5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Psychosocial predictors of posttreatment pain after nonmetastatic breast cancer treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The search for risk factors of pain after breast cancer, which affects a considerable proportion of the women, has primarily focused on clinical factors. The aim of this meta-analysis was to explore the less well-studied psychosocial predictors of pain after breast cancer treatment.

          Methods

          Two independent searches were conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and CINAHL. Eligible studies were prospective, observational studies of women aged ≥18 years, diagnosed and treated for nonmetastatic breast cancer ≥3 months previously. Additional inclusion criteria were that studies had assessed at least one pain outcome and at least one psychosocial predictor. The psychosocial predictors investigated included: 1) psychological–behavioral states, 2) psychological traits, and 3) social support. Effect size correlations (ESr) were chosen as the effect size and pooled using a random effects model. We also explored a number of study characteristics as possible moderators of the effect with meta-regression.

          Results

          Of the total of 13 eligible studies identified, most studies measured psychosocial predictors at presurgery. Neither psychological–behavioral states (ESr: 0.05; p=0.13; K=11) nor psychological traits (ESr: 0.02; p=0.48; K=6) emerged as statistically significant predictors of pain. In contrast, higher levels of social support were statistically significantly associated with less pain (ESr: −0.24; p<0.001; K=4). In studies of psychological–behavioral states, longer follow-up was associated with smaller effect sizes ( p=0.023). Furthermore, older mean sample age was associated with larger effect sizes for both psychological–behavioral states ( p=0.0004) and psychological traits ( p=0.035).

          Conclusion

          The results of this meta-analysis suggest that psychosocial factors measured at presurgery may only be of modest predictive value in identifying women at risk of developing pain after breast cancer treatment. While speculative, psychosocial factors may play a larger role in the postsurgery trajectory, which could be valuable to investigate in future studies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book: not found

          Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences

           Jacob Cohen (2013)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Dopaminergic foundations of schizotypy as measured by the German version of the Oxford-Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences (O-LIFE)—a suitable endophenotype of schizophrenia

            The concept of schizotypy or “psychosis proneness” captures individual differences in perceptual, cognitive, and affective experiences that may relate to a range of psychotic disorders. The concept is an important way to assess the contribution of pre-existing psychological and genetically based biological features to the development of illnesses such as schizophrenia (so called endophenotypes). The Oxford-Liverpool Inventory of Feelings and Experiences (O-LIFE) is a widely used multi-dimensional measure of the construct and consists of four scales which mirror several groups of psychotic symptoms: Unusual Experiences (UnEx; positive symptoms), Cognitive Disorganization (CogDis; cognitive symptoms), Introvertive Anhedonia (IntAn; negative symptoms), and Impulsive Nonconformity (ImpNon; impulsive and antisocial symptoms). For the purpose of evaluating the suitability of schizotypy as an endophenotype of schizophrenia the current version of the O-LIFE was translated into German: its psychometric properties (including re-test reliability and construct validity) were examined in a large sample (n > 1200) and compared to those of the English original. The German version was both highly reliable and consistent with the original. The study aimed to show that schizotypy as measured by the O-LIFE can indeed be regarded as an endophenotype of schizophrenia in terms of genetic associations regarding relevant dopamine-related candidate polymorphisms of schizotypy [i.e., Val158Met-polymorphism of the COMT gene, uVNTR of the MAOA gene, Taq1A-polymorphism of the DRD2 gene, VNTR of the SLC6A3 (DAT) gene]. We also wanted to compare the genetic associations of the O-LIFE to those published using other operationalizations of schizotypy. Our results show a large number of significant associations and borderline-significant trends between the O-LIFE sub-scales and a range of genes, thereby supporting using the O-LIFE in the search for endophenotypic markers.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment. Confirmation from meta-analysis.

              Conventional reviews of research on the efficacy of psychological, educational, and behavioral treatments often find considerable variation in outcome among studies and, as a consequence, fail to reach firm conclusions about the overall effectiveness of the interventions in question. In contrast meta-analytic reviews show a strong, dramatic pattern of positive overall effects that cannot readily be explained as artifacts of meta-analytic technique or generalized placebo effects. Moreover, the effects are not so small that they can be dismissed as lacking practical or clinical significance. Although meta-analysis has limitations, there are good reasons to believe that its results are more credible than those of conventional reviews and to conclude that well-developed psychological, educational, and behavioral treatment is generally efficacious.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Pain Res
                J Pain Res
                Journal of Pain Research
                Journal of Pain Research
                Dove Medical Press
                1178-7090
                2018
                21 December 2017
                : 11
                : 23-36
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Unit for Psychoncology and Health Psychology, Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital
                [2 ]Department of Psychology, Aarhus University
                [3 ]Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus C, Denmark
                Author notes
                Correspondence: M Johannsen, Department of Oncology and Psychology, Unit for Psycho-Oncology and Health Psychology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus University, Bartolins Allé 9, Building 1340, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark, Tel +45 8716 5956, Email majajo@ 123456psy.au.dk
                Article
                jpr-11-023
                10.2147/JPR.S124665
                5743183
                © 2018 Johannsen et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                Categories
                Review

                Comments

                Comment on this article