从说教式解释到共同设计、顺序艺术与具身学习:病患疼痛教育的挑战、批评与未来方向。

IF 2.5 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) Pub Date : 2025-05-09 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fpain.2025.1536112
G Lorimer Moseley, Amelia Mardon, James Watson, Felicity Braithwaite, Monique V Wilson, Trevor Barker, James Lawrence, Dianne Sheppard, Michiel F Reneman, Jennifer Stinson, Cormac G Ryan
{"title":"从说教式解释到共同设计、顺序艺术与具身学习:病患疼痛教育的挑战、批评与未来方向。","authors":"G Lorimer Moseley, Amelia Mardon, James Watson, Felicity Braithwaite, Monique V Wilson, Trevor Barker, James Lawrence, Dianne Sheppard, Michiel F Reneman, Jennifer Stinson, Cormac G Ryan","doi":"10.3389/fpain.2025.1536112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pain Neuroscience Education (PNE) emerged over two decades ago in response to the incoherence between evidence-based pain management strategies, and consumer and clinician understandings of \"how pain works\". Many clinical trials have investigated the effects of PNE either as a standalone intervention or embedded within a more complex care package, with mixed results. A range of research methods have been used to explore the inconsistent effects of PNE. Together they (i) identify significant shortcomings and limitations of PNE and (ii) raise the possibility that gaining a broadly scientifically accurate understanding of \"how pain works\" may be critical for subsequent pain and disability improvements. Both learnings strongly suggest that we need to do better. Extensive research incorporating several interest-holders has led to updated content and language and criticisms of both are addressed. The method of PNE has also been updated, with integration of educational frameworks, teaching strategies and tactics, patient resources and clinical tools that all aim to promote the likelihood that patients will learn key concepts and operationalise them to improve their pain, function and quality of life. Pain Science Education is used to differentiate the new approach from PNE.</p>","PeriodicalId":73097,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)","volume":"6 ","pages":"1536112"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12098622/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From didactic explanations to co-design, sequential art and embodied learning: challenges, criticisms and future directions of patient pain education.\",\"authors\":\"G Lorimer Moseley, Amelia Mardon, James Watson, Felicity Braithwaite, Monique V Wilson, Trevor Barker, James Lawrence, Dianne Sheppard, Michiel F Reneman, Jennifer Stinson, Cormac G Ryan\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fpain.2025.1536112\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Pain Neuroscience Education (PNE) emerged over two decades ago in response to the incoherence between evidence-based pain management strategies, and consumer and clinician understandings of \\\"how pain works\\\". Many clinical trials have investigated the effects of PNE either as a standalone intervention or embedded within a more complex care package, with mixed results. A range of research methods have been used to explore the inconsistent effects of PNE. Together they (i) identify significant shortcomings and limitations of PNE and (ii) raise the possibility that gaining a broadly scientifically accurate understanding of \\\"how pain works\\\" may be critical for subsequent pain and disability improvements. Both learnings strongly suggest that we need to do better. Extensive research incorporating several interest-holders has led to updated content and language and criticisms of both are addressed. The method of PNE has also been updated, with integration of educational frameworks, teaching strategies and tactics, patient resources and clinical tools that all aim to promote the likelihood that patients will learn key concepts and operationalise them to improve their pain, function and quality of life. Pain Science Education is used to differentiate the new approach from PNE.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)\",\"volume\":\"6 \",\"pages\":\"1536112\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12098622/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2025.1536112\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2025.1536112","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

疼痛神经科学教育(PNE)在二十多年前出现,以回应基于证据的疼痛管理策略与消费者和临床医生对“疼痛如何起作用”的理解之间的不一致性。许多临床试验调查了PNE作为独立干预措施或嵌入更复杂的护理方案的效果,结果好坏参半。一系列的研究方法被用来探索PNE的不一致的影响。总之,他们(i)确定了PNE的重大缺陷和局限性,(ii)提出了获得对“疼痛如何起作用”的广泛科学准确理解的可能性,这可能对随后的疼痛和残疾改善至关重要。这两项研究都强烈表明,我们需要做得更好。包括几个利益相关者在内的广泛研究导致了内容和语言的更新,并解决了对两者的批评。PNE的方法也得到了更新,整合了教育框架、教学策略和战术、患者资源和临床工具,所有这些都旨在促进患者学习关键概念的可能性,并将其付诸实践,以改善他们的疼痛、功能和生活质量。疼痛科学教育被用来区别于PNE的新方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

From didactic explanations to co-design, sequential art and embodied learning: challenges, criticisms and future directions of patient pain education.

From didactic explanations to co-design, sequential art and embodied learning: challenges, criticisms and future directions of patient pain education.

Pain Neuroscience Education (PNE) emerged over two decades ago in response to the incoherence between evidence-based pain management strategies, and consumer and clinician understandings of "how pain works". Many clinical trials have investigated the effects of PNE either as a standalone intervention or embedded within a more complex care package, with mixed results. A range of research methods have been used to explore the inconsistent effects of PNE. Together they (i) identify significant shortcomings and limitations of PNE and (ii) raise the possibility that gaining a broadly scientifically accurate understanding of "how pain works" may be critical for subsequent pain and disability improvements. Both learnings strongly suggest that we need to do better. Extensive research incorporating several interest-holders has led to updated content and language and criticisms of both are addressed. The method of PNE has also been updated, with integration of educational frameworks, teaching strategies and tactics, patient resources and clinical tools that all aim to promote the likelihood that patients will learn key concepts and operationalise them to improve their pain, function and quality of life. Pain Science Education is used to differentiate the new approach from PNE.

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
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
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