Kinesiophobia Is Associated with Migraine

Benatto, Mariana Tedeschi; Bevilaqua-Grossi, Débora; Carvalho, Gabriela Ferreira; Bragatto, Marcela Mendes; Pinheiro, Carina Ferreira; Lodovichi, Samuel Straceri; Dach, Fabíola; Fernández‐de‐las‐Peñas, César; Florêncio, Lidiane Lima

doi:10.1093/pm/pny206

Cited by 36 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, pain and fear of movement under HV condition might be linked to III and IV deformity degrees compared to I and II deformity degrees according to prior studies associating greater HV deformity with worse quality of life related to foot health, higher depression, as well as foot posture, pressure patterns, and function alterations [4][5][6][7]23,24]. Our findings were in line with prior research studies detailing kinesiophobia and pain in different musculoskeletal conditions, such as patellofemoral pain [20], temporomandibular conditions [48], chronic fatigue syndrome and/or fibromyalgia [49], whiplash-associated conditions and/or low back pain [50], chronic mechanical neck pain [51], or migraine [52].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Kinesiophobia and Pain Intensity Are Increased by a Greater Hallux Valgus Deformity Degree- Kinesiophobia and Pain Intensity in Hallux Valgus

Palomo‐López

Becerro-de-Bengoa-Vallejo

Iglesias

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Hallux valgus (HV) has been previously associated with psychological disorders. Thus, the purposes of this study were to associate kinesiophobia and pain intensity with HV deformity degrees, as well as predict kinesiophobia and pain intensity based on HV deformity and demographic features. Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out recruiting 100 subjects, who were divided into HV deformity degrees, such as I-no HV (n = 25), II-mild (n = 25), III-moderate (n = 25), and IV-severe (n = 25) HV. Kinesiophobia total and domains (activity avoidance and harm) scores and levels were self-reported by the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK-11). Pain intensity was self-reported by the numeric rating scale (NRS). Results: Statistically significant differences (p < 0.01; η2 = 0.132–0.850) were shown for between-groups comparison of kinesiophobia total and domain scores (activity avoidance and harm) and levels, as well as pain intensity among HV deformity degrees. Post hoc comparisons showed statistically significant differences with a large effect size (p < 0.05; d = 0.85–4.41), showing higher kinesiophobia symptoms and levels and pain intensity associated with greater HV deformity degrees, especially for III-moderate and/or IV-severe HV deformity degrees versus I-no HV and/or II-mild deformity degrees. Both statistically significant prediction models (p < 0.05) for kinesiophobia (R2 = 0.300) and pain intensity (R2 = 0.815) were predicted by greater HV deformity degree and age. Conclusions: Greater kinesiophobia symptoms and levels and pain were associated with higher HV deformity degrees, especially severe and/or moderate HV with respect to no and/or mild HV. The kinesiophobia and pain intensity were predicted by greater HV deformity degree and age.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Kinesiophobia and Pain Intensity Are Increased by a Greater Hallux Valgus Deformity Degree- Kinesiophobia and Pain Intensity in Hallux Valgus

Palomo‐López

Becerro-de-Bengoa-Vallejo

Iglesias

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In such scenario, aggressive or excessive exercise may be detrimental if the intervention triggers sensitized peripheral nociceptors and may cause prolonged pain. This situation plays an important role since kinesiophobia (fear to movement) is present in 50% of migraineurs and is associated to worse cutaneous allodynia severity [77]. Therefore, an inappropriate exercise program could lead to a worse treatment scenario for a headache patient.…”

Section: Scientific Evidence Of Exercise Interventions For Headachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Reasoning Behind Non-Pharmacological Interventions for the Management of Headaches: A Narrative Literature Review

Fernández‐de‐las‐Peñas

Plaza-Manzano

Arias-Buría

2020

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Headache is the clinical syndrome most commonly observed by neurologists in daily practice. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments are commonly used for the management of headaches; however, the clinical reasoning behind these interventions is not properly applied. We conducted a narrative literature review using as data sources for academic PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, EBSCO, PEDro, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Collaboration Trials Register, and SCOPUS. This narrative literature review mainly considered systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomised clinical trials, and expert opinions published after the year 2000 discussing clinical reasoning for application of non-pharmacological interventions in individuals with tension-type, migraine, and cervicogenic headaches. After the data extraction, we organized the literature thematically as follows: (1) mapping of theoretical aspects of non-pharmacological interventions; (2) summarizing most updated literature about effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions grouped by targeted tissue and headache; (3) identifying research gaps in the existing literature and proposing hypotheses for better understanding of current clinical reasoning. We found that there are many non-pharmacological treatment strategies used for headaches, including beyond the tissue-based impairment treatments (bottom-up) and strategies targeting the central nervous system (top down). Bottom-up strategies include joint-biased, soft-tissue biased, or needling interventions, whereas top-down strategies include exercise and cognitive interventions. Evidence shows that the effectiveness of these interventions depends on the application of proper clinical reasoning, since not all strategies are effective for all headaches. For instance, evidence of non-pharmacological interventions is more controversial for migraines than for tension-type or cervicogenic headaches, since migraine pathogenesis involves activation of sub-cortical structures and the trigemino- vascular system, whereas pathogenesis of tension-type or cervicogenic headaches is most associated to musculoskeletal impairments of the cervical spine. We conclude that current literature suggests that not all non-pharmacological interventions are effective for all headaches, and that multimodal, not isolated, approaches seem to be more effective for patients with headaches. Most published studies have reported small clinical effects in the short term. This narrative literature review provides some hypotheses for discrepancies in the available literature and future research. Clinical reasoning should be applied to better understand the effects of non-pharmacological interventions.

show abstract

“…The ASC-12 was previously validated in comparison with QST 8 . It was originally written in English and has been translated into Portuguese, Spanish and Korean 32,50,51 . The Korean translation was constructed through forward and backward translation by a translator and reliability was assessed by calculating internal consistency of items.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence and characteristics of cutaneous allodynia in probable migraine

Han

Kim

Cho

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cutaneous allodynia (CA) is a pain in response to non-nociceptive stimulation and a marker of central sensitisation. Probable migraine (PM) is a migraine subtype that fulfils all but one criterion of migraine. Headache intensity and the disability of individuals with PM are similar or lower than individuals with migraine. This study compared CA prevalence and characteristics of PM and migraine using a nationally representative sample in Korea. The Allodynia Symptom Checklist-12 (ASC-12) was used to assess CA (ASC-12 score ≥ 3). PM and migraine prevalence were 11.6% and 5.0%, respectively. CA prevalence did not significantly differ between PM and migraine (14.5% vs. 16.0%, p = 0.701). Participants with PM with CA reported a higher monthly headache frequency (3.3 ± 4.3 vs. 1.8 ± 3.6, p = 0.044), more severe headache intensity (Visuals Analogue Scale, 6.0 [4.0–7.0] vs. 5.0 [3.0–6.0], p = 0.002), and higher impact of headache (Headache Impact Test-6, 56.3 ± 7.2 vs. 48.3 ± 8.0, p < 0.001) than those without CA. Multiple regression analyses revealed that headache frequency and intensity, anxiety, and depression were significant factors for CA in participants with PM. In conclusion, CA prevalence among participants with PM and migraine were comparable. Anxiety, depression, and headache frequency and intensity were significant factors for CA in participants with PM.

show abstract

Kinesiophobia Is Associated with Migraine

Cited by 36 publications

References 35 publications

Kinesiophobia and Pain Intensity Are Increased by a Greater Hallux Valgus Deformity Degree- Kinesiophobia and Pain Intensity in Hallux Valgus

Kinesiophobia and Pain Intensity Are Increased by a Greater Hallux Valgus Deformity Degree- Kinesiophobia and Pain Intensity in Hallux Valgus

Clinical Reasoning Behind Non-Pharmacological Interventions for the Management of Headaches: A Narrative Literature Review

Prevalence and characteristics of cutaneous allodynia in probable migraine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About