Cited by 190Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and TreatmentPain Mechanisms and Treatments

A Modern Neuroscience Approach to Chronic Spinal Pain: Combining Pain Neuroscience Education With Cognition-Targeted Motor Control Training

Nijs, Jo, Meeus, Mira, Cagnie, Barbara, Roussel, Nathalie A., Dolphens, Mieke, Van Oosterwijck, Jessica, Danneels, Lieven·2014·Physical Therapy

Abstract

Chronic spinal pain (CSP) is a severely disabling disorder, including nontraumatic chronic low back and neck pain, failed back surgery, and chronic whiplash-associated disorders. Much of the current therapy is focused on input mechanisms (treating peripheral elements such as muscles and joints) and output mechanisms (addressing motor control), while there is less attention to processing (central) mechanisms. In addition to the compelling evidence for impaired motor control of spinal muscles in patients with CSP, there is increasing evidence that central mechanisms (ie, hyperexcitability of the central nervous system and brain abnormalities) play a role in CSP. Hence, treatments for CSP should address not only peripheral dysfunctions but also the brain. Therefore, a modern neuroscience approach, comprising therapeutic pain neuroscience education followed by cognition-targeted motor control training, is proposed. This perspective article explains why and how such an approach to CSP can be applied in physical therapist practice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2522/ptj.20130258

Cites

82 of 82 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
Nijs, J., Meeus, M., Cagnie, B., Roussel, N. A., Dolphens, M., Van Oosterwijck, J., & Danneels, L.
Affiliations
  • Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE)
  • University of Antwerp (BE)
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • J. Van Oosterwijck, PT, PhD, Pain in Motion Research Group, Departments of Human Physiology and Physiotherapy, Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, and Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, Ghent University.
Corresponding author
Nijs, Jo
Venue
Physical Therapy
Published
2014-05-01
Volume
94
Issue
5
Pages
730-738
ISSN
  • 0031-9023 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-6724
OpenAlex
W2133202890
Cited by
190
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 6
FWCI
11.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Physical Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
Keywords
chronic spinal pain, pain neuroscience education, motor control training, central sensitization, central nervous system hyperexcitability, chronic low back pain, chronic neck pain, whiplash-associated disorders, failed back surgery syndrome, cognitive training
MeSH terms
Atrophy, Brain, Communication, Exercise Therapy, Humans, Movement, Neurosciences, Patient Education as Topic, Posture, Whiplash Injuries, Low Back Pain, Muscle, Skeletal, Patient Selection, Neck Pain, Physical Therapy Modalities, Failed Back Surgery Syndrome, Chronic 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