Centre for Spinal Studies and Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.
Research Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5PB.
Eur J Pain. 2019 Feb;23(2):234-249. doi: 10.1002/ejp.1314. Epub 2018 Oct 14.
Pain neuroscience education (PNE) has shown promising ability in previous reviews to improve pain and disability in chronic low back pain (CLBP). This review aimed to evaluate randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of PNE on pain and disability in CLBP.
A systematic search was performed using the databases of EBSCO, Medline, Cochrane and Web of Science. Meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.1 software to pool outcomes using the random effects model, weighted mean differences (WMD), standard deviation, 95% confidence intervals and sample size. GRADEpro software was utilized to calculate overall strength of evidence.
A total of 6,767 papers were found, eight were included (n = 615). Meta-analysis for short-term pain (n = 428) demonstrated a WMD of 0.73 (95%CI -0.14, 1.61) on a ten-point scale of PNE against no PNE (GRADE analysis low evidence). When PNE alongside physiotherapy interventions were grouped for pain (n = 212), a WMD of 1.32 was demonstrated (95% CI 1.08, 1.56, p < 0.00001; GRADE analysis moderate evidence). Short-term disability (RMDQ) meta-analysis demonstrated a WMD of 0.42 (95%CI 0.28, 0.56; p < 0.00001; n = 362; GRADE analysis moderate evidence); whereas the addition of PNE to physiotherapy interventions demonstrated a WMD of 3.94 (95% CI 3.37, 4.52; p < 0.00001; GRADE analysis moderate evidence.
This review presents moderate evidence that the addition of PNE to usual physiotherapy intervention in patients with CLBP improves disability in the short term. However, this meta-analysis failed to show evidence of long-term improvement on pain or disability when adding PNE to usual physiotherapy.
This review demonstrates moderate level evidence that the use of pain neuroscience education alongside physiotherapy interventions probably improves disability and pain in the short term in chronic low back pain. These results provide greater support for the addition of pain neuroscience education in routine physiotherapy practice in chronic low back pain.
疼痛神经科学教育(PNE)在之前的综述中显示出在改善慢性下背痛(CLBP)中的疼痛和残疾方面有很大的潜力。本研究旨在评估比较 PNE 对 CLBP 疼痛和残疾影响的随机对照试验。
使用 EBSCO、Medline、Cochrane 和 Web of Science 数据库进行系统搜索。使用 RevMan 5.1 软件进行荟萃分析,使用随机效应模型、加权均数差(WMD)、标准差、95%置信区间和样本量来合并结果。使用 GRADEpro 软件计算总体证据强度。
共检索到 6767 篇论文,其中 8 篇被纳入(n=615)。短期疼痛(n=428)的荟萃分析显示,PNE 与无 PNE 相比,疼痛在十分制上的 WMD 为 0.73(95%CI -0.14,1.61)(GRADE 分析低证据)。当 PNE 与物理治疗干预相结合用于疼痛(n=212)时,WMD 为 1.32(95%CI 1.08,1.56,p<0.00001;GRADE 分析中等证据)。短期残疾(RMDQ)荟萃分析显示,WMD 为 0.42(95%CI 0.28,0.56;p<0.00001;n=362;GRADE 分析中等证据);而将 PNE 加入物理治疗干预中,WMD 为 3.94(95%CI 3.37,4.52;p<0.00001;GRADE 分析中等证据。
本综述提供了中等证据,表明在 CLBP 患者中,将 PNE 加入常规物理治疗干预中可在短期内改善残疾。然而,当将 PNE 加入常规物理治疗时,本荟萃分析未能显示出疼痛或残疾的长期改善的证据。
本综述表明,在物理治疗干预中使用疼痛神经科学教育可能在短期内改善慢性下背痛的残疾和疼痛,为疼痛神经科学教育在慢性下背痛常规物理治疗实践中的应用提供了更强有力的支持。