Cited by 169Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and Treatment

Diagnosing and treating chronic musculoskeletal pain based on the underlying mechanism(s)

Clauw, Daniel J.·2015·Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology

Abstract

Until recently, most clinicians considered chronic pain to be typically due to ongoing peripheral nociceptive input (i.e., damage or inflammation) in the region of the body where the individual is experiencing pain. Clinicians are generally aware of a few types of pain (e.g., headache and phantom limb pain) where chronic pain is not due to such causes, but most do not realize there is not a single chronic pain state where any radiographic, surgical, or pathological description of peripheral nociceptive damage has been reproducibly shown to be related to the presence or severity of pain. The primary reason for this appears to be that both the peripheral and central nervous systems play a critical role in determining which nociceptive input being detected by sensory nerves in the peripheral tissues will lead to the perception of pain in humans. This manuscript reviews some of the latest findings regarding the neural processing of pain, with a special focus on how clinicians can use information gleaned from the history and physical examination to assess which mechanisms are most likely to be responsible for pain in a given individual, and tailors therapy appropriately. A critical construct is that, within any specific diagnostic category (e.g., fibromyalgia (FM), osteoarthritis (OA), and chronic low back pain (CLBP) are specifically reviewed), individual patients may have markedly different peripheral/nociceptive and neural contributions to their pain. Thus, just as low back pain has long been acknowledged to have multiple potential mechanisms, so also is this true of all chronic pain states, wherein some individuals will have pain primarily due to peripheral nociceptive input, whereas in others peripheral (e.g., peripheral sensitization) or central nervous system factors ("central sensitization" or "centralization" of pain via augmented pain processing in spinal and brain) may be playing an equally or even more prominent role in their pain and other symptoms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.berh.2015.04.024

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clauw, D. J.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Clauw, Daniel J.
Venue
Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-02
Volume
29
Issue
1
Pages
6-19
ISSN
1521-6942 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1951621994
Cited by
169
References
100
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 16
FWCI
2.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
chronic musculoskeletal pain, pain mechanisms, central sensitization, peripheral sensitization, fibromyalgia, osteoarthritis, chronic low back pain, pain diagnosis, pain management, nociception
MeSH terms
Humans, Pain Perception, Central Nervous System Sensitization, Chronic Pain, Musculoskeletal Pain

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review