An emerging technique in chronic pain research is MRI, which has led to the understanding that chronic pain patients display brain structure and function alterations. Many of these altered brain regions and networks are not just involved in pain processing, but also in other sensory and particularly cognitive tasks. Therefore, the next step is to investigate the relation between brain alterations and pain related cognitive and emotional factors. This review aims at providing an overview of the existing literature on this subject. Pubmed, Web of Science and Embase were searched for original research reports. Twenty eight eligible papers were included, with information on the association of brain alterations with pain catastrophizing, fear-avoidance, anxiety and depressive symptoms. Methodological quality of eligible papers was checked by two independent researchers. Evidence on the direction of these associations is inconclusive. Pain catastrophizing is related to brain areas involved in pain processing, attention to pain, emotion and motor activity, and to reduced top-down pain inhibition. In contrast to pain catastrophizing, evidence on anxiety and depressive symptoms shows no clear association with brain characteristics. However, all included cognitive or emotional factors showed significant associations with resting state fMRI data, providing that even at rest the brain reserves a certain activity for these pain-related factors. Brain changes associated with illness perceptions, pain attention, attitudes and beliefs seem to receive less attention in literature. Significance: This review shows that maladaptive cognitive and emotional factors are associated with several brain regions involved in chronic pain. Targeting these factors in these patients might normalize specific brain alterations.

Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP) is a major and highly prevalent health problem. Given the high number of papers available, clinicians might be overwhelmed by the evidence on CLBP management. Taking into account the scale and costs of CLBP, it is imperative that healthcare professionals have access to up-to-date, evidence-based information to assist them in treatment decision-making. Therefore, this paper provides a state-of-the-art overview of the best evidence non-invasive rehabilitation for CLBP. Taking together up-to-date evidence from systematic reviews, meta-analysis and available treatment guidelines, most physically inactive therapies should not be considered for CLBP management, except for pain neuroscience education and spinal manipulative therapy if combined with exercise therapy, with or without psychological therapy. Regarding active therapy, back schools, sensory discrimination training, proprioceptive exercises, and sling exercises should not be considered due to low-quality and/or conflicting evidence. Exercise interventions on the other hand are recommended, but while all exercise modalities appear effective compared to minimal/passive/conservative/no intervention, there is no evidence that some specific types of exercises are superior to others. Therefore, we recommend choosing exercises in line with the patient’s preferences and abilities. When exercise interventions are combined with a psychological component, effects are better and maintain longer over time.

The original CSI was translated into Dutch and did not reveal any problems during data acquisition. The domains represented by the 4 factors may be useful in setting up specific patient profiles and treatment targets. To conclude, the Dutch CSI revealed 4 distinguishable domains, showed good internal consistency for the total score and 3 out of 4 domains, good discriminative power, and excellent test-retest reliability.