Abbott Rebecca A, Martin Alice E, Newlove-Delgado Tamsin V, Bethel Alison, Thompson-Coon Joanna, Whear Rebecca, Logan Stuart
NIHR CLAHRC South West Peninsula (PenCLAHRC), University of Exeter Medical School, South Cloisters, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, England, UK, EX1 2LU.
Paediatrics, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter, England, UK, EX2 5DW.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 10;1(1):CD010971. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010971.pub2.
This review supersedes the original Cochrane review first published in 2008 (Huertas-Ceballos 2008).Between 4% and 25% of school-aged children complain of recurrent abdominal pain (RAP) severe enough to interfere with their daily activities. No organic cause for this pain can be found on physical examination or investigation for the majority of such children. Although many children are managed by reassurance and simple measures, a large range of psychosocial interventions involving cognitive and behavioural components have been recommended.
To determine the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for reducing pain in school-aged children with RAP.
In June 2016 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, eight other databases, and two trials registers. We also searched the references of identified studies and relevant reviews.
Randomised controlled trials comparing psychosocial therapies with usual care, active control, or wait-list control for children and adolescents (aged 5 to 18 years) with RAP or an abdominal pain-related functional gastrointestinal disorder defined by the Rome III criteria were eligible for inclusion.
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Five review authors independently selected studies, assessed them for risk of bias, and extracted relevant data. We also assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
This review includes 18 randomised controlled trials (14 new to this version), reported in 26 papers, involving 928 children and adolescents with RAP between the ages of 6 and 18 years. The interventions were classified into four types of psychosocial therapy: cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), hypnotherapy (including guided imagery), yoga, and written self-disclosure. The studies were carried out in the USA, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, Germany, and Brazil. The majority of the studies were small and short term; only two studies included more than 100 participants, and only five studies had follow-up assessments beyond six months. Small sample sizes and the degree of assessed risk of performance and detection bias in many studies led to the overall quality of the evidence being rated as low to very low for all outcomes.For CBT compared to control, we found evidence of treatment success postintervention (odds ratio (OR) 5.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.18 to 27.32; Z = 2.16; P = 0.03; 4 studies; 175 children; very low-quality evidence), but no evidence of treatment success at medium-term follow-up (OR 3.08, 95% CI 0.93 to 10.16; Z = 1.85; P = 0.06; 3 studies; 139 children; low-quality evidence) or long-term follow-up (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.33; Z = 0.53; P = 0.60; 2 studies; 120 children; low-quality evidence). We found no evidence of effects of intervention on pain intensity scores measured postintervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.33, 95% CI -0.74 to 0.08; 7 studies; 405 children; low-quality evidence), or at medium-term follow-up (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.85 to 0.20; 4 studies; 301 children; low-quality evidence).For hypnotherapy (including studies of guided imagery) compared to control, we found evidence of greater treatment success postintervention (OR 6.78, 95% CI 2.41 to 19.07; Z = 3.63; P = 0.0003; 4 studies; 146 children; low-quality evidence) as well as reductions in pain intensity (SMD -1.01, 95% CI -1.41 to -0.61; Z = 4.97; P < 0.00001; 4 studies; 146 children; low-quality evidence) and pain frequency (SMD -1.28, 95% CI -1.84 to -0.72; Z = 4.48; P < 0.00001; 4 studies; 146 children; low-quality evidence). The only study of long-term effect reported continued benefit of hypnotherapy compared to usual care after five years, with 68% reporting treatment success compared to 20% of controls (P = 0.005).For yoga therapy compared to control, we found no evidence of effectiveness on pain intensity reduction postintervention (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.05; Z = 1.69; P = 0.09; 3 studies; 122 children; low-quality evidence).The single study of written self-disclosure therapy reported no benefit for pain.There was no evidence of effect from the pooled analyses for any type of intervention on the secondary outcomes of school performance, social or psychological functioning, and quality of daily life.There were no adverse effects for any of the interventions reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The data from trials to date provide some evidence for beneficial effects of CBT and hypnotherapy in reducing pain in the short term in children and adolescents presenting with RAP. There was no evidence for the effectiveness of yoga therapy or written self-disclosure therapy. There were insufficient data to explore effects of treatment by RAP subtype.Higher-quality, longer-duration trials are needed to fully investigate the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions. Identifying the active components of the interventions and establishing whether benefits are sustained in the long term are areas of priority. Future research studies would benefit from employing active control groups to help minimise potential bias from wait-list control designs and to help account for therapist and intervention time.
本综述取代了2008年首次发表的原始Cochrane综述(Huertas-Ceballos,2008年)。4%至25%的学龄儿童抱怨反复出现腹痛(RAP),严重程度足以干扰他们的日常活动。对于大多数此类儿童,体格检查或检查未发现该疼痛的器质性原因。尽管许多儿童通过安慰和简单措施进行处理,但已推荐了一系列涉及认知和行为成分的心理社会干预措施。
确定心理社会干预对减轻患有RAP的学龄儿童疼痛的有效性。
2016年6月,我们检索了Cochrane系统评价数据库、医学期刊数据库、荷兰医学文摘数据库、其他八个数据库以及两个试验注册库。我们还检索了已识别研究的参考文献和相关综述。
将心理社会疗法与常规护理、积极对照或等待名单对照进行比较的随机对照试验,纳入对象为患有RAP或符合罗马III标准定义的腹痛相关功能性胃肠疾病的儿童和青少年(5至18岁)。
我们采用了Cochrane期望的标准方法程序。五位综述作者独立选择研究,评估其偏倚风险,并提取相关数据。我们还使用GRADE方法评估了证据质量。
本综述纳入了18项随机对照试验(本版本新增14项),发表在26篇论文中,涉及928名6至18岁患有RAP的儿童和青少年。干预措施分为四种心理社会疗法:认知行为疗法(CBT)、催眠疗法(包括引导式意象)、瑜伽和书面自我表露。这些研究在美国、澳大利亚、加拿大、荷兰、德国和巴西进行。大多数研究规模小且为短期研究;只有两项研究纳入了100多名参与者,只有五项研究进行了六个月以上的随访评估。许多研究中的小样本量以及所评估的实施和检测偏倚程度导致所有结局的证据总体质量被评为低至极低。
与对照组相比,对于CBT,我们发现干预后有治疗成功的证据(优势比(OR)5.67,95%置信区间(CI)1.18至27.32;Z = 2.16;P = 0.03;4项研究;175名儿童;极低质量证据),但在中期随访(OR 3.08,95%CI 0.93至10.16;Z = 1.85;P = 0.06;3项研究;139名儿童;低质量证据)或长期随访(OR 1.29,95%CI 0.50至3.33;Z = 0.53;P = 0.60;2项研究;120名儿童;低质量证据)时没有治疗成功的证据。我们没有发现干预对干预后测量的疼痛强度评分有影响的证据(标准化均数差(SMD)-0.33,95%CI -0.74至0.08;7项研究;405名儿童;低质量证据),或在中期随访时(SMD -0.32,95%CI -0.85至0.20;4项研究;301名儿童;低质量证据)。
与对照组相比,对于催眠疗法(包括引导式意象研究),我们发现干预后有更大治疗成功的证据(OR 6.78,95%CI 2.41至19.07;Z = 3.63;P = 0.0003;4项研究;146名儿童;低质量证据),以及疼痛强度降低(SMD -1.01,95%CI -1.41至-0.61;Z = 4.97;P < 0.00001;4项研究;146名儿童;低质量证据)和疼痛频率降低(SMD -1.28,95%CI -1.84至-0.72;Z = 4.48;P < 0.00001;4项研究;146名儿童;低质量证据)。唯一一项关于长期效果的研究报告称,与常规护理相比,五年后催眠疗法仍有持续益处,68%的患者报告治疗成功,而对照组为20%(P = 0.005)。
与对照组相比,对于瑜伽疗法,我们没有发现干预后疼痛强度降低有效的证据(SMD -0.