{"title":"Efficacy of mHealth in Patients With Chronic Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Xiaotong Xie, Hui Wang, Xue Gao, Hualiang Chen, Lingjun Zhou","doi":"10.1016/j.pmn.2025.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the efficacy of mobile health-based interventions for alleviating symptoms of chronic neck pain in patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted in databases, including the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP, Wanfang, Chinese Biomedical Databases, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding support provided to patients with chronic neck pain using mobile health interventions from database inception to March 2024. Two researchers independently screened the literature and evaluated the quality using the Cochrane Handbook 5.1 risk of bias assessment tool. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.2, and the quality of evidence was assessed according to the GRADE criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten RCTs comprising 825 participants were included. A meta-analysis indicated that mobile health interventions were more effective than other physical therapies for reducing pain (short-term: SMD = -0.76, [95% CI -1.50, -0.02], p = .04; mid-term: SMD = -0.48, [95% CI -0.78, -0.18], p < .01), although there was no significant difference for improving neck disability status (short-term: MD = -6.74, [95% CI -13.65, 0.17], p = .06; mid-term: SMD = -2.26 [95% CI -6.71, 2.20], p = .32). Compared to minimal intervention, mobile health interventions were more effective in reducing pain (short-term: SMD = -1.16, [95% CI -1.70, -0.63], p < .001) and improving neck disability status (short-term: MD = -7.88, [95% CI -12.27, -3.13], p < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mobile health-based interventions positively affected the predictive outcomes for patients with chronic neck pain, reduced pain levels, and improved neck disability. Further research is needed to demonstrate their benefits for reducing fear of pain and improving quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":19959,"journal":{"name":"Pain Management Nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Management Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmn.2025.03.001","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的评估基于移动医疗的干预措施对缓解慢性颈痛患者症状的疗效：在中国国家知识基础设施、VIP、万方、中国生物医学数据库、PubMed、Embase、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 图书馆等数据库中进行了系统检索，以了解自数据库建立至 2024 年 3 月期间有关使用移动健康干预为慢性颈痛患者提供支持的随机对照试验 (RCT)。两名研究人员独立筛选文献，并使用 Cochrane 手册 5.1 偏倚风险评估工具对文献质量进行评估。使用 RevMan 5.2 进行统计分析，并根据 GRADE 标准评估证据质量：结果：共纳入了 10 项 RCT，共有 825 名参与者。一项荟萃分析表明，移动医疗干预在减轻疼痛方面比其他物理疗法更有效（短期：SMD = -0.76，[-0.76]）：SMD = -0.76，[95% CI -1.50, -0.02]，p = .04；中期：SMD = -0.48，[95% CI -1.50, -0.02]，p = .04：SMD=-0.48，[95% CI -0.78，-0.18]，p <.01），但在改善颈部残疾状况方面没有显著差异（短期：SMD =-6.74，[95% CI -0.78，-0.18]，p <.01）：短期：MD = -6.74，[95% CI -13.65，0.17]，p = .06；中期：SMD = -2.26[95% CI -0.18]，p = .01：SMD = -2.26 [95% CI -6.71, 2.20], p = .32）。与最小干预相比，移动医疗干预在减轻疼痛（短期：SMD = -1.16, [95% CI -1.70, -0.63]，p < .001）和改善颈部残疾状况（短期：MD = -7.88, [95% CI -12.27, -3.13]，p < .001）方面更为有效：结论：基于移动医疗的干预措施对慢性颈部疼痛患者的预测结果产生了积极影响，降低了疼痛程度，改善了颈部残疾状况。还需要进一步的研究来证明其在减少疼痛恐惧和提高生活质量方面的益处。
Efficacy of mHealth in Patients With Chronic Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Objectives: To assess the efficacy of mobile health-based interventions for alleviating symptoms of chronic neck pain in patients.
Methods: A systematic search was conducted in databases, including the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP, Wanfang, Chinese Biomedical Databases, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding support provided to patients with chronic neck pain using mobile health interventions from database inception to March 2024. Two researchers independently screened the literature and evaluated the quality using the Cochrane Handbook 5.1 risk of bias assessment tool. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.2, and the quality of evidence was assessed according to the GRADE criteria.
Results: Ten RCTs comprising 825 participants were included. A meta-analysis indicated that mobile health interventions were more effective than other physical therapies for reducing pain (short-term: SMD = -0.76, [95% CI -1.50, -0.02], p = .04; mid-term: SMD = -0.48, [95% CI -0.78, -0.18], p < .01), although there was no significant difference for improving neck disability status (short-term: MD = -6.74, [95% CI -13.65, 0.17], p = .06; mid-term: SMD = -2.26 [95% CI -6.71, 2.20], p = .32). Compared to minimal intervention, mobile health interventions were more effective in reducing pain (short-term: SMD = -1.16, [95% CI -1.70, -0.63], p < .001) and improving neck disability status (short-term: MD = -7.88, [95% CI -12.27, -3.13], p < .001).
Conclusions: Mobile health-based interventions positively affected the predictive outcomes for patients with chronic neck pain, reduced pain levels, and improved neck disability. Further research is needed to demonstrate their benefits for reducing fear of pain and improving quality of life.
期刊介绍：
This peer-reviewed journal offers a unique focus on the realm of pain management as it applies to nursing. Original and review articles from experts in the field offer key insights in the areas of clinical practice, advocacy, education, administration, and research. Additional features include practice guidelines and pharmacology updates.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
