OBJECTIVES: Many interventions are available to manage chronic pain; understanding the durability of treatment effects may assist with treatment selection. We sought to assess which noninvasive nonpharmacological treatments for selected chronic pain conditions are associated with persistent improvement in function and pain outcomes at least 1 month after the completion of treatment.
DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE®, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) through November 2017, reference lists, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
REVIEW METHODS: Using predefined criteria, we selected randomized controlled trials of noninvasive nonpharmacological treatments for five common chronic pain conditions (chronic low back pain; chronic neck pain; osteoarthritis of the knee, hip, or hand; fibromyalgia; and tension headache) that addressed efficacy or harms compared with usual care, no treatment, waitlist, placebo, or sham intervention; compared with pharmacological therapy; or compared with exercise. Study quality was assessed, data extracted, and results summarized for function and pain. Only trials reporting results for at least 1 month post-intervention were included. We focused on the persistence of effects at short term (1 to <6 months following treatment completion), intermediate term (≥6 to <12 months), and long term (≥12 months).
RESULTS: Two hundred eighteen publications (202 trials) were included. Many included trials were small. Evidence on outcomes beyond 1 year after treatment completion was sparse. Most trials enrolled patients with moderate baseline pain intensity (e.g., >5 on a 0 to 10 point numeric rating scale) and duration of symptoms ranging from 3 months to >15 years. The most common comparison was against usual care. Chronic low back pain: At short term, massage, yoga, and psychological therapies (primarily CBT) (strength of evidence [SOE]: moderate) and exercise, acupuncture, spinal manipulation, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE: low) were associated with slight improvements in function compared with usual care or inactive controls. Except for spinal manipulation, these interventions also improved pain. Effects on intermediate-term function were sustained for yoga, spinal manipulation, multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE: low), and psychological therapies (SOE: moderate). Improvements in pain continued into intermediate term for exercise, massage, and yoga (moderate effect, SOE: low); mindfulness-based stress reduction (small effect, SOE: low); spinal manipulation, psychological therapies, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (small effects, SOE: moderate). For acupuncture, there was no difference in pain at intermediate term, but a slight improvement at long term (SOE: low). Psychological therapies were associated with slightly greater improvement than usual care or an attention control on both function and pain at short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term followup (SOE: moderate). At short and intermediate term, multidisciplinary rehabilitation slightly improved pain compared with exercise (SOE: moderate). High-intensity multidisciplinary rehabilitation (≥20 hours/week or >80 hours total) was not clearly better than non–high-intensity programs. Chronic neck pain: At short and intermediate terms, acupuncture and Alexander Technique were associated with slightly improved function compared with usual care (both interventions), sham acupuncture, or sham laser (SOE: low), but no improvement in pain was seen at any time (SOE: llow). Short-term low-level laser therapy was associated with moderate improvement in function and pain (SOE: moderate). Combination exercise (any 3 of the following: muscle performance, mobility, muscle re-education, aerobic) demonstrated a slight improvement in pain and function short and long term (SOE: low). Osteoarthritis: For knee osteoarthritis, exercise and ultrasound demonstrated small short-term improvements in function compared with usual care, an attention control, or sham procedure (SOE: moderate for exercise, low for ultrasound), which persisted into the intermediate term only for exercise (SOE: low). Exercise was also associated with moderate improvement in pain (SOE: low). Long term, the small improvement in function seen with exercise persisted, but there was no clear effect on pain (SOE: low). Evidence was sparse on interventions for hip and hand osteoarthritis . Exercise for hip osteoarthritis was associated with slightly greater function and pain improvement than usual care short term (SOE: low). The effect on function was sustained intermediate term (SOE: low). Fibromyalgia: In the short term, acupuncture (SOE: moderate), CBT, tai chi, qigong, and exercise (SOE: low) were associated with slight improvements in function compared with an attention control, sham, no treatment, or usual care. Exercise (SOE: moderate) and CBT improved pain slightly, and tai chi and qigong (SOE: low) improved pain moderately in the short term. At intermediate term for exercise (SOE: moderate), acupuncture, and CBT (SOE: low), slight functional improvements persisted; they were also seen for myofascial release massage and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE: low); pain was improved slightly with multidisciplinary rehabilitation in the intermediate term (SOE: low). In the long term, small improvements in function continued for multidisciplinary rehabilitation but not for exercise or massage (SOE: low for all); massage (SOE: low) improved long-term pain slightly, but no clear impact on pain for exercise (SOE: moderate) or multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE: low) was seen. Short-term CBT was associated with a slight improvement in function but not pain compared with pregabalin. Chronic tension headache: Evidence was sparse and the majority of trials were of poor quality. Spinal manipulation slightly improved function and moderately improved pain short term versus usual care, and laser acupuncture was associated with slight pain improvement short term compared with sham (SOE: low). There was no evidence suggesting increased risk for serious treatment-related harms for any of the interventions, although data on harms were limited.
CONCLUSIONS: Exercise, multidisciplinary rehabilitation, acupuncture, CBT, and mind-body practices were most consistently associated with durable slight to moderate improvements in function and pain for specific chronic pain conditions. Our findings provided some support for clinical strategies that focused on use of nonpharmacological therapies for specific chronic pain conditions. Additional comparative research on sustainability of effects beyond the immediate post-treatment period is needed, particularly for conditions other than low back pain.
ANTECEDENTES: El dolor lumbar (dolor lumbar) es responsable de una considerable sufrimiento personal a nivel mundial. Las personas con síntomas incapacitantes persistentes también contribuyen a los costos sustanciales a la sociedad a través de los gastos de la asistencia sanitaria y reducción de la productividad del trabajo. Si bien hay muchas opciones de tratamiento, ninguno está aprobado universalmente. La idea de que el dolor lumbar crónico es una condición mejor entendida con referencia a una interacción de influencias físicas, psicológicas y sociales, el «modelo biopsicosocial ', ha recibido cada vez más aceptación. Esto ha llevado al desarrollo de programas multidisciplinarios de rehabilitación biopsicosocial (MBR) que se dirigen a los factores de los diferentes dominios, administrados por profesionales de la salud de diferentes orígenes.
OBJETIVOS: Revisar la evidencia sobre la eficacia de MBR para los pacientes con dolor lumbar crónico. La atención se centró en la comparación con la atención habitual y con los tratamientos físicos que miden los resultados de dolor, la discapacidad y el estado de trabajo, sobre todo en el largo plazo.
ESTRATEGIA DE BÚSQUEDA: Se realizaron búsquedas en las bases de datos CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO y CINAHL en enero y marzo de 2014, junto con la realización de búsquedas manuales en las listas de referencias de los estudios incluidos y relacionados, rastreo de citas por delante de los estudios y la proyección de los estudios incluidos excluidos en el anterior versión de esta revisión.
Criterios de selección: Todos los estudios identificados en las búsquedas se analizaron de forma independiente por dos autores de la revisión; desacuerdos con respecto a la inclusión se resolvieron por consenso. Se publicaron ensayos controlados aleatorios (ECA) que incluyó adultos con dolor lumbar inespecífico de más de 12 semanas de duración Los criterios de inclusión; la intervención índice apuntado al menos dos de los factores físicos, psicológicos y sociales o relacionadas con el trabajo; y la intervención índice fue entregado por los médicos a partir de al menos dos perfiles profesionales diferentes.
Recopilación y análisis de datos: Dos revisores extrajeron y verificaron la información para describir los estudios incluidos, evaluaron el riesgo de sesgo y realizaron los análisis. Se utilizó el riesgo Cochrane de sesgo herramienta para describir la calidad metodológica. Las medidas de resultado primarias fueron el dolor, la discapacidad y el trabajo de estado, dividido en el corto, mediano y largo plazo. Los resultados secundarios fueron el funcionamiento psicológico (por ejemplo, la depresión, la ansiedad, el catastrofismo), la utilización de servicios de salud, calidad de vida y los eventos adversos. Hemos clasificado las intervenciones de control como la atención habitual, el tratamiento físico, cirugía, o Lista de Espera para la cirugía en el meta-análisis por separado. Las dos primeras comparaciones formaron nuestro principal objetivo. Se realizó metanálisis con modelos de efectos aleatorios y se evaluó la calidad de las pruebas usando el método GRADE. Se realizó análisis de sensibilidad para evaluar la influencia de la calidad metodológica y análisis de subgrupos para investigar la influencia de la gravedad de los síntomas de línea de base y la intensidad de intervención.
Resultados principales: De 6.168 estudios identificados en las búsquedas, se incluyeron 41 ECA con un total de 6.858 participantes. Las calificaciones de calidad metodológica variaron entre 1 y 9 a 12, y 13 de los 41 estudios incluidos fueron evaluados como de bajo riesgo de sesgo. Las estimaciones agrupadas de 16 ECA siempre moderada a pruebas de baja calidad que MBR es más eficaz que la atención habitual para reducir el dolor y la discapacidad, con las diferencias de medias estandarizadas (DME) en el largo plazo de (IC del 95%: 0,04 a 0,37) 0,21 y 0,23 (95 CI%: 0,06 a 0,4), respectivamente. La gama en todos los puntos de tiempo iguala a aproximadamente 0,5 a 1,4 unidades en una escala de calificación numérica de 0 a 10 para el dolor y 1.4 a 2.5 puntos en la escala de discapacidad de Roland Morris (0 a 24). No hubo evidencia de moderada a baja calidad de ninguna diferencia en los resultados de trabajo (odds-ratio (OR) a largo plazo 1,04; IC del 95%: 0,73 a 1,47). Las estimaciones agrupadas de 19 ECA siempre moderada a pruebas de baja calidad que MBR fue más eficaz que el tratamiento físico para el dolor y la discapacidad con componentes de montaje superficial en el largo plazo de 0,51 (IC del 95%: -0,01 a 1,04) y 0,68 (95% CI 0,16-1,19) respectivamente. En todos los puntos de tiempo esto se tradujo a aproximadamente 0,6 a 1,2 unidades en la escala de dolor y 1.2 a 4.0 puntos en la escala de Roland Morris. No hubo evidencia de moderada a baja calidad de un efecto sobre los resultados del trabajo (o al largo plazo 1,87; IC del 95%: 1,39 a 2,53). No hubo pruebas suficientes para evaluar si las intervenciones MBR se asociaron con eventos adversos más que la atención habitual o intervenciones físicas.
Los análisis de sensibilidad no sugieren que las estimaciones combinadas fueron indebidamente influenciadas por los resultados de los estudios de baja calidad. Los análisis de los subgrupos no fueron concluyentes en cuanto a la influencia de la gravedad de los síntomas de línea de base y la intensidad de intervención.
Conclusiones de los revisores: Los pacientes con dolor lumbar crónico que reciben MBR son propensos a experimentar menos dolor y discapacidad que los que recibieron la atención habitual o un tratamiento físico. MBR también tiene una influencia positiva en el estado de trabajo en comparación con el tratamiento físico. Los efectos son de una magnitud modesta y deben ser equilibrados contra los requisitos de tiempo y de recursos de los programas de MBR. Intervenciones más intensivas no son responsables de los efectos que eran sustancialmente diferentes a los de las intervenciones menos intensivas. Si bien no hemos podido determinar si la intensidad de los síntomas en la presentación influye en la probabilidad de éxito, parece apropiado que sólo las personas con los indicadores de impacto psicosocial significativo se hace referencia a MBR.
Many interventions are available to manage chronic pain; understanding the durability of treatment effects may assist with treatment selection. We sought to assess which noninvasive nonpharmacological treatments for selected chronic pain conditions are associated with persistent improvement in function and pain outcomes at least 1 month after the completion of treatment.
DATA SOURCES:
Electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE®, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) through November 2017, reference lists, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
REVIEW METHODS:
Using predefined criteria, we selected randomized controlled trials of noninvasive nonpharmacological treatments for five common chronic pain conditions (chronic low back pain; chronic neck pain; osteoarthritis of the knee, hip, or hand; fibromyalgia; and tension headache) that addressed efficacy or harms compared with usual care, no treatment, waitlist, placebo, or sham intervention; compared with pharmacological therapy; or compared with exercise. Study quality was assessed, data extracted, and results summarized for function and pain. Only trials reporting results for at least 1 month post-intervention were included. We focused on the persistence of effects at short term (1 to <6 months following treatment completion), intermediate term (≥6 to <12 months), and long term (≥12 months).
RESULTS:
Two hundred eighteen publications (202 trials) were included. Many included trials were small. Evidence on outcomes beyond 1 year after treatment completion was sparse. Most trials enrolled patients with moderate baseline pain intensity (e.g., >5 on a 0 to 10 point numeric rating scale) and duration of symptoms ranging from 3 months to >15 years. The most common comparison was against usual care. Chronic low back pain: At short term, massage, yoga, and psychological therapies (primarily CBT) (strength of evidence [SOE]: moderate) and exercise, acupuncture, spinal manipulation, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (
SOE:
low) were associated with slight improvements in function compared with usual care or inactive controls. Except for spinal manipulation, these interventions also improved pain. Effects on intermediate-term function were sustained for yoga, spinal manipulation, multidisciplinary rehabilitation (
SOE:
low), and psychological therapies (
SOE:
moderate). Improvements in pain continued into intermediate term for exercise, massage, and yoga (moderate effect
low); spinal manipulation, psychological therapies, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (small effects
, SOE:
moderate). For acupuncture, there was no difference in pain at intermediate term, but a slight improvement at long term (
SOE:
low). Psychological therapies were associated with slightly greater improvement than usual care or an attention control on both function and pain at short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term followup (
SOE:
moderate). At short and intermediate term, multidisciplinary rehabilitation slightly improved pain compared with exercise (
SOE:
moderate). High-intensity multidisciplinary rehabilitation (≥20 hours/week or >80 hours total) was not clearly better than non–high-intensity programs. Chronic neck pain: At short and intermediate terms, acupuncture and Alexander Technique were associated with slightly improved function compared with usual care (both interventions), sham acupuncture, or sham laser (
SOE:
low), but no improvement in pain was seen at any time (
SOE:
llow). Short-term low-level laser therapy was associated with moderate improvement in function and pain (
SOE:
moderate). Combination exercise (any 3 of the following: muscle performance, mobility, muscle re-education, aerobic) demonstrated a slight improvement in pain and function short and long term (
SOE:
low). Osteoarthritis: For knee osteoarthritis, exercise and ultrasound demonstrated small short-term improvements in function compared with usual care, an attention control, or sham procedure (
SOE:
moderate for exercise, low for ultrasound), which persisted into the intermediate term only for exercise (
SOE:
low). Exercise was also associated with moderate improvement in pain (
SOE:
low). Long term, the small improvement in function seen with exercise persisted, but there was no clear effect on pain (
SOE:
low). Evidence was sparse on interventions for hip and hand osteoarthritis . Exercise for hip osteoarthritis was associated with slightly greater function and pain improvement than usual care short term (
SOE:
low). The effect on function was sustained intermediate term (
SOE:
low). Fibromyalgia: In the short term, acupuncture (
SOE:
moderate), CBT, tai chi, qigong, and exercise (
SOE:
low) were associated with slight improvements in function compared with an attention control, sham, no treatment, or usual care. Exercise (
SOE:
moderate) and CBT improved pain slightly, and tai chi and qigong (
SOE:
low) improved pain moderately in the short term. At intermediate term for exercise (
SOE:
moderate), acupuncture, and CBT (
SOE:
low), slight functional improvements persisted; they were also seen for myofascial release massage and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (
SOE:
low); pain was improved slightly with multidisciplinary rehabilitation in the intermediate term (
SOE:
low). In the long term, small improvements in function continued for multidisciplinary rehabilitation but not for exercise or massage (
SOE:
low for all); massage (
SOE:
low) improved long-term pain slightly, but no clear impact on pain for exercise (
SOE:
moderate) or multidisciplinary rehabilitation (
SOE:
low) was seen. Short-term CBT was associated with a slight improvement in function but not pain compared with pregabalin. Chronic tension headache: Evidence was sparse and the majority of trials were of poor quality. Spinal manipulation slightly improved function and moderately improved pain short term versus usual care, and laser acupuncture was associated with slight pain improvement short term compared with sham (
SOE:
low). There was no evidence suggesting increased risk for serious treatment-related harms for any of the interventions, although data on harms were limited.
CONCLUSIONS:
Exercise, multidisciplinary rehabilitation, acupuncture, CBT, and mind-body practices were most consistently associated with durable slight to moderate improvements in function and pain for specific chronic pain conditions. Our findings provided some support for clinical strategies that focused on use of nonpharmacological therapies for specific chronic pain conditions. Additional comparative research on sustainability of effects beyond the immediate post-treatment period is needed, particularly for conditions other than low back pain.
