Objectives The goal of the present study was to explore additional evidence of validity of the Serbian version of the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), a patient‐reported outcome measure of symptoms that have been found to be associated with central sensitization (CS). The CSI has been found to be psychometrically sound, and has demonstrated evidence of convergent and discriminant validity in numerous published studies and in multiple languages. Methods CSI data were collected from 399 patients with chronic pain who had various diagnoses and from 146 pain‐free controls. In addition, the patient sample completed a battery of validated patient‐reported outcome measures of sleep problems, cognitive problems, pain catastrophizing, pain‐related fear‐avoidance, decreased quality of life, and decreased perception of social support. Six patient subgroups were formed, with presumably different levels of CS (including those with fibromyalgia, multiple pain sites, and localized pain sites). Results Significant differences were found in total CSI scores among the controls and patient subgroups. Those with fibromyalgia and multiple pathologies scored highest and the control subjects scored lowest. Other patient‐reported CS‐related symptom dimensions were significantly correlated with total CSI scores. When the patients were divided into CSI severity subgroups (from subclinical to extreme), the severity of these other symptom dimensions increased with the severity of CSI scores. Conclusions The current study successfully demonstrated additional evidence of the convergent and discriminant validity of the Serbian version of the CSI.

Background:Sarcopenia is a loss of skeletal muscle mass, muscle strength, and function, with an impact on the quality of life, increased risk of bone loss and fracture, which is associated with normal aging.Objectives:To determine the effect of sarcopenia on the recovery of patients after hip fracture, their fitness, functionality, and quality of lifeMethods:A prospective study had 60 patients with hip fractures of both sexes,> 65 years of age (70.8), in the experimental group of patients with sarcopenia and the control group without sarcopenia. All anthropometric measurements were performed: BMI (kg / m2), waist circumference, the volume of the upper arm and lower leg muscle mass, handgrip force (kg) - dynamometry. The following questionnaires were used to assess functionality, mobility, and quality of life: Health assessment questionnaire (HAQ), Harrison hip score (HHS), Sarcopenia and Quality of life (SarQol)Results:Muscle mass (BMI) was significantly lower in the experimental group patients (p <0.005) compared to the control group. The clamp strength measured by the dynamometer was significantly lower in patients with hip fractures (p <0.005) compared to the control group. About 2/3 of the subjects with sarcopenia and hip fracture have a severe and complete physical disability. There was a significant difference in all domains of quality of life between subjects with hip fractures and the control group due to the presence of sarcopenia (p <0.005).Conclusion:The presence of sarcopenia indicates consequently reduced functionality and a degree of disability in patients with hip fractures, slows recovery and increases the need for mobility aids, thus extending hospital stay and patient recovery.References:[1]He H, Liu Y, Tian Q, Papasian CJ, Hu T, Deng HW. Relationship of sarcopenia and body composition with osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2016 Feb; 27(2):473–82.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-015-3241-8PMID: 26243357[2]Oliveira A, Vaz C. The role of sarcopenia in the risk of osteoporotic hip fracture. Clin Rheumatol. 2015 Oct; 34(10):1673–80.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-015-2943-9PMID: 25912213[3]Tarantino U, Piccirilli E, Fantini M, Baldi J, Gasbarra E, Bei R. Sarcopenia and fragility fractures: molecular and clinical evidence of the bone-muscle interaction. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015 Mar 4; 97(5):429–37.https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00648PMID: 25740034 Benichou O, Lord SR. Rationale for Strengthening Muscle to Prevent Falls and Fractures: A Review of the Evidence. Calcif Tissue Int. 2016 Jun; 98(6):531–45.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-016-0107-9PMID: 26847435[4]Hirschfeld HP, Kinsella R, Duque G. Osteosarcopenia: where bone, muscle, and fat collide. Osteoporos Int. 2017 Oct; 28(10):2781–2790.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-017-4151-8PMID: 28733716[5]Rantanen T, Volpato S, Ferrucci L, Heikkinen E, Fried LP, Guralnik JM. Handgrip strength and causespecific and total mortality in older disabled women: exploring the mechanism. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003 May; 51(5):636–41.https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0579.2003.00207.xPMID: 12752838[6]Syddall H, Cooper C, Martin F, Briggs R, Aihie Sayer A. Is grip strength a useful single marker of frailty? Age Ageing. 2003 Nov; 32(6):650–6.https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afg111PMID: 14600007[7]Chen LK, Liu LK, Woo J, Assantachai P, Auyeung TW, Bahyah KS, et al. Sarcopenia in Asia: consensus report of the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2014 Feb; 15(2):95–101.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2013.11.025PMID: 24461239[8]Wehren LE, Hawkes WG, Hebel JR, Orwig DL, Magaziner J. Bone mineral density, soft tissue body composition, strength, and functioning after hip fracture. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2005 Jan; 60 (1):80–4.https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/60.1.80PMID: 15741287Disclosure of Interests:None declared

No abstract

Introduction. A multidisciplinary and therapeutic approach is used for patients with osteoporotic bone fractures. Falls, leading to injuries, including bone fractures, are a common occurrence in the elderly suffering from osteoporosis. Multifactorial risk assessment is of great importance in identifying risk factors for the occurrence of falls, their removal and implementing preventive measures. The issue of risk assessment is very current and treated by related professional recommendations and national and international guidelines. The latter point out the following fall risks: previous falls, use of psychotropic substances, vision impairment, mobility, gait, muscle strength and balance and impairment of cognitive functions. Fear of falling, psychological passivity, urinary incontinence, inadequate footwear and certain neurologic and cardiovascular conditions are also considered additional risks. Fall risks may also be environmental (within the dwelling and outside), such as low lighting, inadequate furniture and its disposition, difficulty in accessing the bed, chair, toilet, bathroom, stairs and other. For a realistic fall risk estimate, besides using adequate questionnaires, several static and dynamic tests may be used to assess balance and mobility. Depending on the type of risk factors present, actions for their removal through information, education and participation of the elderly in preventive measures are also recommended. Conclusion. Multifactorial risk assessment of fall occurrence and bone fracture, as of recovery, are of great importance within certain population groups, especially the elderly.