Lee Hopin, Hübscher Markus, Moseley G Lorimer, Kamper Steven J, Traeger Adrian C, Mansell Gemma, McAuley James H
Neuroscience Research Australia (NeuRA), Sydney, NSW, Australia School of Medical Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia Sansom Institute for Health Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia EMGO+ Institute, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands The George Institute for Global Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia Arthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Primary Care Sciences, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, United Kingdom.
Pain. 2015 Jun;156(6):988-997. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000146.
Disability is an important outcome from a clinical and public health perspective. However, it is unclear how disability develops in people with low back pain or neck pain. More specifically, the mechanisms by which pain leads to disability are not well understood. Mediation analysis is a way of investigating these mechanisms by examining the extent to which an intermediate variable explains the effect of an exposure on an outcome. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify and examine the extent to which putative mediators explain the effect of pain on disability in people with low back pain or neck pain. Five electronic databases were searched. We found 12 studies (N = 2961) that examined how pain leads to disability with mediation analysis. Standardized regression coefficients (β) of the indirect and total paths were pooled. We found evidence to show that self-efficacy (β = 0.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.10 to 0.34), psychological distress (β = 0.10, 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.18), and fear (β = 0.08, 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.14) mediated the relationship between pain and disability, but catastrophizing did not (β = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.06 to 0.19). The methodological quality of these studies was low, and we highlight potential areas for development. Nonetheless, the results suggest that there are significant mediating effects of self-efficacy, psychological distress, and fear, which underpins the direct targeting of these constructs in treatment.
从临床和公共卫生角度来看,残疾是一个重要的结果。然而,目前尚不清楚腰痛或颈痛患者的残疾是如何发展的。更具体地说,疼痛导致残疾的机制尚未得到很好的理解。中介分析是一种通过检查中间变量在多大程度上解释暴露对结果的影响来研究这些机制的方法。本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在确定并检验假定的中介因素在多大程度上解释了疼痛对腰痛或颈痛患者残疾的影响。我们检索了五个电子数据库。我们发现12项研究(N = 2961)通过中介分析研究了疼痛如何导致残疾。对间接路径和总路径的标准化回归系数(β)进行了汇总。我们发现有证据表明自我效能感(β = 0.23,95%置信区间[CI] = 0.10至0.34)、心理困扰(β = 0.10,95%CI = 0.01至0.18)和恐惧(β = 0.08,95%CI = 0.01至0.14)介导了疼痛与残疾之间的关系,但灾难化思维没有(β = 0.07,95%CI = -0.06至0.19)。这些研究的方法学质量较低,我们强调了潜在的发展领域。尽管如此,结果表明自我效能感、心理困扰和恐惧存在显著的中介作用,这为在治疗中直接针对这些因素提供了依据。