Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 11, 2025
Biomechanical Changes Related to Low Back Pain: An Innovative Tool for Movement Pattern Assessment and Treatment Evaluation in Rehabilitation
Published on: December 13, 2024
Comprehensive assessment and classification of upper and lower limb pain in athletes: a scoping review
Ciarán Purcell1,2, Ciara Duignan3,2, Brona M Fullen3
1School of Public Health, Physiotherapy & Sport Science, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland ciaran.purcell.1@ucdconnect.ie.
Background:
Upper and lower limb (peripheral) pain is prevalent in athletes. Contemporary research prioritises multidimensional pain assessment and classification. This study aims to review comprehensive athlete pain assessment practices against the reference standard (International Olympic Committee, IOC Athlete Pain framework), identifying trends and highlighting gaps.
Methods And Analysis:
Six databases were searched using a comprehensive search strategy. This review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute standardised methodology for scoping reviews and is reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Title and abstract, full-text screening and data charting were completed by two independent reviewers.
Inclusion Criteria:
Original research, systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines reporting assessment or classification of pain in athletes of any age with chronic or acute peripheral pain in English on human participants from database inception.
Results:
470 studies with 175 different pain assessment tools were mapped against the IOC Athlete Pain Framework. Papers included tools from neurophysiological (470/100%), biomechanical (425/90%), affective (103/22%), cognitive (59/13%) and socioenvironmental (182/39%) domains. Pain classification was included in 108 studies (23%). 4 studies (0.85%) defined pain. Athletes with physical disability were included in 13 (3%) studies and no studies included athletes with intellectual disabilities. Socioeconomic factors were addressed in 29 (6%) studies.
Discussion:
Neurophysiological and biomechanical domains are frequently addressed. Affective, socioenvironmental and cognitive tools are under-represented. Potential tools for use by researchers and clinicians are highlighted. Defining and classifying pain and determining predominant pain mechanisms is needed in both research and clinical practice. More work on underrepresented populations is needed.
Conclusion:
This review informs researchers and clinicians working with athletes in pain how pain assessment and classification is currently conducted and highlights future priorities.
