Slattery Brian W, Haugh Stephanie, O'Connor Laura, Francis Kady, Dwyer Christopher P, O'Higgins Siobhán, Egan Jonathan, McGuire Brian E
School of Nursing and Human Sciences, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.
Centre for Pain Research, School of Psychology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Jul 17;21(7):e11086. doi: 10.2196/11086.
Electronic health (eHealth) is the use of information and communication technology in the context of health care and health research. Recently, there has been a rise in the number of eHealth modalities and the frequency with which they are used to deliver technology-assisted self-management interventions for people living with chronic pain. However, there has been little or no research directly comparing these eHealth modalities.
The aim of this systematic review with a network meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare the effectiveness of eHealth modalities in the context of chronic pain.
Randomized controlled trials (N>20 per arm) that investigated interventions for adults with chronic pain, delivered via an eHealth modality, were included. Included studies were categorized into their primary node of delivery. Data were extracted on the primary outcome, pain interference, and secondary outcomes, pain severity, psychological distress, and health-related quality of life. Pairwise meta-analyses were undertaken where possible, and an NMA was conducted to generate indirect comparisons and rankings of modalities for reducing pain interference.
The search returned 18,470 studies with 18,349 being excluded (duplicates=2310; title and abstract=16,039). Of the remaining papers, 30 studies with 5394 randomized participants were included in the review. Rankings tentatively indicated that modern eHealth modalities are the most effective, with a 43% chance that mobile apps delivered the most effective interventions, followed by a 34% chance that interventions delivered via virtual reality were the most effective.
This systematic review with an NMA generated comparisons between eHealth modalities previously not compared to determine which delivered the most effective interventions for the reduction of pain interference in chronic pain patients. There are limitations with this review, in particular, the underrepresented nature of some eHealth modalities included in the analysis. However, in the event that the review is regularly updated, a clear ranking of eHealth modalities for the reduction of pain interference will emerge.
电子健康(eHealth)是指在医疗保健和健康研究领域中使用信息和通信技术。最近,电子健康模式的数量及其用于为慢性疼痛患者提供技术辅助自我管理干预措施的频率有所增加。然而,直接比较这些电子健康模式的研究很少或几乎没有。
本系统评价及网络荟萃分析(NMA)的目的是比较电子健康模式在慢性疼痛背景下的有效性。
纳入通过电子健康模式对慢性疼痛成人进行干预研究的随机对照试验(每组N>20)。纳入的研究按其主要传播节点进行分类。提取主要结局(疼痛干扰)和次要结局(疼痛严重程度、心理困扰和健康相关生活质量)的数据。尽可能进行成对荟萃分析,并进行NMA以生成减少疼痛干扰的模式的间接比较和排名。
检索到18470项研究,排除18349项(重复项=2310;标题和摘要=16039)。在其余论文中,30项研究共5394名随机参与者被纳入本评价。排名初步表明,现代电子健康模式最有效,移动应用提供最有效干预措施的可能性为43%,其次是通过虚拟现实提供干预措施最有效的可能性为34%。
本系统评价及NMA对以前未进行比较的电子健康模式进行了比较,以确定哪种模式对减少慢性疼痛患者的疼痛干扰提供了最有效的干预措施。本评价存在局限性,特别是分析中纳入的一些电子健康模式代表性不足。然而,如果定期更新本评价,将出现减少疼痛干扰的电子健康模式的明确排名。