Malfliet Anneleen, Kregel Jeroen, Meeus Mira, Danneels Lieven, Cagnie Barbara, Roussel Nathalie, Nijs Jo
Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO), Brussels, Belgium; Pain in Motion International Research Group, www.paininmotion.be; Department of Physical Medicine and Physiotherapy, University Hospital Brussels, Brussels, Belgium; Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy (KIMA), Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium; Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Medical Campus Jette, Building F-Kine, Brussels, Belgium(∗).
Pain in Motion International Research Group, www.paininmotion.be; Department of Physiotherapy, Human Physiology and Anatomy (KIMA), Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium; Department of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Campus Heymans, Ghent, Belgium(†).
PM R. 2018 Dec;10(12):1330-1343.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2018.04.010. Epub 2018 May 9.
Pain neuroscience education is effective in chronic pain management. Central sensitization (ie, generalized hypersensitivity) is often explained as the underlying mechanism for chronic pain, because of its clinical relevance and influence on pain severity, prognosis, and treatment outcome.
To examine whether patients with more or fewer symptoms of central sensitization respond differently to pain neuroscience education.
A secondary analysis of a multicenter, triple-blind randomized controlled trial.
University Hospital Ghent and University Hospital Brussels, Belgium.
120 persons with chronic spinal pain with high or low self-reported symptoms of central sensitization.
Pain neuroscience education or neck/back school. Both interventions were delivered in 3 sessions: 1 group session, 1 online session, and 1 individual session.
disability (primary), pain catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, illness perceptions, and hypervigilance.
Pain disability did not change in any group (P = .242). Regarding secondary outcomes: significant interaction effects were found for pain catastrophizing (P-values: P = .02 to P = .05), kinesiophobia (P = .02), and several aspects of illness perceptions (chronicity: P = .002; negative consequences: P = .02; personal control: P = .02; and cyclicity: P = .02). Bonferroni post hoc analysis showed that only the pain neuroscience education group (high and low self-reported symptoms of central sensitization) showed a significant improvement regarding kinesiophobia (P < .001, medium effect sizes), perceived negative consequence (P = .004 and P < .001, small to medium effect sizes), and perceived cyclicity of the illness (P = .01 and P = .01, small effect sizes). Pain catastrophizing only significantly reduced in people with high self-reported central sensitization symptoms (P < .05).
Pain neuroscience education is useful in all patients with chronic spinal pain as it improves kinesiophobia and the perceived negative consequences and cyclicity of the illness regardless the self-reported signs of central sensitization. Regarding pain catastrophizing, pain neuroscience education is more effective in patients with high self-reported symptoms of central sensitization.
I.
疼痛神经科学教育在慢性疼痛管理中有效。中枢敏化(即全身性超敏反应)常被解释为慢性疼痛的潜在机制,因其具有临床相关性且对疼痛严重程度、预后及治疗结果有影响。
研究中枢敏化症状较多或较少的患者对疼痛神经科学教育的反应是否不同。
一项多中心、三盲随机对照试验的二次分析。
比利时根特大学医院和布鲁塞尔大学医院。
120名慢性脊柱疼痛患者,自我报告的中枢敏化症状有高有低。
疼痛神经科学教育或颈/背训练班。两种干预均通过3次课程进行:1次小组课程、1次在线课程和1次个人课程。
残疾(主要指标)、疼痛灾难化、运动恐惧、疾病认知和过度警觉。
各组的疼痛残疾情况均未改变(P = 0.242)。关于次要结果:在疼痛灾难化(P值:P = 0.02至P = 0.05)、运动恐惧(P = 0.02)以及疾病认知的几个方面(慢性:P = 0.002;负面后果:P = 0.02;个人控制:P = 0.02;周期性:P = 0.02)发现了显著的交互作用。Bonferroni事后分析表明,只有疼痛神经科学教育组(中枢敏化自我报告症状高和低的患者)在运动恐惧(P < 0.001,中等效应量)、感知到的负面后果(P = 0.004和P < 0.001,小到中等效应量)以及疾病的感知周期性(P = 0.01和P = 0.01,小效应量)方面有显著改善。疼痛灾难化仅在自我报告中枢敏化症状高的人群中显著降低(P < 0.05)。
疼痛神经科学教育对所有慢性脊柱疼痛患者都有用,因为它能改善运动恐惧以及疾病的感知负面后果和周期性,无论中枢敏化的自我报告体征如何。关于疼痛灾难化,疼痛神经科学教育对自我报告中枢敏化症状高的患者更有效。
I级。