Loading…
Neuropathic and Nociplastic Pain Profiles are Common in Adult Chronic Nonbacterial Osteitis (CNO)
Chronic nonbacterial osteitis (CNO) is a rare musculoskeletal disease causing chronic bone pain. It is known that chronic musculoskeletal pain may involve other mechanisms than nociceptive pain only. We investigate the prevalence of neuropathic and nociplastic pain in adult CNO and their association...
Saved in:
Published in: | Calcified tissue international 2024-06, Vol.114 (6), p.603-613 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Chronic nonbacterial osteitis (CNO) is a rare musculoskeletal disease causing chronic bone pain. It is known that chronic musculoskeletal pain may involve other mechanisms than nociceptive pain only. We investigate the prevalence of neuropathic and nociplastic pain in adult CNO and their association with clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes. Survey study among the Dutch adult CNO cohort (
n
= 84/195 participated), including PAIN-detect for neuropathic pain, and the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), Fibromyalgia Rapid Screening Tool (FiRST), and ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy (AAPT) for nociplastic pain. Clinical characteristics and CNO-related bone pain scores were compared between patients with exclusive nociceptive pain and those with nociceptive pain plus neuropathic and/or nociplastic pain (mixed pain). 31% (95% CI 21–41) of patients classified as likely having neuropathic pain according to PAIN-detect. 53% (41–64) of patients displayed central sensitization on CSI, 61% (50–72) screened positive for fibromyalgia on FiRST and 14% (7–23) of patients fulfilled the AAPT criteria, all indicative of nociplastic pain. Mixed pain was associated with longer diagnostic delay (mean difference 2.8 years, 95% CI 0.4–5.2,
p
= 0.023), lower educational level (72% versus 20%,
p
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 1432-0827 0171-967X 1432-0827 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00223-024-01214-3 |