9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      The efficacy of pain neuroscience education on musculoskeletal pain: A systematic review of the literature

      , , ,

      Physiotherapy Theory and Practice

      Informa UK Limited

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      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

          Systematic review of randomized control trials (RCTs) for the effectiveness of pain neuroscience education (PNE) on pain, function, disability, psychosocial factors, movement, and healthcare utilization in individuals with chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) pain.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials.

          Assessment of the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is common practice in systematic reviews. However, the reliability of data obtained with most quality assessment scales has not been established. This report describes 2 studies designed to investigate the reliability of data obtained with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale developed to rate the quality of RCTs evaluating physical therapist interventions. In the first study, 11 raters independently rated 25 RCTs randomly selected from the PEDro database. In the second study, 2 raters rated 120 RCTs randomly selected from the PEDro database, and disagreements were resolved by a third rater; this generated a set of individual rater and consensus ratings. The process was repeated by independent raters to create a second set of individual and consensus ratings. Reliability of ratings of PEDro scale items was calculated using multirater kappas, and reliability of the total (summed) score was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC [1,1]). The kappa value for each of the 11 items ranged from.36 to.80 for individual assessors and from.50 to.79 for consensus ratings generated by groups of 2 or 3 raters. The ICC for the total score was.56 (95% confidence interval=.47-.65) for ratings by individuals, and the ICC for consensus ratings was.68 (95% confidence interval=.57-.76). The reliability of ratings of PEDro scale items varied from "fair" to "substantial," and the reliability of the total PEDro score was "fair" to "good."
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The effect of neuroscience education on pain, disability, anxiety, and stress in chronic musculoskeletal pain.

            To evaluate the evidence for the effectiveness of neuroscience education (NE) for pain, disability, anxiety, and stress in chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) pain. Systematic searches were conducted on Biomed Central, BMJ.com, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, NLM Central Gateway, OVID, ProQuest (Digital Dissertations), PsycInfo, PubMed/Medline, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science. Secondary searching (PEARLing) was undertaken, whereby reference lists of the selected articles were reviewed for additional references not identified in the primary search. All experimental studies including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), nonrandomized clinical trials, and case series evaluating the effect of NE on pain, disability, anxiety, and stress for chronic MSK pain were considered for inclusion. Additional limitations: studies published in English, published within the last 10 years, and patients older than 18 years. No limitations were set on specific outcome measures of pain, disability, anxiety, and stress. Data were extracted using the participants, interventions, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) approach. Methodological quality was assessed by 2 reviewers using the Critical Review Form-Quantitative Studies. This review includes 8 studies comprising 6 high-quality RCTs, 1 pseudo-RCT, and 1 comparative study involving 401 subjects. Most articles were of good quality, with no studies rated as poor or fair. Heterogeneity across the studies with respect to participants, interventions evaluated, and outcome measures used prevented meta-analyses. Narrative synthesis of results, based on effect size, established compelling evidence that NE may be effective in reducing pain ratings, increasing function, addressing catastrophization, and improving movement in chronic MSK pain. For chronic MSK pain disorders, there is compelling evidence that an educational strategy addressing neurophysiology and neurobiology of pain can have a positive effect on pain, disability, catastrophization, and physical performance. Copyright © 2011 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Fifteen Years of Explaining Pain: The Past, Present, and Future.

              The pain field has been advocating for some time for the importance of teaching people how to live well with pain. Perhaps some, and maybe even for many, we might again consider the possibility that we can help people live well without pain. Explaining Pain (EP) refers to a range of educational interventions that aim to change one's understanding of the biological processes that are thought to underpin pain as a mechanism to reduce pain itself. It draws on educational psychology, in particular conceptual change strategies, to help patients understand current thought in pain biology. The core objective of the EP approach to treatment is to shift one's conceptualization of pain from that of a marker of tissue damage or disease to that of a marker of the perceived need to protect body tissue. Here, we describe the historical context and beginnings of EP, suggesting that it is a pragmatic application of the biopsychosocial model of pain, but differentiating it from cognitive behavioral therapy and educational components of early multidisciplinary pain management programs. We attempt to address common misconceptions of EP that have emerged over the last 15 years, highlighting that EP is not behavioral or cognitive advice, nor does it deny the potential contribution of peripheral nociceptive signals to pain. We contend that EP is grounded in strong theoretical frameworks, that its targeted effects are biologically plausible, and that available behavioral evidence is supportive. We update available meta-analyses with results of a systematic review of recent contributions to the field and propose future directions by which we might enhance the effects of EP as part of multimodal pain rehabilitation. Perspective: EP is a range of educational interventions. EP is grounded in conceptual change and instructional design theory. It increases knowledge of pain-related biology, decreases catastrophizing, and imparts short-term reductions in pain and disability. It presents the biological information that justifies a biopsychosocial approach to rehabilitation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Physiotherapy Theory and Practice
                Physiotherapy Theory and Practice
                Informa UK Limited
                0959-3985
                1532-5040
                July 11 2016
                July 03 2016
                June 28 2016
                July 03 2016
                : 32
                : 5
                : 332-355
                Article
                10.1080/09593985.2016.1194646
                27351541
                © 2016

                Comments

                Comment on this article