复杂局部疼痛综合征的康复干预:系统综述。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Erfan Shafiee, Joy MacDermid, Tara Packham, Ruby Grewal, Maryam Farzad, Pavlos Bobos, David Walton
{"title":"复杂局部疼痛综合征的康复干预:系统综述。","authors":"Erfan Shafiee,&nbsp;Joy MacDermid,&nbsp;Tara Packham,&nbsp;Ruby Grewal,&nbsp;Maryam Farzad,&nbsp;Pavlos Bobos,&nbsp;David Walton","doi":"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>An increasing number of systematic reviews have been conducted on various conservative management of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) targeting different rehabilitation interventions and objectives. The intent of this article was to summarize and critically appraise the body of evidence on conservative management of the CRPS and to provide an overall picture of the current state of the literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was an overview of systematic reviews on conservative treatments for CRPS. We conducted a literature search from inception to January 2023 in the following databases: Embase, Medline, CINAHL, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). Two independent reviewers conducted study screening, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment (using AMSTAR-2). Qualitative synthesis was the preferred method for reporting the findings of our review. We calculated the corrected covered area index to account for the proportion of overlapping primary studies that were included in multiple reviews.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>We identified 214 articles, and a total of 9 systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials were eligible for inclusion. Pain and disability were the most common outcomes evaluated in the reviews. There were 6 (6/9; 66%) high-quality, 2 (2/9; 22%) moderate-quality, and 1 critically low-quality systematic review (1/9;11%), with the quality of the included trials ranging from very low to high. There was a large overlap across primary studies that were included in the systematic reviews (corrected covered area=23%). The findings of high-quality reviews support the effectiveness of mirror therapy (MT) and graded motor imagery (GMI) programs on pain and disability improvement in CRPS patients. The large effect size was reported for the effectiveness of MT on pain and disability (SMD:1.88 (95% CI: 0.73-3.02) and 1.30 (95% CI: 0.11-2.49), respectively) and the effectiveness of GMI program (GMIP) on pain and disability improvement (SMD: 1.36 (95% CI: 0.75-1.96) and 1.64 (95% CI: 0.53-2.74), respectively).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The evidence is in favor of adopting movement representation techniques, such as MT and GMI programs, for the treatment of pain and disability in patients with CRPS. However, this is based on a small body of primary evidence, and more research is required to generate conclusions. Overall, the evidence is not comprehensive or of sufficient quality to make definitive recommendations about the effectiveness of other rehabilitation interventions in improving pain and disability.</p>","PeriodicalId":50678,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Journal of Pain","volume":"39 9","pages":"473-483"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rehabilitation Interventions for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.\",\"authors\":\"Erfan Shafiee,&nbsp;Joy MacDermid,&nbsp;Tara Packham,&nbsp;Ruby Grewal,&nbsp;Maryam Farzad,&nbsp;Pavlos Bobos,&nbsp;David Walton\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/AJP.0000000000001133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>An increasing number of systematic reviews have been conducted on various conservative management of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) targeting different rehabilitation interventions and objectives. The intent of this article was to summarize and critically appraise the body of evidence on conservative management of the CRPS and to provide an overall picture of the current state of the literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was an overview of systematic reviews on conservative treatments for CRPS. We conducted a literature search from inception to January 2023 in the following databases: Embase, Medline, CINAHL, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). Two independent reviewers conducted study screening, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment (using AMSTAR-2). Qualitative synthesis was the preferred method for reporting the findings of our review. We calculated the corrected covered area index to account for the proportion of overlapping primary studies that were included in multiple reviews.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>We identified 214 articles, and a total of 9 systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials were eligible for inclusion. Pain and disability were the most common outcomes evaluated in the reviews. There were 6 (6/9; 66%) high-quality, 2 (2/9; 22%) moderate-quality, and 1 critically low-quality systematic review (1/9;11%), with the quality of the included trials ranging from very low to high. There was a large overlap across primary studies that were included in the systematic reviews (corrected covered area=23%). The findings of high-quality reviews support the effectiveness of mirror therapy (MT) and graded motor imagery (GMI) programs on pain and disability improvement in CRPS patients. The large effect size was reported for the effectiveness of MT on pain and disability (SMD:1.88 (95% CI: 0.73-3.02) and 1.30 (95% CI: 0.11-2.49), respectively) and the effectiveness of GMI program (GMIP) on pain and disability improvement (SMD: 1.36 (95% CI: 0.75-1.96) and 1.64 (95% CI: 0.53-2.74), respectively).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The evidence is in favor of adopting movement representation techniques, such as MT and GMI programs, for the treatment of pain and disability in patients with CRPS. However, this is based on a small body of primary evidence, and more research is required to generate conclusions. Overall, the evidence is not comprehensive or of sufficient quality to make definitive recommendations about the effectiveness of other rehabilitation interventions in improving pain and disability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50678,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Journal of Pain\",\"volume\":\"39 9\",\"pages\":\"473-483\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Journal of Pain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/AJP.0000000000001133\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/AJP.0000000000001133","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:针对不同的康复干预措施和目标,对复杂区域性疼痛综合征(CRPS)的各种保守治疗进行了越来越多的系统综述。本文的目的是总结和批判性地评估CRPS保守治疗的证据体,并提供文献现状的总体情况。方法:对CRPS的保守治疗进行系统综述。我们在Embase、Medline、CINAHL、Google Scholar、Cochrane Library和物理治疗证据数据库(PEDro)中进行了从成立到2023年1月的文献检索。两名独立审稿人进行了研究筛选、数据提取和方法学质量评估(使用AMSTAR-2)。定性综合是报告我们综述结果的首选方法。我们计算了校正后的覆盖面积指数,以考虑多个综述中包含的重叠主要研究的比例。结果:我们确定了214篇文章,共有9篇随机对照试验的系统评价符合纳入条件。疼痛和残疾是评估中最常见的结果。有6个(6/9;66%)优质,2 (2/9;22%)中度质量,1篇极低质量的系统评价(1/9;11%),纳入的试验质量从极低到高不等。在系统综述中包含的主要研究之间有很大的重叠(修正后的覆盖面积=23%)。高质量的研究结果支持镜像治疗(MT)和分级运动意象(GMI)方案在改善CRPS患者疼痛和残疾方面的有效性。据报道,MT对疼痛和残疾的有效性(SMD分别为1.88 (95% CI: 0.73-3.02)和1.30 (95% CI: 0.11-2.49), GMI项目(GMIP)对疼痛和残疾改善的有效性(SMD分别为1.36 (95% CI: 0.75-1.96)和1.64 (95% CI: 0.53-2.74))的效应量很大。讨论:证据支持采用运动表征技术,如MT和GMI项目,用于治疗CRPS患者的疼痛和残疾。然而,这是基于一小部分主要证据,需要更多的研究来得出结论。总的来说,证据不够全面或质量不够,无法就其他康复干预措施在改善疼痛和残疾方面的有效性提出明确的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rehabilitation Interventions for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

Objectives: An increasing number of systematic reviews have been conducted on various conservative management of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) targeting different rehabilitation interventions and objectives. The intent of this article was to summarize and critically appraise the body of evidence on conservative management of the CRPS and to provide an overall picture of the current state of the literature.

Methods: This study was an overview of systematic reviews on conservative treatments for CRPS. We conducted a literature search from inception to January 2023 in the following databases: Embase, Medline, CINAHL, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). Two independent reviewers conducted study screening, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment (using AMSTAR-2). Qualitative synthesis was the preferred method for reporting the findings of our review. We calculated the corrected covered area index to account for the proportion of overlapping primary studies that were included in multiple reviews.

Result: We identified 214 articles, and a total of 9 systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials were eligible for inclusion. Pain and disability were the most common outcomes evaluated in the reviews. There were 6 (6/9; 66%) high-quality, 2 (2/9; 22%) moderate-quality, and 1 critically low-quality systematic review (1/9;11%), with the quality of the included trials ranging from very low to high. There was a large overlap across primary studies that were included in the systematic reviews (corrected covered area=23%). The findings of high-quality reviews support the effectiveness of mirror therapy (MT) and graded motor imagery (GMI) programs on pain and disability improvement in CRPS patients. The large effect size was reported for the effectiveness of MT on pain and disability (SMD:1.88 (95% CI: 0.73-3.02) and 1.30 (95% CI: 0.11-2.49), respectively) and the effectiveness of GMI program (GMIP) on pain and disability improvement (SMD: 1.36 (95% CI: 0.75-1.96) and 1.64 (95% CI: 0.53-2.74), respectively).

Discussion: The evidence is in favor of adopting movement representation techniques, such as MT and GMI programs, for the treatment of pain and disability in patients with CRPS. However, this is based on a small body of primary evidence, and more research is required to generate conclusions. Overall, the evidence is not comprehensive or of sufficient quality to make definitive recommendations about the effectiveness of other rehabilitation interventions in improving pain and disability.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Journal of Pain
Clinical Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.40%
发文量
118
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​The Clinical Journal of Pain explores all aspects of pain and its effective treatment, bringing readers the insights of leading anesthesiologists, surgeons, internists, neurologists, orthopedists, psychiatrists and psychologists, clinical pharmacologists, and rehabilitation medicine specialists. This peer-reviewed journal presents timely and thought-provoking articles on clinical dilemmas in pain management; valuable diagnostic procedures; promising new pharmacological, surgical, and other therapeutic modalities; psychosocial dimensions of pain; and ethical issues of concern to all medical professionals. The journal also publishes Special Topic issues on subjects of particular relevance to the practice of pain 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