and 15.4% (95% CI 12.0% to 19.5%) in the pilot phase (p = 0.820). The extrapolated annual cost saving following the implementation of the new coordinator role was calculated to be £234,000 for the 2010/2011 year.ConclusionsThis audit found that the extended scope of practice coordinator role may have a positive impact on reducing length of stay for diabetic foot admissions. This paper advocates the role of a podiatric high-risk foot coordinator utilising an extended scope of practice model, although further research is needed.

No abstract