Are mind-body therapies effective for relieving cancer-related pain in adults? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Psycho-Oncology Pub Date : 2022-03-01 Epub Date: 2021-09-21 DOI:10.1002/pon.5821
Nadia Danon, Muaamar Al-Gobari, Bernard Burnand, Pierre-Yves Rodondi
{"title":"Are mind-body therapies effective for relieving cancer-related pain in adults? A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Nadia Danon, Muaamar Al-Gobari, Bernard Burnand, Pierre-Yves Rodondi","doi":"10.1002/pon.5821","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess whether mind-body therapies are effective for relieving cancer-related pain in adults, since at least one-third of adults with cancer are affected by moderate or severe pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for all randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials that included adults (≥18 years) with cancer-related pain who were treated with mind-body therapies (mindfulness, hypnosis, yoga, guided imagery, and progressive muscle relaxation) in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Science Citation Index, Web of Science, trials registers, and reference lists. The primary outcome was pain intensity. We calculated the standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and assessed the risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 40 primary studies involving a total of 3569 participants. The meta-analysis included 24 studies (2404 participants) and showed a significant effect of -0.39 (95% CI -0.62 to -0.16) with considerable heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup>  = 86.3%, p < 0.001). After we excluded four \"outlier\" studies in sensitivity analyses, the effect size remained significant but weaker. There was a high risk of bias in all studies, for example, performance bias due to lack of participant blinding. Patients in multiple settings were included but many studies were of low quality.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mind-body therapies may be effective in improving cancer pain, but the quality of the evidence is low. There is a need for further high-quality clinical trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":516935,"journal":{"name":"Psycho-Oncology","volume":" ","pages":"345-371"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/1d/47/PON-31-345.PMC9291932.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psycho-Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.5821","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/9/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To assess whether mind-body therapies are effective for relieving cancer-related pain in adults, since at least one-third of adults with cancer are affected by moderate or severe pain.

Methods: We searched for all randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials that included adults (≥18 years) with cancer-related pain who were treated with mind-body therapies (mindfulness, hypnosis, yoga, guided imagery, and progressive muscle relaxation) in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Science Citation Index, Web of Science, trials registers, and reference lists. The primary outcome was pain intensity. We calculated the standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and assessed the risk of bias.

Results: We identified 40 primary studies involving a total of 3569 participants. The meta-analysis included 24 studies (2404 participants) and showed a significant effect of -0.39 (95% CI -0.62 to -0.16) with considerable heterogeneity (I2  = 86.3%, p < 0.001). After we excluded four "outlier" studies in sensitivity analyses, the effect size remained significant but weaker. There was a high risk of bias in all studies, for example, performance bias due to lack of participant blinding. Patients in multiple settings were included but many studies were of low quality.

Conclusions: Mind-body therapies may be effective in improving cancer pain, but the quality of the evidence is low. There is a need for further high-quality clinical trials.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

身心疗法对缓解成人癌症相关疼痛有效吗?系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:评估身心疗法对缓解成人癌症相关疼痛是否有效,因为至少三分之一的成人癌症患者受到中度或重度疼痛的影响。方法:我们在MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、Cochrane中央对照试验登记(Central)、科学引文索引、科学网络、试验登记和参考文献列表中检索了所有随机或准随机对照试验,包括接受身心疗法(正念、催眠、瑜伽、引导意象和渐进式肌肉放松)治疗的患有癌症相关疼痛的成人(≥18岁)。主要结局是疼痛强度。我们计算标准化平均差异和95%置信区间(ci),并评估偏倚风险。结果:我们确定了40项主要研究,共涉及3569名参与者。荟萃分析包括24项研究(2404名参与者),结果显示显著效果为-0.39 (95% CI -0.62至-0.16),具有相当大的异质性(I2 = 86.3%, p)。结论:身心疗法可能有效改善癌症疼痛,但证据质量较低。需要进一步开展高质量的临床试验。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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