Article

Meta-analysis of psychological interventions for chronic low back pain

Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States
Health Psychology (Impact Factor: 3.95). 02/2007; 26(1):1-9. DOI: 10.1037/0278-6133.26.1.1
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was to evaluate the efficacy of psychological interventions for adults with noncancerous chronic low back pain (CLBP). The authors updated and expanded upon prior meta-analyses by using broad definitions of CLBP and psychological intervention, a broad data search strategy, and state-of-the-art data analysis techniques. All relevant controlled clinical trials meeting the inclusion criteria were identified primarily through a computer-aided literature search. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and articles for inclusion criteria and extracted relevant data. Cohen's d effect sizes were calculated by using a random effects model. Outcomes included pain intensity, emotional functioning, physical functioning (pain interference or pain-specific disability, health-related quality of life), participant ratings of global improvement, health care utilization, health care provider visits, pain medications, and employment/disability compensation status. A total of 205 effect sizes from 22 studies were pooled in 34 analyses. Positive effects of psychological interventions, contrasted with various control groups, were noted for pain intensity, pain-related interference, health-related quality of life, and depression. Cognitive-behavioral and self-regulatory treatments were specifically found to be efficacious. Multidisciplinary approaches that included a psychological component, when compared with active control conditions, were also noted to have positive short-term effects on pain interference and positive long-term effects on return to work. The results demonstrated positive effects of psychological interventions for CLBP. The rigor of the methods used, as well as the results that reflect mild to moderate heterogeneity and minimal publication bias, suggest confidence in the conclusions of this review.

0 Followers
 · 
259 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic low back pain is a serious global health problem. There is substantial evidence that physicians' attitudes towards and beliefs about chronic low back pain can influence their subsequent management of the condition. (1) to evaluate the attitudes and beliefs towards chronic low back pain among primary care physicians in Asia; (2) to study the cultural differences and other factors that are associated with these attitudes and beliefs. A cross sectional online survey was sent to primary care physicians who are members of the Hong Kong College of Family Physician (HKCFP). The Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapist (PABS-PT) was used as the questionnaire to determine the biomedical and biopsychosocial orientation of the participants. The mean Biomedical (BM) score was 34.8+/-6.1; the mean biopsychosocial (BPS) score was 35.6 (+/- 4.8). Both scores were higher than those of European doctors. Family medicine specialists had a lower biomedical score than General practitioners. Physicians working in the public sector tended to have low BM and low BPS scores; whereas physicians working in private practice tended to have high BM and high BPS scores. The lack of concordance in the pain explanatory models used by private and public sector may have a detrimental effect on patients who are under the care of both parties. The uncertain treatment orientation may have a negative influence on patients' attitudes and beliefs, thus contributing to the tension and, perhaps, even ailing mental state of a person with chronic LBP.
    PLoS ONE 10(1):e0117521. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0117521 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Psychological treatments are recognised as generally effective for chronic pain. However, little is known about the evidence for psychological treatments for chronic pain in Asia. This study aimed (1) to identify all treatment outcome studies in the area of psychological approaches to chronic pain in adult populations of East Asia and Southeast Asia and (2) to evaluate the treatment types, the evidence for treatment outcomes and research design quality with regard to these studies. We identified all psychologically based treatment outcome studies for chronic pain in East and Southeast Asia by searching CENTRAL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, MEDLINE (via Ovid), Global Health and Web of Science from the beginning of each abstracting service until December 2014 (week 4). Seventeen studies met inclusion criteria including a total of N = 1,890 participants. Four were randomised controlled trials (RCTs), five controlled clinical trials (CCTs) and eight cohort studies. Treatment outcomes included pain, disability, depression and anxiety. Overall, the studies included in this review showed small to medium within-group effect sizes for all four outcomes. A majority of the studies were rated as weak in design quality. Three RCTs were found to be of strong quality, one of moderate quality and only one CCT of moderate quality. The current available literature on psychological treatments for chronic pain in East and Southeast Asia is generally small in scale, mostly preliminary and lags behind on some developments occurring in North America and Europe. Further development of treatment methods and research designs is warranted.
    International Journal of Behavioral Medicine 03/2015; DOI:10.1007/s12529-015-9481-3 · 2.63 Impact Factor
  • Source