有什么证据表明非药物、非手术、生物心理社会干预对子宫内膜异位症患者的身体形象和疼痛管理有效?系统综述

IF 0.6 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Laura Falconer, E. Hendricks, D. Harcourt
{"title":"有什么证据表明非药物、非手术、生物心理社会干预对子宫内膜异位症患者的身体形象和疼痛管理有效?系统综述","authors":"Laura Falconer, E. Hendricks, D. Harcourt","doi":"10.1177/22840265221139909","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To identify and review the success of non-pharmaceutical, non-surgical biopsychosocial interventions in individuals with endometriosis, in managing pain and improving body image. Methods: Cochrane, EBSCO, IBSS, NICE, Open Grey, OVID, Proquest, Scopus and Science Direct were searched in April 2021, using inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data collection and analysis: Five randomised control trials, and one controlled clinical trial resulted from the search. Study quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool. Studies were synthesised by intervention type, into physical only, and physical and psychological. Results: Across the six papers, 323 participants were recruited, through medical records or self-referral, and treatments largely administered by specialist practitioners. From the EPHPP quality assessment,2 weak quality papers, and four moderate quality papers found improvements to pain, with large effect sizes in four papers. No studies used established body image measures to examine intervention effects on body image, and all lacked health psychology theoretical basis. There were common issues in selection bias, confounders and blinding. Conclusion: Without gold-standard methodology, evidence of effectiveness cannot be concluded. However, there is promising rationale if these issues are addressed.","PeriodicalId":15725,"journal":{"name":"Journal of endometriosis and pelvic pain disorders","volume":"14 1","pages":"206 - 216"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is the evidence of effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical, non-surgical, biopsychosocial interventions for body image and pain management in individuals with endometriosis? A systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Laura Falconer, E. Hendricks, D. Harcourt\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/22840265221139909\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: To identify and review the success of non-pharmaceutical, non-surgical biopsychosocial interventions in individuals with endometriosis, in managing pain and improving body image. Methods: Cochrane, EBSCO, IBSS, NICE, Open Grey, OVID, Proquest, Scopus and Science Direct were searched in April 2021, using inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data collection and analysis: Five randomised control trials, and one controlled clinical trial resulted from the search. Study quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool. Studies were synthesised by intervention type, into physical only, and physical and psychological. Results: Across the six papers, 323 participants were recruited, through medical records or self-referral, and treatments largely administered by specialist practitioners. From the EPHPP quality assessment,2 weak quality papers, and four moderate quality papers found improvements to pain, with large effect sizes in four papers. No studies used established body image measures to examine intervention effects on body image, and all lacked health psychology theoretical basis. There were common issues in selection bias, confounders and blinding. Conclusion: Without gold-standard methodology, evidence of effectiveness cannot be concluded. However, there is promising rationale if these issues are addressed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":15725,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of endometriosis and pelvic pain disorders\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"206 - 216\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of endometriosis and pelvic pain disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/22840265221139909\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of endometriosis and pelvic pain disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/22840265221139909","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:确定和回顾非药物、非手术生物-心理-社会干预在子宫内膜异位症患者治疗疼痛和改善身体形象方面的成功。方法:采用纳入和排除标准,于2021年4月检索Cochrane、EBSCO、IBSS、NICE、Open Grey、OVID、Proquest、Scopus和Science Direct。数据收集和分析:五项随机对照试验和一项对照临床试验来自搜索。使用有效公共卫生实践项目(EPHPP)质量评估工具评估研究质量。研究按干预类型综合,分为仅身体干预、身体干预和心理干预。结果:在这六篇论文中,323名参与者通过医疗记录或自我推荐被招募,治疗主要由专业医生进行。根据EPHPP质量评估,2 弱质量的论文和四篇中等质量的论文发现疼痛有所改善,四篇论文的效果大小较大。没有任何研究使用既定的身体形象测量来检验干预对身体形象的影响,也都缺乏健康心理学的理论基础。在选择偏差、混杂因素和盲目性方面存在一些常见问题。结论:如果没有金标准方法,就无法得出有效性的证据。然而,如果这些问题得到解决,就有很好的理由。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What is the evidence of effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical, non-surgical, biopsychosocial interventions for body image and pain management in individuals with endometriosis? A systematic review
Aim: To identify and review the success of non-pharmaceutical, non-surgical biopsychosocial interventions in individuals with endometriosis, in managing pain and improving body image. Methods: Cochrane, EBSCO, IBSS, NICE, Open Grey, OVID, Proquest, Scopus and Science Direct were searched in April 2021, using inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data collection and analysis: Five randomised control trials, and one controlled clinical trial resulted from the search. Study quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool. Studies were synthesised by intervention type, into physical only, and physical and psychological. Results: Across the six papers, 323 participants were recruited, through medical records or self-referral, and treatments largely administered by specialist practitioners. From the EPHPP quality assessment,2 weak quality papers, and four moderate quality papers found improvements to pain, with large effect sizes in four papers. No studies used established body image measures to examine intervention effects on body image, and all lacked health psychology theoretical basis. There were common issues in selection bias, confounders and blinding. Conclusion: Without gold-standard methodology, evidence of effectiveness cannot be concluded. However, there is promising rationale if these issues are addressed.
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
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
×
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