OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the deep-tissue pressure pain sensitivity and temporal summation of pain within and around healthy knees exposed to experimental pain.

DESIGN: The study was designed as a randomized crossover trial, with each subject tested on 1 day.

SETTING: All tests were carried out at the Laboratory for Musculoskeletal Pain and Motor Control, Center for Sensory-Motor Interaction, Department of Health Science and Technology at Aalborg University, Denmark.

SUBJECTS: Seventeen healthy subjects (10 males) participated in this study.

INTERVENTIONS: Experimental pain model. Pain was induced in the infrapatellar fat pad by injection of hypertonic saline and the contralateral infrapatellar fat pad was injected with isotonic saline as control.

OUTCOME MEASURES: Pressure pain thresholds, temporal summation of pressure pain, and cutaneous mechanosensitivity were assessed on three occasions: baseline, immediately after the injection, and when pain had vanished. Assessments sites were located in the peripatellar region, vastus lateralis, and tibialis anterior muscles.

RESULTS: The experimental knee pain model demonstrated 1) hyperalgesia to pressure stimulation on the infrapatellar fat pad during experimental pain, and 2) facilitated temporal summation of pressure pain at the infrapatellar fat pad and knee-related muscles.

CONCLUSION: The increased sensitivity and temporal summation found in this study were exclusive to deep -tissue with no contralateral decreased pain sensitivity. The study showed that acute knee joint pain leads to hyperalgesia and facilitated temporal summation in the infrapatellar fat pad and in muscles located distant to the injection site, in subjects with no history of knee pain.

Summary of Findings (SoF) tables present, for each of the seven (or fewer) most important outcomes, the following: the number of studies and number of participants; the confidence in effect estimates (quality of evidence); and the best estimates of relative and absolute effects. Potentially challenging choices in preparing SoF table include using direct evidence (which may have very few events) or indirect evidence (from a surrogate) as the best evidence for a treatment effect. If a surrogate is chosen, it must be labeled as substituting for the corresponding patient-important outcome. Another such choice is presenting evidence from low-quality randomized trials or high-quality observational studies. When in doubt, a reasonable approach is to present both sets of evidence; if the two bodies of evidence have similar quality but discrepant results, one would rate down further for inconsistency. For binary outcomes, relative risks (RRs) are the preferred measure of relative effect and, in most instances, are applied to the baseline or control group risks to generate absolute risks. Ideally, the baseline risks come from observational studies including representative patients and identifying easily measured prognostic factors that define groups at differing risk. In the absence of such studies, relevant randomized trials provide estimates of baseline risk. When confidence intervals (CIs) around the relative effect include no difference, one may simply state in the absolute risk column that results fail to show a difference, omit the point estimate and report only the CIs, or add a comment emphasizing the uncertainty associated with the point estimate.

Early therapeutic intervention and use of new highly efficacious treatments have improved the outcome in many patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), but have also led to the need for more precise methods to evaluate disease activity. In adult rheumatology, numerous studies have established the importance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography (US), and MRI is considered the reference standard. Nevertheless, due to differences in disease characteristics and the unique features of the growing skeleton, the findings obtained in adults are not directly applicable to children and adolescents. For paediatric patients, US offers specific advantages over MRI, because it is non-invasive, does not require sedation or general anesthesia (which facilitates repeated examinations for follow-up), is quickly accessible bedside, and is easy to combine with clinical assessment (interactivity). Agitation of the patient is rarely a problem, and hence young children can be seated on a parent's lap or play while being examined, and multiple locations can be assessed during a single session. Furthermore, modern high-frequency US transducers used by experienced US examiners can provide unsurpassed resolution of the superficial musculoskeletal structures in children. US is also the best available technique for imaging guidance of steroid injections. Unfortunately, there are still no validated MRI or US scoring systems for evaluating inflammatory and joint damage abnormalities in JIA, and few US studies have been conducted. Sonographic assessment of disease activity has, however, been proven to be more informative than clinical examination and is also readily available at points of care. This review summarises the literature on imaging in JIA, focusing on US and the important role this technique will play in JIA in the future.