46
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of chronic widespread pain in the general population

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          One in 10 adults report chronic widespread pain with potential sociocultural variation. Cultural differences in pain reporting should be considered in future research.

          Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.

          Abstract

          Chronic widespread pain (CWP) is common and associated with poor general health. There has been no attempt to derive a robust prevalence estimate of CWP or assess how this is influenced by sociodemographic factors. This study therefore aimed to determine, through a systematic review and meta-analysis, the prevalence of CWP in the adult general population and explore variation in prevalence by age, sex, geographical location, and criteria used to define CWP. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and AMED were searched using a search strategy combining key words and related database-specific subject terms to identify relevant cohort or cross-sectional studies published since 1990. Included articles were assessed for risk of bias. Prevalence figures for CWP (American College of Rheumatology criteria) were stratified according to geographical location, age, and sex. Potential sources of variation were investigated using subgroup analyses and meta-regression. Twenty-five articles met the eligibility criteria. Estimates for CWP prevalence ranged from 0% to 24%, with most estimates between 10% and 15%. The random-effects pooled prevalence was 10.6% (95% confidence intervals: 8.6-12.9). When only studies at low risk of bias were considered pooled, prevalence increased to 11.8% (95% confidence intervals: 10.3-13.3), with reduced but still high heterogeneity. Prevalence was higher in women and in those aged more than 40 years. There was some limited evidence of geographic variation and cultural differences. One in 10 adults in the general population report chronic widespread pain with possible sociocultural variation. The possibility of cultural differences in pain reporting should be considered in future research and the clinical assessment of painful conditions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The prevalence and characteristics of fibromyalgia in the general population.

          To determine the prevalence and characteristics of fibromyalgia in the general population. A random sample of 3,006 persons in Wichita, KS, were characterized according to the presence of no pain, non-widespread pain, and widespread pain. A subsample of 391 persons, including 193 with widespread pain, were examined and interviewed in detail. The prevalence of fibromyalgia was 2.0% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.4, 2.7) for both sexes, 3.4% (95% CI 2.3, 4.6) for women, and 0.5% (95% CI 0.0, 1.0) for men. The prevalence of the syndrome increased with age, with highest values attained between 60 and 79 years (> 7.0% in women). Demographic, psychological, dolorimetry, and symptom factors were associated with fibromyalgia. Fibromyalgia is common in the population, and occurs often in older persons. Characteristic features of fibromyalgia--pain threshold and symptoms--are similar in community and clinic populations, but overall severity, pain, and functional disability are more severe in the clinic population.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Epidemiology of chronic non-cancer pain in Europe: narrative review of prevalence, pain treatments and pain impact.

            Estimates on the epidemiology of chronic non-cancer pain vary widely throughout Europe. It is unclear whether this variation reflects true population differences or methodological factors. Such epidemiological information supports European decision makers in allocating healthcare resources. Pan-Europe epidemiological data about chronic non-cancer pain was obtained using systematic review principles in searching and summarising results. Multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CRD Databases, and GIN) were systematically searched for primary studies containing epidemiological data on chronic non-cancer pain in Europe excluding studies that solely concerned migraines, headaches and pain associated with specific disease conditions. The studies were prioritised according to quality, recency and validity. Eighteen research questions concerning aspects of chronic pain included: prevalence; incidence; pain treatments, control and compliance; treatment satisfaction; and quality of life and economic impacts. The search yielded 16 619 references and 45 were relevant to Europe. Studies for each question were selected that provided the most recent, representative and valid data. There was a clear lack of studies concerning chronic non-cancer pain in Europe as a whole. The 1-month prevalence of moderate-to-severe non-cancer chronic pain was 19%. Chronic pain significantly impacted on patient-perceived health status, affected everyday activities including economic pursuits and personal relationships, and was significantly associated with depressive symptoms. The majority relied on drugs for pain control and NSAIDs were the most frequent drug choice. Despite pain medications, a large proportion had inadequate pain control. To the authors' knowledge this is the most comprehensive literature review on epidemiological data in this field. It is clear that chronic pain has a dramatic impact on European society. Since chronic non-cancer pain is treated differently from cancer-related pain, the lack of data in this area clearly underlines the need for decision makers in healthcare to gather further epidemiological data.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Chronic musculoskeletal pain, prevalence rates, and sociodemographic associations in a Swedish population study.

              To estimate the prevalence of chronic regional and widespread musculoskeletal pain in a sample of the general adult population and study the association to age, sex, socioeconomic class, immigration, and housing area. A cross sectional survey with a postal questionnaire to 3928 inhabitants on the west coast of Sweden. The age and sex adjusted prevalence of chronic regional pain (CRP) was 23.9% and chronic widespread pain (CWP) 11.4% among 2425 subjects who responded to the complete questionnaire. Odds ratio (OR) for CWP showed a systematic increasing gradient with age and was highest in the age group 59-74 yrs (OR 6.36, 95% CI 3.85-10.50) vs age group 20-34 yrs. CWP was also associated with female sex (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.41-2.61), being an immigrant (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.22-2.77), living in a socially compromised housing area (OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.48-6.27), and being an assistant nonmanual lower level employee (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.09-3.38) or manual worker (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.65-4.49) vs being an intermediate/higher nonmanual employee. OR for CRP showed a systematic increasing gradient with age and was highest in the age group 59-74 yrs (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.62-3.05) vs age group 20-34 yrs. CRP was also associated with being a manual worker (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.19-2.23) vs being an intermediate/higher nonmanual employee. Chronic musculoskeletal pain is common in the general population. Sociodemographic variables were overall more frequently and strongly associated with CWP than with CRP, which indicates different pathophysiology in the development or preservation of pain in the 2 groups.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Pain
                Pain
                JPAIN
                Pain
                JOP
                Pain
                Wolters Kluwer (Philadelphia, PA )
                0304-3959
                1872-6623
                January 2016
                23 December 2015
                : 157
                : 1
                : 55-64
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Non-communicable Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom
                [b ]Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, United Kingdom
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. Address: London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, London WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom. Tel.: +44 (0)207 927 2922; fax: +44 (0)20 7580 6897. E-mail address: kathryn.mansfield@ 123456lshtm.ac.uk (K. E. Mansfield).
                Article
                PAIN-D-14-13463 00006
                10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000314
                4711387
                26270591
                063c936c-3bd6-400f-97b5-2bb6ed9baa1a
                © 2015 International Association for the Study of Pain

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND), which permits downloading and sharing the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.

                History
                : 04 March 2015
                : 17 June 2015
                : 28 July 2015
                Categories
                Comprehensive Review
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                systematic review,meta-analysis,chronic widespread pain,fibromyalgia,prevalence,general population

                Comments

                Comment on this article