Does a Prolonged Sham Theta Burst Stimulation Intervention Regimen Outperform Standard Care in Terms of Functional Recovery and Pain Relief After an Upper Limb Fracture?

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Léa Proulx-Bégin, Marianne Jodoin, Daphnée Brazeau, Alberto Herrero Babiloni, Catherine Provost, Dominique M Rouleau, Caroline Arbour, Louis De Beaumont
{"title":"Does a Prolonged Sham Theta Burst Stimulation Intervention Regimen Outperform Standard Care in Terms of Functional Recovery and Pain Relief After an Upper Limb Fracture?","authors":"Léa Proulx-Bégin, Marianne Jodoin, Daphnée Brazeau, Alberto Herrero Babiloni, Catherine Provost, Dominique M Rouleau, Caroline Arbour, Louis De Beaumont","doi":"10.1097/PSY.0000000000001355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In a recent sham-controlled 13-session prolonged continuous theta burst stimulation intervention protocol, recovery from upper limb fracture at both 1 and 3 months was better than anticipated in patients assigned to the sham intervention group. To determine whether potential placebo effect and close patient monitoring affected recovery, the current study aimed to compare clinical outcomes between sham-treated participants who also received standard care with similarly injured patients who only received standard care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty participants with isolated upper limb fractures from the sham group were seen 13 times post-fracture (1 baseline session, 10 treatments, and 2 follow-ups [1 and 3 months]) over 3 months. They completed the self-reported Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and the Numerical Rating Scale for pain assessment at 1 and 3 months post-fracture. Two control groups were recruited: 43 participants at 1 month post-fracture and another 40 participants at 3 months post-fracture. These control groups completed the same questionnaires online, without any lab visits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 1 month, patients from the sham group reported significantly less functional impairments on the DASH (p = .010). At 3 months, significantly more patients from the control group reported functional limitations (72.5% versus sham's 40%, p = .015).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although preliminary, these findings suggest clinically significant beneficial effects of the sham intervention over the standard care groups. This positive sham intervention effect may be attributed to a placebo response that includes the placebo effect associated with sham rTMS, but also the impact of various factors such as the close monitoring of the injury.</p>","PeriodicalId":20918,"journal":{"name":"Psychosomatic Medicine","volume":"87 1","pages":"84-92"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychosomatic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0000000000001355","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: In a recent sham-controlled 13-session prolonged continuous theta burst stimulation intervention protocol, recovery from upper limb fracture at both 1 and 3 months was better than anticipated in patients assigned to the sham intervention group. To determine whether potential placebo effect and close patient monitoring affected recovery, the current study aimed to compare clinical outcomes between sham-treated participants who also received standard care with similarly injured patients who only received standard care.

Methods: Twenty participants with isolated upper limb fractures from the sham group were seen 13 times post-fracture (1 baseline session, 10 treatments, and 2 follow-ups [1 and 3 months]) over 3 months. They completed the self-reported Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and the Numerical Rating Scale for pain assessment at 1 and 3 months post-fracture. Two control groups were recruited: 43 participants at 1 month post-fracture and another 40 participants at 3 months post-fracture. These control groups completed the same questionnaires online, without any lab visits.

Results: At 1 month, patients from the sham group reported significantly less functional impairments on the DASH (p = .010). At 3 months, significantly more patients from the control group reported functional limitations (72.5% versus sham's 40%, p = .015).

Conclusions: Although preliminary, these findings suggest clinically significant beneficial effects of the sham intervention over the standard care groups. This positive sham intervention effect may be attributed to a placebo response that includes the placebo effect associated with sham rTMS, but also the impact of various factors such as the close monitoring of the injury.

在上肢骨折后的功能恢复和疼痛缓解方面,延长假θ波爆发刺激干预方案是否优于标准护理?
目的:在最近的一项假控制的13期延长连续θ波爆发刺激干预方案中,在1个月和3个月时,被分配到假干预组的患者上肢骨折的恢复情况比预期的要好。为了确定潜在的安慰剂效应和密切的患者监测是否影响康复,目前的研究旨在比较接受标准治疗的假治疗参与者与只接受标准治疗的类似受伤患者的临床结果。方法:假手术组20例上肢孤立性骨折患者骨折后随访13次(1次基线治疗,10次治疗,2次随访[1和3个月]),随访时间超过3个月。他们在骨折后1个月和3个月完成了手臂、肩膀和手部残疾(DASH)自我报告问卷和疼痛评估的数值评定量表。招募两个对照组:43名参与者在骨折后1个月,另外40名参与者在骨折后3个月。这些控制组在没有任何实验室访问的情况下,完成了同样的在线调查问卷。结果:在1个月时,假手术组患者在DASH上报告的功能损伤明显减少(p = 0.010)。在3个月时,对照组有更多的患者报告功能受限(72.5%,而假手术组为40%,p = 0.015)。结论:虽然是初步的,但这些发现表明,与标准治疗组相比,假干预具有临床显著的有益效果。这种积极的假干预效果可能归因于安慰剂反应,其中包括与假rTMS相关的安慰剂效应,但也包括各种因素的影响,如密切监测损伤。
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
Psychosomatic Medicine
Psychosomatic Medicine 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
258
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Psychosomatic Medicine is the official peer-reviewed journal of the American Psychosomatic Society. The journal publishes experimental, clinical, and epidemiological studies on the role of psychological and social factors in the biological and behavioral processes relevant to health and disease. Psychosomatic Medicine is an interdisciplinary peer-reviewed journal devoted to high-quality science on biobehavioral mechanisms, brain-behavior interactions relevant to physical and mental disorders, as well as interventions in clinical and public health settings. Psychosomatic Medicine was founded in 1939 and publishes interdisciplinary research articles relevant to medicine, psychiatry, psychology, and other health-related disciplines. The print journal is published nine times a year; most articles are published online ahead of print. Supplementary issues may contain reports of conferences at which original research was presented in areas relevant to the psychosomatic and behavioral medicine.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信