Psychological treatments for the management of pain after musculoskeletal injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Aaron Rachel V.1,Rassu Fenan S.1,Wegener Stephen T.1,Holley Amy L.2,Castillo Renan C.3,Osgood Greg M.4,Fisher Emma56

Affiliation:

1. Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Baltimore, MD, United States

2. Department of Pediatrics, Oregon Health Sciences University School of Medicine, Portland, OR, United States

3. Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States

4. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States

5. Centre for Pain Research, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom

6. Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Support Care Review Group, Oxford, United Kingdom

Abstract

Abstract Musculoskeletal injury is a leading cause of pain and disability worldwide; 35% to 75% of people experience persistent pain for months and years after injury. Psychological treatments can reduce pain, functional impairment, and psychological distress but are not widely used after injury. This systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO ID: CRD42021236807) aimed to synthesize the literature testing psychological treatments for pain after musculoskeletal injury. We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL from inception to May 2022. We extracted participant, treatment, and injury characteristics and primary (eg, pain intensity, functional impairment, depression, anxiety, and PTSD symptoms) and secondary (treatment feasibility and acceptability) outcomes. Twenty-four randomized controlled trials (N = 1966) were included. Immediately posttreatment, people who received psychological treatments (versus any control) reported lower pain intensity (standardized mean differences [SMD] = −0.25, 95% confidence interval [−0.49, −0.02]), functional impairment (SMD = −0.32 [−0.55, −0.09]), and symptoms of depression (SMD = −0.46 [−0.64, −0.29]), anxiety (SMD = −0.34 [−0.65, −0.04]), and PTSD (SMD = −0.43 [−0.70, −0.15]); at 6-month follow-up, only depression symptoms were significantly lower. Included trials varied widely in treatment and injury characteristics. The certainty of evidence was low or very low for most effects and heterogeneity moderate to substantial. Most studies had risk of bias domains judged to be high or unclear. Owing to very low certainty of results, we are unsure whether psychological therapies reduce pain and functional impairment after musculoskeletal injury; they may result in improved depression immediately posttreatment and at follow-up. More research is needed to identify treatments that result in enduring effects.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Neurology (clinical),Neurology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3