Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2007 Aug;57(541):655-61.

Prognostic factors for musculoskeletal pain in primary care: a systematic review

Affiliations
Review

Prognostic factors for musculoskeletal pain in primary care: a systematic review

Christian D Mallen et al. Br J Gen Pract. 2007 Aug.

Abstract

Background: Estimating the future course of musculoskeletal pain is an important consideration in the primary care consultation for patients and healthcare professionals. Studies of prognostic indicators tend to have been viewed in relation to each site separately, however, an alternative view is that some prognostic indicators may be common across different sites of musculoskeletal pain.

Aim: To identify generic prognostic indicators for patients with musculoskeletal pain in primary care.

Design of study: Systematic review.

Setting: Observational cohort studies in primary care.

Method: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO and CINAHL electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2006. Inclusion criteria were that the study was a primary care-based cohort, published in English and contained information on prognostic indicators for musculoskeletal conditions.

Results: Forty-five studies were included. Eleven factors, assessed at baseline, were found to be associated with poor outcome at follow up for at least two different regional pain complaints: higher pain severity at baseline, longer pain duration, multiple-site pain, previous pain episodes, anxiety and/or depression, higher somatic perceptions and/or distress, adverse coping strategies, low social support, older age, higher baseline disability, and greater movement restriction.

Conclusion: Despite substantial heterogeneity in the design and analysis of original studies, this review has identified potential generic prognostic indicators that may be useful when assessing any regional musculoskeletal pain complaint. However, Its unclear whether these indicators, used alone, or in combination, can correctly estimate the likely course of individual patients' problems. Further research is needed, particularly in peripheral joint pain and using assessment methods feasible for routine practice.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Results of systematic search and selection of studies.

Comment in

  • Chronic musculoskeletal pain.
    Carnes D, Underwood M. Carnes D, et al. Br J Gen Pract. 2007 Aug;57(541):604-5. Br J Gen Pract. 2007. PMID: 17688752 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Roberts C, Adebajo A, Long S. Improving the quality of care of musculoskeletal conditions in primary care. Rheumatology. 2002;41(5):503–508. - PubMed
    1. NHS Executive. NHS R&D strategic review — primary care. London: Department of Health; 1999.
    1. Richardson J, Hassell A, Hay E, Thomas E. ‘I'd rather go and know’: women's understanding and experience of DEXA scanning for osteoporosis. Health Expect. 2002;5(2):114–126. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt GH, Tugwell P. Clinical epidemiology. A basic science for clinical medicine. 2nd edn. Boston: Little, Brown & Company; 1991.
    1. Webb R, Brammah T, Lunt M, et al. Opportunities for prevention of‘clinically significant’ knee pain: results from a population-based cross sectional survey. J Public Health. 2004;26(3):277–284. - PubMed