AbstractBackground and aimsThe choice of testing site for quantitative sensory testing (QST) of pain sensitivity is important and previous studies have demonstrated patterns in pain sensitivity within discrete areas in different body regions. Some areas are characterized by a relatively high degree of spatial pain discrimination and recognizable patterns of pain referral, whilst others are not. The lumbar region is likely to have relatively low pain acuity and overlapping of pain referral. The current study was conducted to determine whether patterns of pain sensitivity (detection thresholds) could be identified in the lower back, whether differences in such patterns exist between different groups and whether such patterns could help identify a clinical source of pain and localized increased pain sensitivity.MethodsTwenty-one patients with non-specific chronic low back pain and 21 healthy controls were tested for pressure and heat pain thresholds on 30 pre-defined locations over the mid and lower back. Topographical maps of mean pain thresholds and variability were produced, inspected visually and analyzed statistically. Between group differences in pain threshold were analyzed statistically as an indicator of widespread increased pain sensitivity. Evidence of segmental increased pain sensitivity was examined by group statistical comparison of mid-line lower range.ResultsA clear pattern of higher pain thresholds in the mid-line was evident in both groups and for both pain modalities. No discernible patterns were evident for variability within groups, but marked differences were seen between groups: variability for pressure pain thresholds appeared similar between groups, however for heat pain threshold, variability was uniformly low in the control group and uniformly high in the patient group. A highly significant (p<0.0001) difference in pain thresholds for pressure and heat was found with patients exhibiting lower thresholds than controls. No between group difference was found for mid-line lower range for either modality (p>0.05).ConclusionsThe current study supports previous findings of widespread, increased pain sensitivity in chronic non-specific low-back pain patients. It also indicates that there are discernible and similar topographical patterns of pain sensitivity in the dorsal area in both groups, but that this pattern is related to the lateral position of the test site and not the segmental level. Specific segments with increased pain sensitivity could not be identified in the patient group, which casts doubt on the utility of pressure and heat pain thresholds as indicators of the clinical source of spinal pain – at least in a population of chronic non-specific low-back pain.ImplicationsIn a cohort of chronic non-specific low-back pain patients and with the chosen methodology, topographical QST mapping in the lumbar region does not appear useful for identifying the spinal segment responsible for clinical pain, but it does demonstrate widespread group differences in pain sensitivity.

BackgroundPerceived value is the key ingredient to carving and maintaining a competitive business niche. The opportunities to interact with consumers to understand and enhance perceived value are termed ‘touch points’. Due to the out-of-pocket expense incurred by patients, Danish chiropractors are subject to consumer trends and behaviors. The purpose of this investigation was to explore and describe consumer touch points relevant to perceived value through healthcare journeys in chiropractic practices.MethodWe designed a convergent parallel, mixed methods study. Our purposive sampling framework identified 11 chiropractic clinics from which we collected observational field notes, video recordings and face-to-face interviews.ResultsData was collected between April 14th and June 26th 2014. We described the exteriors and interiors of all participant clinics, interviewed 32 staff members, 12 new patients and 36 follow-up patients and finally video recorded 11 new and 24 follow-up consultations. Categorization and analysis led to the emergence six consumer touch point themes: ‘the internet’, ‘the physical environment’, ‘practice models’, ‘administrative staff’, ‘the consultation sequence and timing’ and ‘a consultation that adds value’. The Internet functions as a tool when choosing/confirming a clinic as appropriate, developing and initial image and managing appointments. The administrative hub appears integral to the shaping of positive consumer experiences outside of the consultation. Clinic location, practice model and interior design may contribute to context effects and thus may influence value perception during the clinical encounter. The duration of hands-on treatment received from the chiropractor is not an apparent consumer focus point. Rather, through a seven stage clinical procedure patients value consultations with clinicians who demonstrate professional competence by effective communication diagnosis/management and facilitating satisfactory treatment outcomes.ConclusionAt least six consumer touch points add/detract from value-related experiences in chiropractic practices. The duration of hands-on treatment per se does not appear to be a particular focus point. More research is required to explore this issue.