Home Use Therapies for Pain, Disability, and Quality of Life in Military Service Members with a Musculoskeletal Injury: An Updated Systematic Review Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Laura A Talbot, Lin Wu, Vanessa J Ramirez, David F Bradley, Ross Scallan, Pilar Zuber, Christopher H Morrell, Kayla Enochs, Mathias Fagan, Jesse Hillner, E Jeffrey Metter
{"title":"Home Use Therapies for Pain, Disability, and Quality of Life in Military Service Members with a Musculoskeletal Injury: An Updated Systematic Review Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Laura A Talbot, Lin Wu, Vanessa J Ramirez, David F Bradley, Ross Scallan, Pilar Zuber, Christopher H Morrell, Kayla Enochs, Mathias Fagan, Jesse Hillner, E Jeffrey Metter","doi":"10.1093/milmed/usae541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Musculoskeletal (MSK) injury can negatively affect service members by compromising job performance and readiness. These injuries can impact the service member's physical health, functional abilities, and quality of life (QoL). Rehabilitation therapies for MSK injuries can reduce these impacts. One approach is home use rehabilitative therapy, usable during deployment and at home stations. The purpose of this updated systematic review with meta-analysis was to broaden our scope of pain/symptoms, disability, and QoL as outcome measures for nonpharmaceutical MSK therapies in a military population versus controls.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>An updated systematic literature search was conducted from inception to September 2022 using electronic databases. From 2790 retrievals, 22 reports were identified from 21 randomized or nonrandomized control trials. Interventions included exercise, electrotherapy, bracing, and other devices compared to a standard control treatment. Outcomes for MSK pain/symptoms, disability, and QoL were summarized as (1) standardized change from baseline for both intervention and control by time and (2) standardized mean differences (SMDs) in the time change between the intervention and control.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Relative to baseline, pain improved during treatment and follow-up (P < .0001) with differences between intervention and control groups (P < .0001) but no significant interactions between group and time (P = .11). Overall, interventions showed modest (0.33 SMD, 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.54) improvement relative to controls across body regions and time. On average, disability exhibited an SMD of 0.12 (95% CI, -0.20 to 0.44) across all measures with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 0.93). Time (P = .02) but not intervention (P = .87) was a significant moderator with no clear pattern of change over time and no time by group interaction (P = .84). Quality of life had an overall modest effect with an SMD of 0.10 (95% CI, -0.04 to 0.24) with no evidence supporting a difference between the intervention and control groups (P = .10) and no significant interaction between time and group (P = .41). The QoL measures were primarily derived using the Short Form Health Survey (SF12/36), which provide a mental and physical component summary score. For the mental component, there was either no change or a small decline during the study (P(time) = .80), with a difference between the intervention and control (P = .04) but no interaction between groups over time (P = .40). For the physical component scale, there was improvement during the study (P = .01), with the intervention showing better improvement than the control (P = .005), with no interaction between the time and treatment/control group (P = .80). The report considers responses by region and individual treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This analysis demonstrated modest improvement in pain and physical well-being with therapy, with low certainty across diverse military cohorts. The impact on overall health-related disability and QoL was limited, with little change in mental well-being. The substantial heterogeneity and low certainty across diverse military cohorts limit generalizability, suggesting that further research in homogeneous environments is important for guiding clinical decisions. The study's findings suggest that nonpharmacological home use interventions may offer modest improvements in pain relief, particularly early in treatment, and in strength and function, according to our previous report. These interventions could complement standard care, providing options that may benefit service members during deployment and at home.</p>","PeriodicalId":18638,"journal":{"name":"Military Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"e1420-e1431"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Military Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usae541","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Musculoskeletal (MSK) injury can negatively affect service members by compromising job performance and readiness. These injuries can impact the service member's physical health, functional abilities, and quality of life (QoL). Rehabilitation therapies for MSK injuries can reduce these impacts. One approach is home use rehabilitative therapy, usable during deployment and at home stations. The purpose of this updated systematic review with meta-analysis was to broaden our scope of pain/symptoms, disability, and QoL as outcome measures for nonpharmaceutical MSK therapies in a military population versus controls.

Materials and methods: An updated systematic literature search was conducted from inception to September 2022 using electronic databases. From 2790 retrievals, 22 reports were identified from 21 randomized or nonrandomized control trials. Interventions included exercise, electrotherapy, bracing, and other devices compared to a standard control treatment. Outcomes for MSK pain/symptoms, disability, and QoL were summarized as (1) standardized change from baseline for both intervention and control by time and (2) standardized mean differences (SMDs) in the time change between the intervention and control.

Results: Relative to baseline, pain improved during treatment and follow-up (P < .0001) with differences between intervention and control groups (P < .0001) but no significant interactions between group and time (P = .11). Overall, interventions showed modest (0.33 SMD, 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.54) improvement relative to controls across body regions and time. On average, disability exhibited an SMD of 0.12 (95% CI, -0.20 to 0.44) across all measures with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 0.93). Time (P = .02) but not intervention (P = .87) was a significant moderator with no clear pattern of change over time and no time by group interaction (P = .84). Quality of life had an overall modest effect with an SMD of 0.10 (95% CI, -0.04 to 0.24) with no evidence supporting a difference between the intervention and control groups (P = .10) and no significant interaction between time and group (P = .41). The QoL measures were primarily derived using the Short Form Health Survey (SF12/36), which provide a mental and physical component summary score. For the mental component, there was either no change or a small decline during the study (P(time) = .80), with a difference between the intervention and control (P = .04) but no interaction between groups over time (P = .40). For the physical component scale, there was improvement during the study (P = .01), with the intervention showing better improvement than the control (P = .005), with no interaction between the time and treatment/control group (P = .80). The report considers responses by region and individual treatments.

Conclusions: This analysis demonstrated modest improvement in pain and physical well-being with therapy, with low certainty across diverse military cohorts. The impact on overall health-related disability and QoL was limited, with little change in mental well-being. The substantial heterogeneity and low certainty across diverse military cohorts limit generalizability, suggesting that further research in homogeneous environments is important for guiding clinical decisions. The study's findings suggest that nonpharmacological home use interventions may offer modest improvements in pain relief, particularly early in treatment, and in strength and function, according to our previous report. These interventions could complement standard care, providing options that may benefit service members during deployment and at home.

家庭使用治疗肌肉骨骼损伤军人的疼痛、残疾和生活质量:一项最新的系统综述荟萃分析。
肌肉骨骼(MSK)损伤可以通过损害工作表现和准备对服务成员产生负面影响。这些伤害会影响服役人员的身体健康、功能能力和生活质量。MSK损伤的康复治疗可以减少这些影响。一种方法是家庭使用康复治疗,可在部署期间和家庭站使用。这一更新的系统综述采用荟萃分析,目的是扩大我们的范围,将疼痛/症状、残疾和生活质量作为非药物MSK治疗在军人人群与对照组中的结局指标。材料和方法:从成立到2022年9月,使用电子数据库进行了更新的系统文献检索。从2790项检索中,从21项随机或非随机对照试验中确定了22份报告。干预措施包括运动、电疗、支具和其他与标准对照治疗相比的设备。MSK疼痛/症状、残疾和生活质量的结果总结为:(1)干预组和对照组从基线到时间的标准化变化;(2)干预组和对照组时间变化的标准化平均差异(SMDs)。结果:与基线相比,在治疗和随访期间,疼痛得到改善(P)结论:该分析表明,治疗对疼痛和身体健康有适度改善,在不同的军事队列中,这种改善的确定性较低。对总体健康相关残疾和生活质量的影响有限,对心理健康的影响很小。在不同的军事队列中,大量的异质性和低确定性限制了通用性,这表明在同质环境中进一步研究对于指导临床决策很重要。根据我们之前的报告,研究结果表明,非药物家庭使用干预可能会适度改善疼痛缓解,特别是在治疗早期,以及力量和功能。这些干预措施可以补充标准护理,为服役人员在部署期间和在家提供选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Military Medicine
Military Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
393
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Military Medicine is the official international journal of AMSUS. Articles published in the journal are peer-reviewed scientific papers, case reports, and editorials. The journal also publishes letters to the editor. The objective of the journal is to promote awareness of federal medicine by providing a forum for responsible discussion of common ideas and problems relevant to federal healthcare. Its mission is: To increase healthcare education by providing scientific and other information to its readers; to facilitate communication; and to offer a prestige publication for members’ writings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信