Mosquera‐Moscoso, Johanna

Background: A 21-question Lifestyle Medicine Assessment (LMA) tool was recently developed to quickly evaluate the lifestyle medicine domains (Avoidance of Substance Use, Nutrition, Connection, Movement, and Recovery). In this study, we used the LMA tool to complete a preliminary analysis of family medicine providers, a group that is known to face challenging lifestyle demands and burnout. Objective: The primary purpose was to assess the LMA domain scores and determine if significant differences exist (among the domains). The secondary purpose was to complete a correlation matrix for the LMA domain scores to better understand the strength of the relationships (among domains). Methods: The participants were 35 family medicine providers and all completed the LMA. The maximum LMA score is 50 (each of the five domains is scored 0-10 points). Pairwise comparisons were used to determine if there were significant differences among the five domain scores (P < .05) and Pearson correlation was used to assess correlations between domains. Results: The overall LMA score was moderate (34.68 ± 6.26). The Recovery domain score (4.71 ± 2.91) was significantly lower (P < 0.01) than the other domains (Connection = 6.94 ± 2.16; Nutrition = 7.41 ± 2.00; Movement = 6.26 ± 2.94; Avoidance of Substance Use = 9.35 ± 1.28). The Avoidance of Substance Use score was significantly higher than the other domains ( P < .01). Overall, the correlation scores among the domains were weak (all r-scores were ≤0.34). Conclusions: For this group of providers, there appears to be substantial room for improvement in four of the five domains. The domain of greatest concern appears to be Recovery. The weak correlation scores suggest that domain scores tend to be independent of each other, and that assessment results are unique to the individual.

AbstractMetabolic syndrome (MetS) is a prevalent comorbidity in patients with chronic pain conditions. Emerging evidence suggests that the relationship between MetS and chronic pain is bidirectional. This interplay involves complex mechanisms, including proinflammatory mediators in nociceptive modulation and pain‐induced lifestyle changes affecting metabolic function. This scoping review examines the association between MetS and chronic pain. We conducted a scoping review, including 28 studies. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. We included observational studies (cross‐sectional, case–control, and cohort studies) from the following databases: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. We identified studies on migraine (n = 9), spinal pain (n = 8), general chronic pain (n = 4), fibromyalgia syndrome (n = 3), carpal tunnel syndrome (n = 1), osteoarthritis (n = 1), shoulder pain (n = 1), and neuropathic pain (n = 1). Most studies used a cross‐sectional design and standard criteria to define MetS, with some exceptions. Individuals with MetS and spinal pain, fibromyalgia, or general chronic pain showed higher pain scores and increased functional limitations. MetS was common in patients with migraine, but its effect on pain severity was inconclusive. The relationship between MetS and other pain conditions requires further investigation to clarify the association and potential mechanisms. MetS is prevalent in patients with chronic pain and is associated with worse pain and functional outcomes. Health care providers should acknowledge the wide spectrum of MetS beyond obesity. This understanding may help identify those at risk for more severe chronic pain.