1
|
A Scoping Review of the Evidence regarding Assessment and Management of Psychological Features of Shoulder Pain. Rehabil Res Pract 2021; 2021:7211201. [PMID: 34631168 PMCID: PMC8497138 DOI: 10.1155/2021/7211201] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2021] [Revised: 06/10/2021] [Accepted: 09/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Methods A scoping review of research studies identified through PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL and graduate theses identified using Google Scholar was conducted to determine studies and systematic reviews that addressed the management of psychological aspects of shoulder pain with or without neck pain. The search terms included psychological factors, anxiety, depression, catastrophic thinking, fear of movement, and psychological treatments. Two investigators screened study titles and abstracts. Data extraction, content analysis, and thematic coding focused on the dimensions of pain addressed (emotional, behavioural, and cognitive) and treatment approaches used (dimensions targeted, specific treatment parameters) and the linkage between treatment targets/rationale with interventions/outcomes measured. Results Ten studies (seven randomized trials and three cohorts) were identified that addressed the psychological aspects of shoulder pain. Out of seven RCTs, four compared psychological interventions with usual care. Eight studies used cognitive approaches, including emotional freedom techniques (EFT), pain coping strategies (PCS), physical-cognitive-mindfulness training (PCMT), psychological flexibility, face-to-face cognitive-behavioural treatment (CBT), and cognitive therapy using virtual reality (V.R.). Three studies used the behavioural approaches as their intervention, including behavioural therapy and Graded Exercise Therapy (GET). Pain intensity was addressed as the primary outcome in two studies and as a secondary outcome in five studies. Cognitive factors were evaluated in 50% of the articles using nine different measures. Emotional factors were evaluated in 80% of articles using ten different measures. Reduction of pain intensity and catastrophic thinking concerning pain was achieved in most studies using a biopsychosocial approach (70%). Applying a behavioural approach was associated with reductions in kinesiophobia and pain catastrophizing. Cognitive approaches had a positive association with reductions in the emotional aspect of pain. Only one study specifically linked rationale or specific physical and psychosocial treatment targets with the treatments provided and outcomes measured. Conclusions Small pools of studies indicate that the rationale and treatment targeting are poorly defined in biopsychosocial interventions for shoulder pain. However, these benefits have been demonstrated when cognitive or behavioural components are added to the standard physical treatment of shoulder pain. A better definition of treatment targets, description of intervention components, and linkage of outcomes to targets are needed to advance our understanding of optimizing bio-psychosocial approaches.
Collapse
|
2
|
Vitoula K, Venneri A, Varrassi G, Paladini A, Sykioti P, Adewusi J, Zis P. Behavioral Therapy Approaches for the Management of Low Back Pain: An Up-To-Date Systematic Review. Pain Ther 2018; 7:1-12. [PMID: 29767395 PMCID: PMC5993685 DOI: 10.1007/s40122-018-0099-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2017] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Low back pain is one of the most common causes for seeking medical treatment and it is estimated that one in two people will experience low back pain at some point during their lifetimes. Management of low back pain includes pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches. Non-pharmaceutical treatments include interventions such as acupuncture, spinal manipulation, and psychotherapy. The latter is especially important as patients who suffer from low back pain often have impaired quality of life and also suffer from depression. Depressive symptoms can appear because back pain limits patients’ ability to work and engage in their usual social activities. The aim of this systematic review was to overview the behavioral approaches that can be used in the management of patients with low back pain. Approaches such as electromyography (EMG) biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy, and mindfulness-based stress reduction are discussed as non-pharmacological options in the management of low back pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristallia Vitoula
- Department of Anesthesiology, Attica General Hospital KAT, Athens, Greece
| | - Annalena Venneri
- Department of Neurosciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | | | | | | | - Joy Adewusi
- Academic Department of Neurosciences, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Panagiotis Zis
- Academic Department of Neurosciences, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Castelnuovo G, Giusti EM, Manzoni GM, Saviola D, Gatti A, Gabrielli S, Lacerenza M, Pietrabissa G, Cattivelli R, Spatola CAM, Corti S, Novelli M, Villa V, Cottini A, Lai C, Pagnini F, Castelli L, Tavola M, Torta R, Arreghini M, Zanini L, Brunani A, Capodaglio P, D'Aniello GE, Scarpina F, Brioschi A, Priano L, Mauro A, Riva G, Repetto C, Regalia C, Molinari E, Notaro P, Paolucci S, Sandrini G, Simpson SG, Wiederhold B, Tamburin S. Psychological Treatments and Psychotherapies in the Neurorehabilitation of Pain: Evidences and Recommendations from the Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation. Front Psychol 2016; 7:115. [PMID: 26924998 PMCID: PMC4759289 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2015] [Accepted: 01/21/2016] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND It is increasingly recognized that treating pain is crucial for effective care within neurological rehabilitation in the setting of the neurological rehabilitation. The Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation was constituted with the purpose identifying best practices for us in this context. Along with drug therapies and physical interventions, psychological treatments have been proven to be some of the most valuable tools that can be used within a multidisciplinary approach for fostering a reduction in pain intensity. However, there is a need to elucidate what forms of psychotherapy could be effectively matched with the specific pathologies that are typically addressed by neurorehabilitation teams. OBJECTIVES To extensively assess the available evidence which supports the use of psychological therapies for pain reduction in neurological diseases. METHODS A systematic review of the studies evaluating the effect of psychotherapies on pain intensity in neurological disorders was performed through an electronic search using PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Based on the level of evidence of the included studies, recommendations were outlined separately for the different conditions. RESULTS The literature search yielded 2352 results and the final database included 400 articles. The overall strength of the recommendations was medium/low. The different forms of psychological interventions, including Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy, cognitive or behavioral techniques, Mindfulness, hypnosis, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), Brief Interpersonal Therapy, virtual reality interventions, various forms of biofeedback and mirror therapy were found to be effective for pain reduction in pathologies such as musculoskeletal pain, fibromyalgia, Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, Central Post-Stroke pain, Phantom Limb Pain, pain secondary to Spinal Cord Injury, multiple sclerosis and other debilitating syndromes, diabetic neuropathy, Medically Unexplained Symptoms, migraine and headache. CONCLUSIONS Psychological interventions and psychotherapies are safe and effective treatments that can be used within an integrated approach for patients undergoing neurological rehabilitation for pain. The different interventions can be specifically selected depending on the disease being treated. A table of evidence and recommendations from the Italian Consensus Conference on Pain in Neurorehabilitation is also provided in the final part of the paper.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gianluca Castelnuovo
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
- Department of Psychology, Catholic University of MilanMilan, Italy
| | | | - Gian Mauro Manzoni
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
- Faculty of Psychology, eCampus UniversityNovedrate (Como), Italy
| | - Donatella Saviola
- Cardinal Ferrari Rehabilitation Center, Santo Stefano Rehabilitation IstituteFontanellato, Italy
| | | | | | | | - Giada Pietrabissa
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
- Department of Psychology, Catholic University of MilanMilan, Italy
| | - Roberto Cattivelli
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | - Chiara A. M. Spatola
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
- Department of Psychology, Catholic University of MilanMilan, Italy
| | - Stefania Corti
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | - Margherita Novelli
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | - Valentina Villa
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | | | - Carlo Lai
- Department of Dynamic and Clinical PsychologySapienza University of Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Pagnini
- Department of Psychology, Catholic University of MilanMilan, Italy
- Department of Psychology, Harvard UniversityCambridge, MA, USA
| | - Lorys Castelli
- Department of Psychology, University of TurinTurin, Italy
| | | | - Riccardo Torta
- Department of Neuroscience “Rita Levi Montalcini”University of Turin, Italy
| | - Marco Arreghini
- Rehabilitation Unit, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | - Loredana Zanini
- Rehabilitation Unit, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | - Amelia Brunani
- Rehabilitation Unit, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | - Paolo Capodaglio
- Rehabilitation Unit, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | - Guido E. D'Aniello
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | - Federica Scarpina
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
- Department of Neuroscience “Rita Levi Montalcini”University of Turin, Italy
| | - Andrea Brioschi
- Department of Neurology and Neurorehabilitation, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | - Lorenzo Priano
- Department of Neuroscience “Rita Levi Montalcini”University of Turin, Italy
- Department of Neurology and Neurorehabilitation, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | - Alessandro Mauro
- Department of Neuroscience “Rita Levi Montalcini”University of Turin, Italy
- Department of Neurology and Neurorehabilitation, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Riva
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
- Department of Psychology, Catholic University of MilanMilan, Italy
| | - Claudia Repetto
- Department of Psychology, Catholic University of MilanMilan, Italy
| | - Camillo Regalia
- Department of Psychology, Catholic University of MilanMilan, Italy
| | - Enrico Molinari
- Psychology Research Laboratory, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, San Giuseppe HospitalVerbania, Italy
- Department of Psychology, Catholic University of MilanMilan, Italy
| | - Paolo Notaro
- “Pain Center II Level - Department of Surgery” - ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano NiguardaMilano, Italy
| | | | - Giorgio Sandrini
- Department of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, C. Mondino National Neurological Institute, University of PaviaPavia, Italy
| | - Susan G. Simpson
- School of Psychology, Social Work and Social PolicyUniversity of South Australia, Australia
| | | | - Stefano Tamburin
- Department of Neurological and Movement Sciences, University of VeronaVerona, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Henschke N, Ostelo RWJG, van Tulder MW, Vlaeyen JWS, Morley S, Assendelft WJJ, Main CJ. Behavioural treatment for chronic low-back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; 2010:CD002014. [PMID: 20614428 PMCID: PMC7065591 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd002014.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 208] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Behavioural treatment is commonly used in the management of chronic low-back pain (CLBP) to reduce disability through modification of maladaptive pain behaviours and cognitive processes. Three behavioural approaches are generally distinguished: operant, cognitive, and respondent; but are often combined as a treatment package. OBJECTIVES To determine the effects of behavioural therapy for CLBP and the most effective behavioural approach. SEARCH STRATEGY The Cochrane Back Review Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched up to February 2009. Reference lists and citations of identified trials and relevant systematic reviews were screened. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised trials on behavioural treatments for non-specific CLBP were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias in each study and extracted the data. If sufficient homogeneity existed among studies in the pre-defined comparisons, a meta-analysis was performed. We determined the quality of the evidence for each comparison with the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS We included 30 randomised trials (3438 participants) in this review, up 11 from the previous version. Fourteen trials (47%) had low risk of bias. For most comparisons, there was only low or very low quality evidence to support the results. There was moderate quality evidence that:i) operant therapy was more effective than waiting list (SMD -0.43; 95%CI -0.75 to -0.11) for short-term pain relief;ii) little or no difference exists between operant, cognitive, or combined behavioural therapy for short- to intermediate-term pain relief;iii) behavioural treatment was more effective than usual care for short-term pain relief (MD -5.18; 95%CI -9.79 to -0.57), but there were no differences in the intermediate- to long-term, or on functional status;iv) there was little or no difference between behavioural treatment and group exercise for pain relief or depressive symptoms over the intermediate- to long-term;v) adding behavioural therapy to inpatient rehabilitation was no more effective than inpatient rehabilitation alone. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS For patients with CLBP, there is moderate quality evidence that in the short-term, operant therapy is more effective than waiting list and behavioural therapy is more effective than usual care for pain relief, but no specific type of behavioural therapy is more effective than another. In the intermediate- to long-term, there is little or no difference between behavioural therapy and group exercises for pain or depressive symptoms. Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimates of effect and may change the estimates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicholas Henschke
- The George Institute for International HealthLevel 7, 341 George StreetSydneyNSWAustralia2000
| | - Raymond WJG Ostelo
- VU UniversityDepartment of Health Sciences, EMGO Institute for Health and Care ResearchPO Box 7057AmsterdamNetherlands1007 MB
| | - Maurits W van Tulder
- VU UniversityDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life SciencesPO Box 7057Room U454AmsterdamNetherlands1007 MB
| | - Johan WS Vlaeyen
- University of MaastrichtDepartment of Clinical PsychologyPeter Debyeplein 23MaastrichtNetherlands6229 HX
| | - Stephen Morley
- University of LeedsLeeds Institute of Health SciencesCharles Thackrah Building101 Clarendon RoadLeedsUKLS2 9LJ
| | - Willem JJ Assendelft
- Leiden University Medical CenterDepartment of Public Health and Primary CarePO Box 9600LeidenNetherlands2300 RC
| | - Chris J. Main
- Keele UniversityPrimary Care SciencesStaffordshireUK
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Schiltenwolf M, Buchner M, Heindl B, von Reumont J, Müller A, Eich W. Comparison of a biopsychosocial therapy (BT) with a conventional biomedical therapy (MT) of subacute low back pain in the first episode of sick leave: a randomized controlled trial. EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL : OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE EUROPEAN SPINE SOCIETY, THE EUROPEAN SPINAL DEFORMITY SOCIETY, AND THE EUROPEAN SECTION OF THE CERVICAL SPINE RESEARCH SOCIETY 2006; 15:1083-92. [PMID: 16311751 PMCID: PMC3233941 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-005-0008-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2005] [Revised: 07/08/2005] [Accepted: 10/15/2005] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
This randomized controlled clinical trial compares the effectiveness of a biopsychosocial treatment with a solely conventional biomedical therapy in patients with subacute low back pain using parameters for pain intensity, functional status, depressive dysfunction and work performance. Sixty-four patients with a first-time sick leave between 3 and 12 weeks due to low back pain were randomly assigned to either a conventional biomedical therapy (MT; n=33) group, or a biopsychosocial therapy (BT; n=31) group including a psychotherapeutic module; both in accordance with a standardized 3 weeks inpatient treatment. Pain intensity, functional back capacity, clinical parameters and depressive dysfunction revealed significant improvement in both treatment groups at end of 3 weeks therapy (T1). However, at 6 months (T2), analysis revealed significant better results for nearly all parameters in the BT group that showed further improvement from T1 to T2, whereas the values in the MT group deteriorated from T1 back to the baseline values. During the 2-year period after therapy, 10% in MT and 59% in BT required no further sick leave due to low back pain. The results of the study indicate that a psychotherapeutic element in the treatment of low back pain appears to positively influence pain, functional status and work performance when conducted at an early stage of chronification and helps in the achievement of a better outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcus Schiltenwolf
- Orthopaedic Clinic, University of Heidelberg, Schlierbacher Landstrasse 200a, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|