Next Article in Journal
University Students’ Mental Health and Well-Being during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Findings from the UniCoVac Qualitative Study
Next Article in Special Issue
Could the Improvement of Supraspinatus Muscle Activity Speed up Shoulder Pain Rehabilitation Outcomes in Wheelchair Basketball Players?
Previous Article in Journal
Response to the Regulation of Video Games under the Youth Media Protection Act: A Public Health Perspective
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Risk Factors to Persistent Pain Following Musculoskeletal Injuries: A Systematic Literature Review

1
Pain in Motion International Research Group, Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy, Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1050 Ixelles, Belgium
2
Physiotrio, Riyadh 13213, Saudi Arabia
3
Research Centre for Health Care Innovations, Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences, 3015 GG Rotterdam, The Netherlands
4
Healthcare Improvement Scotland, Glasgow G1 2NP, UK
5
Department of Health and Rehabilitation Science, Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj 16278, Saudi Arabia
6
Chronic Pain Rehabilitation, Department of Physical Medicine and Physiotherapy, University Hospital Brussels, 1090 Jette, Belgium
7
Unit of Physiotherapy, Department of Health and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden
8
The Research Chair for Healthcare Innovation, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(15), 9318; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159318
Submission received: 6 April 2022 / Revised: 23 July 2022 / Accepted: 25 July 2022 / Published: 29 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Musculoskeletal Injuries, Rehabilitation and Impact on Public Health)

Abstract

:
Background: Musculoskeletal (MSK) injury is one of the major causes of persistent pain. Objective: This systematic literature review explored the factors that lead to persistent pain following a MSK injury in the general population, including athletes. Methods: A primary literature search of five electronic databases was performed to identify cohort, prospective, and longitudinal trials. Studies of adults who diagnosed with a MSK injury, such as sprains, strains or trauma, were included. Results: Eighteen studies involving 5372 participants were included in this review. Participants’ ages ranged from 18–95 years. Most of the included studies were of prospective longitudinal design. Participants had a variety of MSK injuries (traumatic and non-traumatic) causing persistent pain. Multiple factors were identified as influencing the development of persistent pain following a MSK injury, including high pain intensity at baseline, post-traumatic stress syndrome, presence of medical comorbidities, and fear of movement. Scarcity of existing literature and the heterogeneity of the studies made meta-analysis not possible. Conclusions: This systematic review highlighted factors that might help predict persistent pain and disability following MSK injury in the general population, including athletes. Identification of these factors may help clinicians and other health care providers prevent the development of persistent pain following a MSK injury.

1. Introduction

Musculoskeletal (MSK) pain conditions are very common and are one of the top 20 causes for years lived with disabilities globally [1]. MSK injuries are one of the major causes of persistent pain leading to disabilities and high disease burden [2]. Persistent pain after MSK injury is not only common in the general population but also in athletes, leading to disability and time lost from sports activities [3]. Persistent pain is defined as pain that persists for three to six months following onset, according to the International Association for the Study of Pain [4].
It has been reported that only a small percentage of people will be free of pain following MSK trauma [5]. For that reason, the development of persistent pain following MSK injuries in the general population has been the subject of a number of studies [5,6,7], with one study finding that up to 48% develop chronic pain after traumatic MSK injuries, and a combination of social and medical risk factors identified in the development of chronic pain [5].
In sport-related MSK injuries, a recent scoping review explored the psychological, social, and contextual factors across recovery stages following a sport-related knee injury, finding a broad spectrum of psychological, social, and contextual factors that influenced recovery [8]. It was suggested in this review that athletes who suffered a sport-related knee injury experienced fear/anxiety as well as other barriers to recovery, most predominantly at the return to sport. It was also suggested that psychological, social, and contextual factors influencing recovery were dynamic over the stages of recovery. Central sensitization and psychosocial variables have also been considered to be explanatory factors for persistent pain after MSK injury [9,10].
The limited success seen for the management of persistent pain following MSK injuries in the general population underscores the need for strategies to prevent the development of persistent pain. In order to do this, it is important to understand the factors that contribute to the transition from acute to chronic pain following MSK injury. Therefore, the current systematic review explored the factors that lead to persistent pain following acute MSK injury in the general population. This will be the first step towards focusing on preventing persistent pain and shifting the focus towards prevention of chronicity following musculoskeletal injuries. The study findings may help identify modifiable factors to help prevent chronicity following MSK injury. Additionally, the current systematic review investigated the intrinsic factors (i.e., anatomical and psychological) and extrinsic factors (i.e., social and environmental) that predict the transition from acute to persistent pain state in individuals following MSK injury.

2. Materials and Methods

The search strategy was developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines [11].

2.1. Search Strategy

A primary literature search of five electronic databases was performed to extract data from prospective and retrospective cohort studies. The search strategy was prepared by an information specialist from the Erasmus Medical Centre in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic databases, including MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed, ProQuest, and Web of Science, were searched from their inception to June 2020. The reference lists of eligible studies and relevant systematic reviews were screened for additional articles. In addition, experts in the field were contacted to identify unpublished studies and corresponding authors from the included articles were, when necessary, consulted in order to clarify any missing data.

2.2. Selection Criteria

To systematically select studies, inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed a priori and were applied in three stages. In stage one, identified studies were exported into Covidence, an online systematic review-management platform, where two investigators (O.A. and P.A.) independently reviewed the titles and abstracts against predefined criteria. In stage two, relevant full text articles were retrieved and independently reviewed by two investigators (O.A. and P.A.) to determine their eligibility. The final stage involved screening the included full text studies to exclude unrelated studies. In the event where agreement could not be reached, a third investigator (H.S.) was consulted.
The literature search was conducted using the following criteria: (1) population: adults who had sustained a MSK injury, (2) types of studies: observational studies (retrospective, prospective, cross-sectional, and longitudinal studies), and (3) outcome of interest: pain following injury. Reviews, case reports, and studies that examined the epidemiology, examination, and treatment were excluded. No restriction was placed on language or date of publication. Adults over 18 years who had been diagnosed with injuries such as sprains, strains, or trauma through impact or fall were included. Individuals who presented at baseline with chronic pain or pain as a result of surgery or non-MSK injury were excluded. Studies were included when they examined outcomes associated with the measurement of pain and the factors associated with the development of acute to chronic pain.

2.3. Data Extraction

A data-extraction form was developed for the purposes of this review. Data extraction included the following information: (1) study characteristics (authors, year of publication, and study design); (2) participant characteristics (number of participants at enrollment and follow-up, demographic information, and injury characteristics); (3) risk factors identified; (4) outcomes measured; (5) estimates of risk factors and persistent pain (e.g., odd radios (ORs)); and (6) authors’ conclusions. Kappa statistics were used to assess agreement between the two investigators on inclusion at each stage of the review.

2.4. Quality Assessment

The methodological quality of each included study was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis (QUIP) checklist, which comprises six important domains (i.e., participation, prognostic factor measurement, attrition, outcome measurement, confounding measurement, and analysis and reporting) for assessing validity and risk of bias in prognostic studies [12,13,14]. Therefore, the current systematic review used the QUIP checklist to assess risk of bias in the included studies. Two independent investigators (O.A. and P.A.) evaluated the included studies based on these criteria [13]. The checklist items were evaluated independently as either ‘Identified’ (1 point) or ‘Not identified’ (0 point) by investigators and then discussed to reach consensus. If an agreement between the two investigators could not be met, a third investigator (HS) was consulted. The points from the QUIP checklist were totaled, and studies were considered as having low risk of bias if they were found to be of high quality (score ≥ 17/22) and high risk of bias if they were found to be of low quality (score ≤ 16/22), with this near the 80% quality cut-off point [14].

3. Results

3.1. Study Selection and Characteristics

Out of 4022 identified studies, six duplicates were removed (Figure 1). Out of the remaining 4016 studies, 3942 studies were excluded during title and abstract screening. Out of 74 full-text studies, 56 studies did not meet the inclusion criteria. Finally, a total of 18 studies involving 5372 participants were included in this systematic review. Two independent investigators (O.A. and P.A.) examined the relevant articles and short-listed as per a priori risk-of-bias criteria.
Table 1 presents study characteristics, such as authors’ names, country of study, study design, and sample size. Included studies originated from Australia [15,16,17,18], United States [19,20,21], Canada [22,23], Denmark [24], Germany [25], The Netherlands [26,27], Sweden [28,29], Spain [30], and United Kingdom [31,32]. Participants’ ages ranged from 18–92 years. Most of the included studies used a prospective longitudinal design, only one study was cross-sectional in nature [15]. Participants in the included studies had various of MSK injuries (traumatic and non-traumatic MSK) that led to persistent pain. Minimum and maximum follow-up periods were one week [26] and five years [21], respectively. Most of the included studies measured pain intensity using a numerical rating scale (NRS) [16,17,24,26,27], while three studies used a visual analogue scale [18,30,31]. Sample sizes of the included studies ranged between 66 [21] and 1290 [18].

3.2. Study Quality (Risk of Bias)

Table 2 presents the quality scores from each of the included trials. The risk-of-bias assessment, conducted by the two investigators, was found to be reliable (kappa coefficient = 0.85). Risk of bias was assessed separately for the six QUIP factors. More than 70% of included studies had a low risk of bias for most of the QUIP. Five studies had a high risk of bias for factor 2 and six studies for factor 5. Four studies had a moderate risk of bias for factor 2. Figure 2 presents the assessors’ judgments about the risk of bias for each QUIP factor presented as percentages across all included studies. Studies were considered with low quality if most criteria were not met, or significant flaws relating to key aspects of study design were evident. Five studies with low quality [15,20,25,30,31] were not included in the narrative synthesis of the results.

3.3. Risk Factors for Persistent Pain

Multiple risk factors for developing persistent pain following MSK injury were identified. However, due to the between-study heterogenicity and the limited number of studies examining each risk factor, it was not possible to run a meta-analysis of the results. Therefore, a narrative synthesis of results was conducted. Table 3 presents details of risk factors contributing to persistent pain following MSK injuries as identified through this systematic review.
Age was found to be a significant risk factor for developing chronic pain after MSK injury in a study by Pierik, IJzerman et al. [26].
Initial pain severity was reported as a risk factor for the development of chronic pain in three studies [16,17,19]. Pain at the time of discharge from hospital after traumatic MSK injury predicted the development of chronic pain in one study [28]. The severity of the MSK injury was found to predict the course of pain in MSK injuries [26].
One study reported that the presence of comorbidities predicted chronic pain after MSK injury [28]. In this study, comorbidities were defined as having three or more chronic medical conditions (e.g., diabetes, and hypertension). A low level of physical activity was reported to be a predictor of chronic pain in MSK injuries in two studies [21,28]. One study demonstrated that the level of education and eligibility for compensation following MSK injury may act as risk factors for the development of chronic pain [21].
The presence of post-traumatic stress disorder was shown to be a risk factor for developing chronic pain following MSK injury in one study [25]. One study reported that fear avoidance and catastrophizing may be risk factors for chronic pain [27]. In a sample of patients after distal radius fractures, Ref. [26] reported that depression was a significant risk factor for slowing recovery after the injury.

4. Discussion

This systematic review explored the factors that contribute to persistent pain following acute MSK injury in the general population. Many of the included studies identified persistent pain following MSK injury. Similarly, Rosenbloom et al. [2] reviewed 11 studies and they concluded high prevalence of persistent pain following traumatic musculoskeletal injury. The results highlighted several modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors leading to chronicity in patients who experienced a MSK injury. The results of this study contribute to the body of knowledge on factors leading to persistent pain following MSK injuries that will help guiding prevention strategies to reduce the burden of these conditions.
Comparing our results to previous research, many of the studies included in this review identified persistent pain following MSK injury [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33]. Personal factors such as age, which is considered to be a non-modifiable factor, have reported association with persistent pain. Most of the studies included in the current review reported that the prevalence of persistent pain following MSK injury was more common in those of middle age. In contrast, a previous review identified older age as one of the predicting factors for persistent pain following MSK injury [2]. The reason for this is not clear because heterogeneity in the study design and methodology precludes direct comparison. For instance, four included studies in this review had reported persistent pain following musculoskeletal injuries in more than 60% of female patients. Likewise, a previous study reported high risk of chronic pain following trauma in female patients [34].
Our finding that persistent pain after MSK injury was associated with a group of modifiable factors, including high intensity of pain, pain-catastrophizing, fear-avoidance beliefs, and post-traumatic stress symptoms, is similar to that of a previous review which identified predictive factors including initial pain, anxiety and depression, fear-avoidance, and patient perception for persistent pain [2]. Another study reported high risk of persistent pain in patient with high levels of general anxiety and post-traumatic stress symptoms [22]. Moreover, several studies had reported a positive relationship between post-traumatic stress symptoms and chronic pain [35,36,37,38].
Other modifiable risk factors identified in the current review for developing persistent pain after MSK injury included total abbreviated injury score, initial pain severity, and initial pain control attitudes, which concur with previous studies. Similarly, other studies reported several risk factors of pain progression in traumatic patients [3,39]. Some of the factors are present at the time of admission (e.g., injury pattern and type, anxiety and depression), some are present during hospitalization (e.g., pain intensity, type of surgery, treatment strategies, and hospital-stay duration), while others are present at the time of discharge (e.g., anxiety and depression, post-traumatic stress symptoms, and pain catastrophizing) [2,3,40,41].
None of the studies included in this review investigated or reported risk factors for persistent pain following a sport MSK injury. Therefore, there is a need for more research to understand the transition from acute to chronic pain following sports MSK injury, preferentially applying a broad biopsychosocial perspective and sport-related perspectives for identifying potential risk factors. This will inform health and medical programs at all levels (preventive, primary, secondary, and tertiary) in order to reduce disability following MSK injuries.
The current review had several strengths as well as limitations. Strengths included the screening of five electronic databases by two independent investigators, the search strategy which was prepared by a specialized and independent information specialist, the risk-of-bias assessment performed by two independent investigators, the high interrater reliability of the risk-of-bias assessment, the compliance with the international standards for conducting and reporting systematic literature reviews (i.e., the PRISMA guidelines) and the detailed and thorough data processing. Hence, all efforts were undertaken to optimize the internal and external validity of the study findings, yet some study limitations should be mentioned. First, heterogeneity in the included studies prevented the ability to directly compare various factors causing persistent pain following MSK injury. Second, most of the included studies in this review were cross-sectional in nature, preventing the ability to conduct a cause-and-effect analysis. Finally, a relatively small number of studies (n = 11) were included in this review due to the scarcity of studies that fulfil the inclusion criteria. Therefore, more studies using larger and more homogenous study populations are warranted to further identify various predictors of persistent pain following MSK injury in the adult general population.

5. Conclusions

There are multiple factors causing persistent pain following MSK injury in the general population. These factors include high intensity of pain, pain-catastrophizing, fear-avoidance beliefs, depression, presence of comorbidities, and post-traumatic stress symptoms. Clinicians and other health care providers may focus on preventing persistent pain and shifting the focus towards prevention of chronicity following an injury.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, O.A., J.N., L.V. and H.A.; methodology, O.A., J.N., L.V. and H.A.; formal analysis, O.A., P.A. and H.A.; resources, H.A.; data curation, O.A., P.A. and L.V.; writing—original draft preparation, O.A. and P.A.; writing—review and editing, O.A., P.A., A.A., J.N., L.V. and H.A.; supervision, J.N., L.V. and H.A.; project administration, O.A.; funding acquisition, H.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The Deanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University for funding through the Vice-Deanship of Scientific Research Chairs.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the Deanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University for funding through the Vice-Deanship of Scientific Research Chairs.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Diseases, G.B.D.; Injuries, C. Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet 2020, 396, 1204–1222. [Google Scholar]
  2. Rosenbloom, B.N.; Khan, S.; McCartney, C.; Katz, J. Systematic review of persistent pain and psychological outcomes following traumatic musculoskeletal injury. J. Pain Res. 2013, 6, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Radresa, O.; Chauny, J.-M.; Lavigne, G.; Piette, E.; Paquet, J.; Daoust, R. Current views on acute to chronic pain transition in post-traumatic patients. J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014, 76, 1142–1150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Young Casey, C.; Greenberg, M.A.; Nicassio, P.M.; Harpin, R.E.; Hubbard, D. Transition from acute to chronic pain and disability: A model including cognitive, affective, and trauma factors. Pain 2008, 134, 69–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Artus, M.; Campbell, P.; Mallen, C.D.; Dunn, K.M.; van der Windt, D.A. Generic prognostic factors for musculoskeletal pain in primary care: A systematic review. BMJ Open 2017, 7, e012901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Truong, L.K.; Mosewich, A.D.; Holt, C.J.; Le, C.Y.; Miciak, M.; Whittaker, J.L. Psychological, social and contextual factors across recovery stages following a sport-related knee injury: A scoping review. Br. J. Sports Med. 2020, 54, 1149–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Puentedura, E.J.; Louw, A. A neuroscience approach to managing athletes with low back pain. Phys. Ther. Sport 2012, 13, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Int. J. Surg. 2010, 8, 336–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Hayden, J.A.; Côté, P.; Bombardier, C. Evaluation of the quality of prognosis studies in systematic reviews. Ann. Intern. Med. 2006, 144, 427–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Hayden, J.A.; van der Windt, D.A.; Cartwright, J.L.; Côté, P.; Bombardier, C. Assessing bias in studies of prognostic factors. Ann. Intern. Med. 2013, 158, 280–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hemingway, H.; Philipson, P.; Chen, R.; Fitzpatrick, N.K.; Damant, J.; Shipley, M.; Abrams, K.R.; Moreno, S.; McAllister, K.S.; Palmer, S. Evaluating the quality of research into a single prognostic biomarker: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 83 studies of C-reactive protein in stable coronary artery disease. PLoS Med. 2010, 7, e1000286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Kamper, S.J.; Hancock, M.J.; Maher, C.G. Optimal designs for prediction studies of whiplash. Spine 2011, 36, S268–S274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Tate, R.L.; Douglas, J. Use of reporting guidelines in scientific writing: PRISMA, CONSORT, STROBE, STARD and other resources. Brain Impair. 2011, 12, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Slavin, R.E. Best evidence synthesis: An intelligent alternative to meta-analysis. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1995, 48, 9–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Harris, I.A.; Young, J.M.; Rae, H.; Jalaludin, B.B.; Solomon, M.J. Factors associated with back pain after physical injury: A survey of consecutive major trauma patients. Spine 2007, 32, 1561–1565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Holmes, A.; Williamson, O.; Hogg, M.; Arnold, C.; O’Donnell, M.L. Determinants of chronic pain 3 years after moderate or serious injury. Pain Med. 2013, 14, 336–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Holmes, A.; Williamson, O.; Hogg, M.; Arnold, C.; Prosser, A.; Clements, J.; Konstantatos, A.; O’Donnell, M. Predictors of pain 12 months after serious injury. Pain Med. 2010, 11, 1599–1611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Williamson, O.D.; Epi, G.D.C.; Gabbe, B.J.; Physio, B.; Cameron, P.A.; Edwards, E.R.; Richardson, M.D.; Group, V.O.T.O.R.P. Predictors of moderate or severe pain 6 months after orthopaedic injury: A prospective cohort study. J. Orthop. Trauma 2009, 23, 139–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Friedman, B.W.; Conway, J.; Campbell, C.; Bijur, P.E.; John Gallagher, E. Pain one week after an emergency department visit for acute low back pain is associated with poor three-month outcomes. Acad. Emerg. Med. 2018, 25, 1138–1145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Silva, F.M.; Brismée, J.-M.; Sizer, P.S.; Hooper, T.L.; Robinson, G.E.; Diamond, A.B. Musicians injuries: Upper quarter motor control deficits in musicians with prolonged symptoms-A case-control study. Musculoskelet. Sci. Pract. 2018, 36, 54–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wellsandt, E.; Axe, M.J.; Snyder-Mackler, L. Poor performance on Single-Legged hop tests associated with development of posttraumatic knee osteoarthritis after anterior cruciate ligament injury. Orthop. J. Sports Med. 2018, 6, 2325967118810775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  22. Rosenbloom, B.N.; Katz, J.; Chin, K.Y.; Haslam, L.; Canzian, S.; Kreder, H.J.; McCartney, C.J. Predicting pain outcomes after traumatic musculoskeletal injury. Pain 2016, 157, 1733–1743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Modarresi, S.; Suh, N.; Walton, D.M.; MacDermid, J.C. Depression affects the recovery trajectories of patients with distal radius fractures: A latent growth curve analysis. Musculoskelet. Sci. Pract. 2019, 43, 96–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Andersen, T.E.; Karstoft, K.I.; Brink, O.; Elklit, A. Pain-catastrophizing and fear-avoidance beliefs as mediators between post-traumatic stress symptoms and pain following whiplash injury–A prospective cohort study. Eur. J. Pain 2016, 20, 1241–1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Heidari, J.; Mierswa, T.; Kleinert, J.; Ott, I.; Levenig, C.; Hasenbring, M.; Kellmann, M. Parameters of low back pain chronicity among athletes: Associations with physical and mental stress. Phys. Ther. Sport 2016, 21, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Pierik, J.; IJzerman, M.J.; Gaakeer, M.; Vollenbroek-Hutten, M.M.R.; Van Vugt, A.; Doggen, C.J.M. Incidence and prognostic factors of chronic pain after isolated musculoskeletal extremity injury. Eur. J. Pain 2016, 20, 711–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Hallegraeff, J.M.; Kan, R.; van Trijffel, E.; Reneman, M.F. State anxiety improves prediction of pain and pain-related disability after 12 weeks in patients with acute low back pain: A cohort study. J. Physiother. 2020, 66, 39–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Åkerblom, S.; Larsson, J.; Malmström, E.-M.; Persson, E.; Westergren, H. Acceptance: A factor to consider in persistent pain after neck trauma. Scand. J. Pain 2019, 19, 733–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Söderlund, A.; Löfgren, M.; Stålnacke, B.-M. Predictors before and after multimodal rehabilitation for pain acceptance and engagement in activities at a 1-year follow-up for patients with whiplash-associated disorders (WAD)—A study based on the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation (SQRP). Spine J. 2018, 18, 1475–1482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kovacs, F.M.; Abraira, V.; Zamora, J.; Fernández, C.; Network, S.B.P.R. The transition from acute to subacute and chronic low back pain: A study based on determinants of quality of life and prediction of chronic disability. Spine 2005, 30, 1786–1792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Potter, R.G.; Jones, J.M.; Boardman, A.P. A prospective study of primary care patients with musculoskeletal pain: The identification of predictive factors for chronicity. Br. J. Gen. Pract. 2000, 50, 225–227. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  32. O’Connor, S.R.; Bleakley, C.M.; Tully, M.A.; McDonough, S.M. Predicting Functional Recovery after Acute Ankle Sprain. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e72124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  33. Friedman, B.W.; Gensler, S.; Yoon, A.; Nerenberg, R.; Holden, L.; Bijur, P.E.; Gallagher, E.J. Predicting three-month functional outcomes after an ED visit for acute low back pain. Am. J. Emerg. Med. 2017, 35, 299–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Daoust, R.; Paquet, J.; Moore, L.; Emond, M.; Gosselin, S.; Lavigne, G.; Choiniere, M.; Boulanger, A.; Mac-Thiong, J.-M.; Chauny, J.-M. Early factors associated with the development of chronic pain in trauma patients. Pain Res. Manag. 2018, 2018, 7203218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Jenewein, J.; Moergeli, H.; Wittmann, L.; Büchi, S.; Kraemer, B.; Schnyder, U. Development of chronic pain following severe accidental injury. Results of a 3-year follow-up study. J. Psychosom. Res. 2009, 66, 119–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. López-Martínez, A.; Ramírez-Maestre, C.; Esteve, R. An examination of the structural link between post-traumatic stress symptoms and chronic pain in the framework of fear-avoidance models. Eur. J. Pain 2014, 18, 1129–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Ruiz-Párraga, G.T.; López-Martínez, A.E. The contribution of posttraumatic stress symptoms to chronic pain adjustment. Health Psychol. 2014, 33, 958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Stratton, K.J.; Clark, S.L.; Hawn, S.E.; Amstadter, A.B.; Cifu, D.X.; Walker, W.C. Longitudinal interactions of pain and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms in US Military service members following blast exposure. J. Pain 2014, 15, 1023–1032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Bérubé, M.; Choinière, M.; Laflamme, Y.G.; Gélinas, C. Acute to chronic pain transition in extremity trauma: A narrative review for future preventive interventions (part 1). Int. J. Orthop. Trauma Nurs. 2016, 23, 47–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Bérubé, M.; Choinière, M.; Laflamme, Y.G.; Gélinas, C. Acute to chronic pain transition in extremity trauma: A narrative review for future preventive interventions (part 2). Int. J. Orthop. Trauma Nurs. 2017, 24, 59–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Rivara, F.P.; MacKenzie, E.J.; Jurkovich, G.J.; Nathens, A.B.; Wang, J.; Scharfstein, D.O. Prevalence of pain in patients 1 year after major trauma. Arch. Surg. 2008, 143, 282–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of the selected papers.
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of the selected papers.
Ijerph 19 09318 g001
Figure 2. Assessor’s judgment about the risk of bias for each QUIIP factor across all included studies.
Figure 2. Assessor’s judgment about the risk of bias for each QUIIP factor across all included studies.
Ijerph 19 09318 g002
Table 1. Study characteristics.
Table 1. Study characteristics.
StudiesYear of PublicationCountry of StudyStudy DesignParticipantsFollow-upPeriodsOutcomeRisk FactorsSample Size
Hallegraeff et al. [27]2020The NetherlandsLongitudinal prospective cohortAcute low back pain (LBP with <6 weeks duration with or without radiating pain and had been pain free for at least 3 months before the onset of their current back pain)
Age 18–60 years
Baseline and 12 weeksPain: NRS and PDI
Anxiety: STAI-Y (STAI-S and STAI_T)
Pain intensity
at outset
Duration of pain
Physical workload
State and Trait Anxiety
225
Akerblom et al. [28]2019SwedenRetrospective cohortPersistent pain following neck traumaNRAnxiety and
depression: HADS
Acceptance: CPAQ-8 Pain:
distribution and severity: MPI
Participant
demographics,
anxiety, depression, acceptance,
persistent pain
565
Modarresi et al. [23]2019CanadaRetrospective Exploratory cohortAdults > 18 years who were recovering from distal radius fractureBaseline, 3, 6, and 12 monthsPain and
disability: PRWE
Comorbidities: SCQ
Depression, participant demographics, education and
employment status, pain and disability
318
Friedman et al. [19]2018USARetrospective cohortAcute LBPBaseline,
1 week following ED visit and 3 month follow-up
LBP-related functional impairment (RMDQ)
Presence of moderate or severe LBP
Pain and functional impairment354
Soderlund et al. [29]2018SwedenProspective cohortGeneral population with whiplash history 2–4 months prior to recruitment.
WAD grade 1–2
Age 18–65 years
Baseline, prior to discharge and 1 year
follow-up
CPAQ
MPQ
TSK
Pain acceptance,
fear of movement
and fear of (re)injury
177
Wellsandt et al. [21]2018USAProspective cohortAthletes with acute, unilateral ACL injury
Athletes were level 1 or 2 athletes
5 years post initial injury: Baseline), immediately
following 10 additional physical therapy sessions and 6 months following completion
Quadriceps strength: MVIC
Impairment
and functional
limitation
KOS-ADLS
General function
GRS
IKDC
Knee function66
Silva et al. [20]2018USACase-control studyStudent or
professional
musicians with
upper limb injuries
Age 18–65 years
NRCervical flexor
endurance test
Scapular dyskinesis test
Craniocervical test
Motor control72
Andersen et al. [24]2016DenmarkLongitudinal cohortGeneral population admitted
to hospital
emergency
department with traumatic
whiplash QTFC-WAD grade 1–3
Age > 18 years
Baseline,
3 months and 6 months
Pain: NRS
Fear-avoidance
beliefs: Orebro musculoskeletal pain screening questionnaire
PTSS: Harvard trauma
questionnaire
Depressive symptoms: HADS
Catastrophizing: PCS
Pain at outset
Pain catastrophizing
PTSS
Depression
Fear avoidance
198
Heidari et al. [25]2016GermanyLongitudinal cohortPresence of non-specific back pain
Participation in some form of active exercise therapy
Age > 18 years
6 monthsBack pain: Chronic pain grade
Stress: Recovery stress questionnaire and trier
inventory for assessment of chronic stress
Pain and
chronification
stress
139
Rosenbloom et al. [22]2016Canadaprospective, observational, longitudinal designTraumatic
musculoskeletal injury
Admitted to
hospital for
>2 days
Age > 18 years
14 days and 4 monthsNeuropathic pain: self-report Leeds assessment of
neuropathic
symptoms and signs and NRS
BPI
Mental health: HADS
Pain anxiety: pain anxiety symptom scale
Post-traumatic stress disorder checklist
pain self-efficacy checklist
Pain catastrophizing scale
Anxiety sensitivity index
Chronicity128
Pierik et al. [26]2016The NetherlandsProspective 1 year
follow-up study
Isolated musculoskeletal injury caused by blunt trauma
Age 18–69 years
1 week,
6 weeks,
3 months, and 6 months
Pain: NRS
HRQoL: SF-36
Anxiety and
depression: HADS
Pain Catastrophizing: PCS
Kinesiophobia: TSK
Pain experience during follow-up: BPI
Chronic pain 6 months post-injury435
Holmes et al. [16]2013Australia3 year
follow-up cohort
Scored >2 on
abbreviated injury score
Admitted for more than 24 h
Age 18–70 years
3 months,
12 months, and 3 years
Pain: NRS
Disability: SF-36
Social Support: Multidimensional scale of perceived social support
Mental health: NRS
Psychological symptoms: HADS
Presence of
chronic pain
Pain-related
disability
220
O’Connor et al. [32]2013United KingdomSecondary analysisAcute ankle injury
Age > 16 years
4 weeks and
4 months
Pain: Y/N
Injury grade
Ankle function85
Holmes et al. [17]2010Australiaprospective cohort with 12 months follow-upScored > 2 on
abbreviated
injury score
Admitted for more than 24 h
Age 18–70 years
3 months and 12 monthsPain: NRS
Disability: SF-36
Social Support: Multidimensional scale of perceived social support
Mental health: NRS
Psychological symptoms: HADS
Presence of
chronic pain
Pain-related disability
238
Williamson et al. [18]2009AustraliaProspective cohort studyAdmitted to
hospital with
orthopedic injury
In hospital and 6 monthsSF12
Pain: VAS
Chronic pain 6 months post-injury1290
Harris et al. [15]2007AustraliaCross-
sectional study
Major trauma after accidental injury
Age > 18 years
1–6 years post-injuryPTSD: PTSD checklist
Back pain in the preceding week
General health: SF-36
Disability: ODI
NR355
Kovacs et al. [30]2005SpainLongitudinal studyAcute LBP with or without radiation to leg14 days,
59 days
Pain: VAS
Disability: RMQ and EQ-5D
Pain and disability366
Potter et al. [31]2000United KingdomProspective longitudinal studyUncomplicated musculoskeletal pain
Age 18–65 years
Baseline and 12 weeksHealth: general health
questionnaire
Pain: VAS, pain measurement
inventory
Coping: active coping score
and passive
coping score
chronicity141
Table 2. Quality scores from the 18 included studies.
Table 2. Quality scores from the 18 included studies.
FactorHallegraeff et al. (2020) [27]Akerblom et al. (2019) [28]Modarresi et al. (2019) [23]Friedman et al. (2018) [33]Soderlund et al. (2018) [29]Wellsandt et al. (2018) [21]Silva et al. (2018) [20]Andersen et al. (2016) [24]Heidari et al. (2016) [25]Rosenbloom et al. (2016) [22]Pierik et al. (2015) [26]Holmes et al. (2013) [16]O’Connor et al. (2013) [32]Holmes et al. (2010) [17]Williamson et al. (2009) [18]Harris et al. (2007) [15]Kovacs et al. (2005) [30]Potter et al. (2000) [31]
Study participation
summary
LLLLLLLLHLHLLLLLLL
Study attrition summaryLMMMLLLHHLMMMMLHHH
Prognostic factor
measurement summary
LLMMLMHLLLLLMLMLLH
Outcome measurement summaryLLLLLLLLLLLLLLMLLH
Study confounding
summary
LLMMLMHLHLLLHLHHHH
Statistical analysis and presentation summaryLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLMLH
Overall+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
H: High bias; M: Medium Bias; and L: Low Bias. High quality (+++): Majority of criteria met, little or no risk of bias. Results unlikely to be changed by further research. Acceptable (++): Most criteria met. Some flaws in the study with an associated risk of bias, Conclusions may change in the light of further studies. Low quality (+): Either most criteria not met, or significant flaws relating to key aspects of study design.
Table 3. Risk factors for causing persistent pain following musculoskeletal injuries.
Table 3. Risk factors for causing persistent pain following musculoskeletal injuries.
CitationsAge, Y
Mean (SD)
Gender, n (%)ActivityInjury TypeRegionRisk FactorsResults
Hallegraeff et al. [27]41 (12)Female 103 (51%)Physically active 141 (69%)Non-specific acute LBPLumbarState and trait
anxiety
Pain intensity
at outset
Pain related
disability
Duration of LBP
Widespread pain
State anxiety levels (OR 1.1 (95% CI 1.0–1.1, p = 0.00)) and pain intensity (OR 1.3 (95% CI 1.1–1.7 p = 0.01)) at baseline were independent
predictors of still having pain at 12 weeks.
Trait anxiety was not found to be predictive
of pain at 12 weeks.
Akerblom et al. [28]Median age 39 Traumatic neck injuryNeckParticipant
demographics,
anxiety, depression, acceptance,
persistent pain
Widespread Pain: females and lower
acceptance
Pain Interference: females, depression, and lower acceptance
Pain Severity: lower acceptance, increased
levels of anxiety or depression, and lower
education level.
Modarresi et al. [23]59.6 ± 11.9Female 80.5%NRDistal radius fractureWristDepression,
participant
demographics,
education and
employment status, pain and disability
Majority recovered within normal limits,
depression was associated with non-recovery 24% v
8%, X2 = 6.36, p = 0.01 (rapid recovery) and 16%, X2 = 4.07, p = 0.04 (slow recovery)
No other factors associated with slow/non
recovery.
Friedman et al. [33]38 (12)Female 160 (45)NRAcute low back painLumbarPain one week
following injury
Functional
impairment
At the 3 month follow-up 39% of patients reported LBP related functional impairment and 16% reported moderate to severe LBP. The baseline STaRT score was not associated with long-term pain. The length of pain duration
anticipated by the patient (>7 days) was associated with both the pain at 3 months (OR 2.31 (95% CI 1.17–4.54)) and functional disability (OR 1.93 (95% CI 1.09–3.43))
Soderlund et al. [29]39.5Female 225NRWhiplashNeckFear of movement and fear of
(re)injury
Pain acceptance
Patients with support from significant others and lower levels of fear of movement and
better outcome predictions were associated with better outcomes at the 1 year follow-up than those without.
Wellsandt et al. [21]Non-OA 28.8 (11.3)
OA
28.3 (11.5)
Non-OA Male/
Female: 43/24
OA
Male/
Female: 6/3
Level 1 52
Level 2 24
ACLKneeKnee functionThe risk of developing knee OA 5 years after experiencing an ACL injury is increased when individuals had poor performance in the single-legged hop test. This result was not the same as patients who underwent ACL reconstruction.
Silva et al. [20]Symptomatic 23.3 ± 8.21
CG
25.03 ± 10.5
EG: M/F 12/24
CG: M/F 12/24
Exercise
Days 3.1
Minutes 164.9
Upper limb and neck painUpper limb and neckMotor controlMusicians who present with upper quadrant playing-related pain had reduced performance in clinical tests and demonstrated poor scapular motor function.
Andersen et al. [24]36.79 (12.61)Female, 61.6%NRWhiplash
injury
NeckDemographics
Fear avoidance (FA) beliefs
Catastrophizing
Depression
35.4% as non-recovered.
The non-recovered (the medium stable, high stable and very high stable trajectories)
displayed significantly higher levels of
post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS),
pain-catastrophizing (PCS), FA, and depression compared to the recovered trajectories.
Importantly, PCS and FA
beliefs mediated the effect of PTSS on
pain intensity
Heidari et al. [25]32.24 (11.32)Female, 41%AthletesMusculoskeletal painBackPain factors
Stress
No significant differences noted between the chronic group and non-chronic group,
insignificantly elevated stress levels.
Rosenbloom et al. [22]43.0 (19.9)Female, 32.2%NRMotor-
vehicle
accidents
Multiple locationsDemographics,
Pain factors,
Mental health
The deleterious effects of
neuropathic pain were seen in the 32% of young trauma patients who had symptoms
of neuropathic pain 4 months after injury.
The pain interfered significantly with their daily living, employment, mood, sleep,
and enjoyment of life.
Pierik et al. [26]Median: 50.0 (IQR 36.0–60.0)Female, 60.5%NRFracture: 328 (75.4%)
Dislocation: 25 (5.7%)
Sprains and Strains: 47 (10.8%)
Contusion: 24 (5.5%)
Muscle
rupture: 10 (2.3%)
Lower
extremity
Demographics
Pain factors
Psychological
factors
Injury and
treatment factors
Clinical Factors
Age: 40–49: OR 1.03 (95% CI 0.28–1.07); 50–59: OR 3.43 (95% CI 1.29–9.09); 60–69: OR 3.85 (95% CI 1.47–10.08)
Pain level at discharge,
severe pain: OR 3.41 (95% CI 1.73–6.71);
Preexisting chronic pain: OR 6.09 (95% CI 3.18–11.69); Pre-injury physical,
Poor: OR 3.18 (95% CI 1.68–6.02);
Comorbidities, yes: OR 2.87 (95% CI 1.53–5.40)
Holmes et al. [16]Chronic Pain: 41.4 (13.0)
No Chronic pain: 38.5 (13.1)
Chronic Pain,
female: 31%
No Chronic pain,
female: 27%
NRMultiple traumaMultiple locationsDemographics
Pain factors
Psychological
factors
Social support
Initial pain: OR 1.26 (95% CI 1.09–1.46);
Injury severity: OR 1.12 (95% CI 1.01–1.24)
O’Connor et al. [32]27 (9.8)Female, 30%NRInversion sprainAnkleDemographics
Injury variables
Increased risk of poor function
pain med joint line: 4.92 (95% CI 1.39–8.44); pain weight-bearing ankle dorsiflexion:
6.8 (95% CI 4.8–8.7)
Holmes et al. [17]Chronic Pain: 42 (14)
No Chronic pain: 39 (14)
Chronic Pain,
female: 71%
No Chronic pain, female: 75%
NRMultiple traumaMultiple locationsDemographics
Pain factors
Psychological
factors
Social support
Number of injuries: OR 1.14 (95% CI 1.02–1.27); Initial pain: OR 1.34 (95% CI 1.13–1.61);
Pain control attitudes: OR 0.79 (95% CI 0.69–0.99)
Williamson et al. [18]Range: 14–95Female: 39%NRMultiple traumaMultiple locationsDemographics,
Pain factors
Function
Self-reported pre-injury, pain-related disability, and moderate or severe pain at discharge from the acute hospital were found to be
independent predictors of moderate or
severe pain at 6 months post-injury.
Harris et al. [15]47.8 (19–91)Female, 28%NRMusculoskeletal painBackDemographic,
Clinical factors
Injury severity
Psychosocial factors
PTSD: OR 4.92 (95% CI 2.83–8.56); >3 chronic illness: OR 5.83 (95% CI 2.41–14.09).
The presence of back pain was significantly
associated with increasing chronic illnesses
at follow-up.
Kovacs et al. [30]47.7 (15.5)Female, 54%NRMusculoskeletal painLow backDemographics,
Pain factors Function
The more pain an individual had at baseline the increased risk of disability at 60 days follow-up.
Potter et al. [31]Chronic Pain: <40 = 28 (41.2%)
40–50 = 23 (33.8%)
>55 = 17 (25.0%)
Acute Pain: <40 = 36 (49.3%)
40–50 = 15 (20.5%)
>55 = 22(30.1%)
Chronic Pain,
female: 64.5%
Acute Pain,
female: 53.4%
NRMusculoskeletal painMultiple locationsDemographics, Health status
Pain factors
Pain intensity, active coping score, and previous episode of continuous pain were
significantly and independently related to
the development of chronic pain.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Alkassabi, O.; Voogt, L.; Andrews, P.; Alhowimel, A.; Nijs, J.; Alsobayel, H. Risk Factors to Persistent Pain Following Musculoskeletal Injuries: A Systematic Literature Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9318. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159318

AMA Style

Alkassabi O, Voogt L, Andrews P, Alhowimel A, Nijs J, Alsobayel H. Risk Factors to Persistent Pain Following Musculoskeletal Injuries: A Systematic Literature Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(15):9318. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159318

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alkassabi, Othman, Lennard Voogt, Pamela Andrews, Ahmad Alhowimel, Jo Nijs, and Hana Alsobayel. 2022. "Risk Factors to Persistent Pain Following Musculoskeletal Injuries: A Systematic Literature Review" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 15: 9318. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159318

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop