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

Effectiveness of mind-body interventions in labour pain management during normal delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Labour pain is a common experience among women and poses risks to both the mother and neonate. Mind-body interventions have demonstrated effectiveness in diverse contexts, but their effectiveness in labour pain management remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the effects of each category of mind-body interventions on labour pain management, particularly pain intensity; the use of pharmacological pain relief medications; and the consequent outcomes, including the rate of caesarean section, duration of labour, and fear of childbirth.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic search for related articles was conducted in 10 databases. Randomised controlled trials focusing on the effectiveness of mind-body interventions in labour pain management were included. Two researchers independently conducted methodological quality assessments, data extraction and grading the evidence. Meta-analyses were conducted when studies measured the same outcomes. Standardised mean differences were calculated for continuous variables, whilst risk ratios were calculated for dichotomous variables. All analyses were performed using RevMan version 5.3.

RESULTS

A total of 25 studies from 24 trials were included, and six categories of mind-body interventions, namely hypnosis, mindfulness, breathing skills, muscle relaxation techniques, guided imagery, and therapeutic touch, were identified. Specifically, hypnosis and mindfulness might be effective in relieving labour pain intensity, with large effect sizes (SMD: -1.45, 95 % confidence interval [CI] -2.34, -0.55, I2 = 91 %; SMD: -1.22, 95 % CI -2.07, -0.37, I2 = 93 %, respectively), but could not reduce the use of epidural analgesia. Mindfulness, in particular, yielded statistically significant reductions in the rate of caesarean section, with a small effect size (RR: 0.46, 95 % CI 0.21, 0.97, I2 = 49 %), and in fear of childbirth, with a medium effect size (SMD: -0.63, 95 % CI -1.09, -0.17, I2 = 65 %). Additionally, all categories of mind-body interventions were associated with a significantly decreased duration of labour compared with the control conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Mind-body interventions may have potential benefits in terms of decreasing labour pain intensity, the rate of caesarean section, the duration of labour, and fear of childbirth, with small-to-large effect sizes. Particularly, hypnosis and mindfulness exhibited significant positive effects in terms of relieving labour pain intensity, with large effect sizes. These interventions could serve as complementary or alternative methods for labour pain management in clinical practice. Nevertheless, further rigorous randomised controlled trials are warranted to confirm our results.

REGISTRATION

CRD42024498600 (PROSPERO, January 15, 2024).

Enhancing Chronic Non-Cancer Pain Management: A Systematic Review of Mindfulness Therapies and Guided Imagery Interventions

Background and Objectives: There has been an increasing interest in the use of non-pharmacological approaches for the multidimensional treatment of chronic pain. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of mindfulness-based therapies and Guided Imagery (GI) interventions in managing chronic non-cancer pain and related outcomes. Materials and Methods: Searching three electronic databases (Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus) and following the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was performed on Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and pilot RCTs investigating mindfulness or GI interventions in adult patients with chronic non-cancer pain. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was utilized to assess the quality of the evidence, with outcomes encompassing pain intensity, opioid consumption, and non-sensorial dimensions of pain. Results: Twenty-six trials met the inclusion criteria, with most of them exhibiting a moderate to high risk of bias. A wide diversity of chronic pain types were under analysis. Amongst the mindfulness interventions, and besides the classical programs, Mindfulness-Oriented Recovery Enhancement (MORE) emerges as an approach that improves interoception. Six trials demonstrated that mindfulness techniques resulted in a significant reduction in pain intensity, and three trials also reported significant outcomes with GI. Evidence supports a significant improvement in non-sensory dimensions of pain in ten trials using mindfulness and in two trials involving GI. Significant effects on opioid consumption were reported in four mindfulness-based trials, whereas one study involving GI found a small effect with that variable. Conclusions: This study supports the evidence of benefits of both mindfulness techniques and GI interventions in the management of chronic non-cancer pain. Regarding the various mindfulness interventions, a specific emphasis on the positive results of MORE should be highlighted. Future studies should focus on specific pain types, explore different durations of the mindfulness and GI interventions, and evaluate emotion-related outcomes.

Non-pharmacological strategies to alleviate dysgeusia in patients undergoing chemotherapy: A systematic review

PURPOSE

Dysgeusia is a common side effect in oncology patients, significantly impacting their quality of life. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of non-pharmacological strategies in treating dysgeusia in patients undergoing chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

METHODS

Adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive literature search across five databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and the British Nursing Database. We used the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools to assess the quality of the included studies. A harvest plot was used to synthesise evidence about the differential effects of population-level interventions.

RESULTS

Nine studies of non-pharmacological strategies to manage dysgeusia were included. These studies encompassed a variety of interventions, including oral applications and supplements, instrumental techniques, and educational programs. The review identified promising interventions such as cryotherapy and Miraculine supplementation, which showed potential in mitigating taste alterations. Instrumental techniques like photobiomodulation therapy and complementary and integrative medicine approaches, including acupuncture and herbs, were also found to be beneficial. Educational and self-management strategies emerged as effective interventions for empowering patients to manage dysgeusia. Despite the diversity of interventions and the limitations of the included studies, such as small sample sizes and geographical differences, these findings underscore the potential of non-pharmacological strategies in managing dysgeusia.

CONCLUSION

The results support the integration of these strategies into clinical practice, highlighting the importance of multidisciplinary approaches to improve patient care. Further research should prioritize rigorous studies to enhance evidence and explore long-term effects.

Hypnosis for Symptom Management in Adult Cancer Patients: What is the Evidence?

OPINION STATEMENT

As a palliative care specialist and a hypnotherapist, I use therapeutic communication and conversational hypnosis daily in my patient - doctor relationship. Formal hypnotherapy sessions are integrated in my practice whenever patients are open or wish for such an approach in relation to a specific symptom, for better overall management of their disease burden and/or enhanced well-being. Although hypnosis has been used for centuries in medical practice and for thousands of years in healing practices in ancient cultures all over the world, the evidence remains scarce. Nevertheless, in the last 10 years several randomised controlled trials have been conducted, building up an evidence base. In contrast to most oncological treatments, hypnotherapy is far from being considered evidence-based "standard care". It is however, if practiced by a trained health care professional, almost free of side effects and therefore potentially has a very favourable benefit-to-harm ratio. The question arises whether hypnotherapy will ever become a standard of care intervention? This seems unlikely since its efficacy may be influenced by the patient's belief in hypnosis and compliance to therapy. Furthermore, a fundamental necessity is a personalised approach that moves hypnotherapy more into the category of individual-centred care rather than standard care.

Meta-analytic evidence on the efficacy of hypnosis for mental and somatic health issues: a 20-year perspective

Introduction

Documented use and investigation of hypnosis spans centuries and its therapeutic use has received endorsement by multiple medical associations. We conducted a comprehensive overview of meta-analyses examining the efficacy of hypnosis to provide a foundational understanding of hypnosis in evidence-based healthcare, insight into the safety of hypnosis interventions, and identification of gaps in the current research literature.

Methods

In our systematic review, meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of hypnosis in patients with mental or somatic health problems compared to any control condition published after the year 2000 were included. A comprehensive literature search using Medline, Scopus, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library, HTA Database, Web of Science and a manual search was conducted to identify eligible reviews. Methodological quality of the included meta-analyses was rated using the AMSTAR 2 tool. Effect estimates on various outcomes including at least three comparisons (k ≥ 3) were extracted and transformed into a common effect size metric (Cohen's d). If available, information on the certainty of evidence for these outcomes (GRADE assessment) was obtained.

Results

We included 49 meta-analyses with 261 distinct primary studies. Most robust evidence was reported for hypnosis in patients undergoing medical procedures (12 reviews, 79 distinct primary studies) and in patients with pain (4 reviews, 65 primary studies). There was a considerable overlap of the primary studies across the meta-analyses. Only nine meta-analyses were rated to have high methodological quality. Reported effect sizes comparing hypnosis against control conditions ranged from d = -0.04 to d = 2.72. Of the reported effects, 25.4% were medium (d ≥ 0.5), and 28.8% were large (d ≥ 0.8).

Discussion

Our findings underline the potential of hypnosis to positively impact various mental and somatic treatment outcomes, with the largest effects found in patients experiencing pain, patients undergoing medical procedures, and in populations of children/adolescents. Future research should focus on the investigation of moderators of efficacy, on comparing hypnosis to established interventions, on the efficacy of hypnosis for children and adolescents, and on identifying patients who do not benefit from hypnosis.

Clinical Trial Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023395514, identifier CRD42023395514.

The Effects of Complementary Therapies on Patient-Reported Outcomes: An Overview of Recent Systematic Reviews in Oncology

Many patients with cancer make use of complementary medicine alongside conventional medicine, but clinicians in oncology often lack the knowledge to adequately advise patients on the evidence base for complementary therapies. This study aims to provide an overview of recently published systematic reviews that assess the effects of complementary therapies on patient-reported health outcomes in patients with cancer. Systematic reviews, including a meta-analysis of at least two randomized controlled trials, were identified from the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases. The methodological quality was assessed with AMSTAR 2. One hundred systematic reviews were included. The results suggest that several complementary therapies can improve health outcomes reported by patients with cancer, such as acupuncture to relieve pain, music interventions to reduce anxiety and yoga to improve cancer-related fatigue. The side effects related to complementary therapy use are generally mild. The results remain inconclusive for some intervention-outcome combinations. Many of the included systematic reviews insufficiently assessed the causes and impact of bias in their interpretation of the results. This overview of systematic reviews can support clinicians in counselling their patients on this topic and provide directions for future research and clinical practice guidelines in the field of complementary medicine.

Efficacy of mind-body therapies for sleep disturbance in patients with early-stage cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare the efficacy of different mind-body therapies (MBTs) for sleep disturbance in patients with early-stage cancer.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials that included patients (aged ≥18 years) with early stage cancer who underwent MBTs (mindfulness, hypnosis, relaxation, yoga, and qigong) were searched in the CINAHL via the EBSCO Host, Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Scopus databases, from the date of database inception to October 2022. The outcomes were subjective sleep disturbance and objective sleep efficiency. Network meta-analysis (NMA) and comparative effects ranking were performed using STATA (v14.0; STATACorp, College Station, TX, USA).

RESULTS

Forty-seven studies investigating five MBTs were included in the NMA. For cancer patients receiving active treatment, mindfulness demonstrated the largest effect size in reducing subjective sleep disturbance (standardised mean difference [SMD]: 0.85; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.20-1.50; Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation assessment: moderate), and had the highest cumulative probability compared to usual care or waitlist. For cancer patients who had completed active treatment, qigong demonstrated the largest effect size in reducing subjective sleep disturbance (SMD: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.35-1.63; GRADE: low), followed by hypnosis (SMD: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.32-1.42; GRADE: moderate), and mindfulness (SMD: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.24-0.59; GRADE: moderate). Qigong also demonstrated the largest effect size in improving objective sleep efficiency (weighted mean differences: 10.76; 95% CI: 2.01-19.50; GRADE: low); however, the effect of qigong was tested in only one study in this NMA. Among the eight different treatment conditions, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) showed the highest cumulative probability (surface under the cumulative ranking curve: 96.3%) in reducing subjective sleep disturbance and the second highest cumulative probability (SUCRA: 83.3%) in improving objective sleep efficiency.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence supporting the use of MBTs to replace or be comparable to CBT. Mindfulness can be recommended as an optional treatment for reducing sleep disturbance in patients with early-stage cancer. Some support was observed for qigong and hypnosis in reducing sleep disturbances in patients with early-stage cancer who had completed active treatment. More rigorous trials are warranted to confirm whether different forms of MBTs have different effects on sleep in patients with cancer.

Immersive virtual reality and neurofeedback for the management of cancer symptoms during treatment

Millions of people are diagnosed with cancer each year in the USA and are living on systemic therapies designed to prolong their life. While these therapies are intended to treat the disease, most exacerbate cancer symptoms such as pain and anxiety. Oncologists and other healthcare providers are now challenged to deliver adjunctive therapies designed to improve quality of life of patients while they undergo cancer treatment, including minimizing already disruptive symptoms such as cancer pain and anxiety. Complementary and alternative medicines such as immersive virtual reality (VR) and neurofeedback (NF) are novel approaches to the management of cancer symptoms. While the evidence for combining VR and NF, specifically for management of cancer pain, while patients undergo systemic therapies, is still emerging; our preliminary findings suggest this treatment modality might offer relief of cancer symptoms. This paper briefly highlights the clinical need for supportive therapies such as VR and NF in the oncological setting and summarizes innovative research in this area.

Improvement in patient-reported pain among patients with metastatic cancer and its association with opioid prescribing

PURPOSE

Opioids are a mainstay of cancer pain management; however, patients with metastatic cancer are often excluded from studies, leading to a lack of evidence on whether increased prescribing (dosage and/or duration) results in improved outcomes for this population. This study aimed to investigate whether increased opioid prescribing is associated with an improvement in patient-reported pain among patients with metastatic cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort of all adult patients diagnosed with stage IV cancers, who completed at least two patient-reported outcomes (PROs) within 30 days of each other, was identified from administrative data. Opioid prescriptions were categorized by dosage level and number of prescription days. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate the association between opioid prescribing and clinically important improvement in pain score (≥ 1 point change on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System).

RESULTS

A total of 2169 patients were included, 770 (35.5%) of whom had active opioid prescription between PROs, with an average daily dosage of 86.1 mg of oral morphine equivalent. Active prescription was associated with improvement in pain (OR = 2.17, P < 0.001). However, among patients with active prescription, neither dosage nor number of prescription days was significantly associated with pain improvement.

CONCLUSION

Opioid prescription is important for treating cancer-related pain; however, increased dosage or duration may not be leading to greater improvements in pain. Patients with metastatic cancer who are receiving increased opioid prescribing may have difficult-to-treat pain and may benefit from multidisciplinary pain management strategies to supplement opioid prescription and improve outcomes.

Prevention and Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN) with Non-Pharmacological Interventions: Clinical Recommendations from a Systematic Scoping Review and an Expert Consensus Process

Background: Most individuals affected by cancer who are treated with certain chemotherapies suffer of CIPN. Therefore, there is a high patient and provider interest in complementary non-pharmacological therapies, but its evidence base has not yet been clearly pointed out in the context of CIPN. Methods: The results of a scoping review overviewing the published clinical evidence on the application of complementary therapies for improving the complex CIPN symptomatology are synthesized with the recommendations of an expert consensus process aiming to draw attention to supportive strategies for CIPN. The scoping review, registered at PROSPERO 2020 (CRD 42020165851), followed the PRISMA-ScR and JBI guidelines. Relevant studies published in Pubmed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PEDro, Cochrane CENTRAL, and CINAHL between 2000 and 2021 were included. CASP was used to evaluate the methodologic quality of the studies. Results: Seventy-five studies with mixed study quality met the inclusion criteria. Manipulative therapies (including massage, reflexology, therapeutic touch), rhythmical embrocations, movement and mind-body therapies, acupuncture/acupressure, and TENS/Scrambler therapy were the most frequently analyzed in research and may be effective treatment options for CIPN. The expert panel approved 17 supportive interventions, most of them were phytotherapeutic interventions including external applications and cryotherapy, hydrotherapy, and tactile stimulation. More than two-thirds of the consented interventions were rated with moderate to high perceived clinical effectiveness in therapeutic use. Conclusions: The evidence of both the review and the expert panel supports a variety of complementary procedures regarding the supportive treatment of CIPN; however, the application on patients should be individually weighed in each case. Based on this meta-synthesis, interprofessional healthcare teams may open up a dialogue with patients interested in non-pharmacological treatment options to tailor complementary counselling and treatments to their needs.

"A Hippo Out of Water": A Qualitative Inquiry of How Cancer Survivors' Experienced In-Person and Remote-Delivered Mind-Body Therapies

Background

Mind-body therapies (MBTs) are an effective treatment option for people living with and surviving from cancer to help manage unwanted physical and psychological symptoms and side-effects related to treatment and the illness itself. Many of these structured MBTs, such as Mindfulness Based Cancer Recovery (MBCR) and tai chi/qigong (TCQ) programs are common; however, COVID-19 caused most research intervention trials and clinical programs to halt completely, or rapidly adapt an online modality. The Mindfulness and Tai Chi for Cancer Health (MATCH) study, a large-scale study that compared MBCR to a structured TCQ program for treating psychological and physical health outcomes for cancer survivors, adapted to an online, Zoom delivered, program at the outset of COVID-19.

Objectives

Study objectives were to explore the experiences of MATCH study participants who took the MBCR or TCQ program completely in-person, those who took the program completely online (over zoom), and participants who had to shift from in-person to online delivery midway through their series of TCQ classes.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 participants following participation in either the MBCR or TCQ program of the MATCH study.

Results

We derived four themes from the data: 1) attending to personal needs, 2) functional, interpersonal, and COVID19-related challenges, 3) unique engagement styles based on mode of delivery, and 4) ease of transitioning to remote delivery. We found that thematic outcomes were variable and largely based on individual preference, such as valuing more autonomy online, or appreciating the interpersonal connection of being in-person. Our results further indicated that the process of shifting from in-person to online within a short time-period was a relatively seamless transition that had minimal impact on participant experience.

Conclusions

Insights from this study highlight the benefits of digital mind-body therapies for cancer survivors that extend beyond the acute effects of COVID19.