Park Youn Jin, Lee Myung Kyung
College of Nursing, Research Institute of Nursing Science, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, South Korea.
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2022 Jul;54(4):422-433. doi: 10.1111/jnu.12750. Epub 2021 Nov 30.
The purposes of this study were to review the types of nurse-led nonpharmacological pain interventions (NPI) offered to cancer patients and/or family caregivers, and to determine a comprehensive and robust estimate of the effect size of nurse-led NPI for cancer patients on various pain-related outcomes.
Systematic review and meta-analysis. Studies assessing nurse-led NPIs targeting cancer patients and published between January 2008 and December 2020 were identified by searching multiple literature databases, including MEDLINE , EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, ProQuest Medical Library, and CINAHL .
This review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. The selected randomized clinical trials were independently assessed for methodological quality. The effect sizes (ESs) of treatment were presented as standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
A meta-analysis was performed to analyze data from 22 randomized clinical trials. Three types of nurse-led NPI were offered, mainly to cancer patients but also to some caregivers: music, physical, and psycho-educational interventions. The dose and duration of nonpharmacological interventions varied widely. The study participants ranged in age from 44.1 to 67.3 years. Meta-analysis indicated that, although these interventions had small effects in long-term (g = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.06-0.43, p = 0.011) to medium effects in short-term (g = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.32-0.53, p < 0.001), they significantly reduced patients' pain, increased their knowledge of pain management, reduced barriers to pain management and pain coping, and improved other physical and emotional symptoms. The significance of the ES differed according to the type of intervention, with psycho-educational and physical NPIs having a significant but medium short-term ES, whereas music NPI had a significant but large short-term ES. Only psycho-educational NPIs had significant long-term effects.
The combined ES showed that these nurse-led NPIs were significantly effective in both the short and long-term. Types of intervention as a potential moderator were associated with short-term and long-term effects of nonpharmacological interventions on patient outcomes.
Research-tested interventions should be provided to help patients cope effectively with pain.
本研究旨在回顾为癌症患者和/或家庭护理人员提供的由护士主导的非药物性疼痛干预措施(NPI)的类型,并全面、可靠地评估由护士主导的NPI对癌症患者各种疼痛相关结局的效应大小。
系统评价和荟萃分析。通过检索多个文献数据库,包括MEDLINE、EMBASE、谷歌学术、考克兰图书馆、ProQuest医学图书馆和CINAHL,确定了2008年1月至2020年12月期间发表的评估针对癌症患者的由护士主导的NPI的研究。
本评价按照系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目指南进行。对所选的随机临床试验进行方法学质量的独立评估。治疗的效应大小(ESs)以标准化均数差(Hedges' g)和95%置信区间(CIs)表示。
进行荟萃分析以分析来自22项随机临床试验的数据。提供了三种由护士主导的NPI类型,主要针对癌症患者,但也包括一些护理人员:音乐、身体和心理教育干预。非药物性干预的剂量和持续时间差异很大。研究参与者的年龄在44.1至67.3岁之间。荟萃分析表明,尽管这些干预在长期(g = 0.24,95% CI:0.06 - 0.43,p = 0.011)有较小效应,在短期(g = 0.43,95% CI:0.32 - 0.53,p < 0.001)有中等效应,但它们显著减轻了患者的疼痛,增加了他们对疼痛管理的知识,减少了疼痛管理和疼痛应对的障碍,并改善了其他身体和情绪症状。效应大小的显著性因干预类型而异,心理教育和身体NPI有显著但中等的短期效应,而音乐NPI有显著但较大的短期效应。只有心理教育NPI有显著的长期效应。
综合效应大小表明,这些由护士主导的NPI在短期和长期均有显著效果。作为潜在调节因素的干预类型与非药物性干预对患者结局的短期和长期效应相关。
应提供经研究验证的干预措施,以帮助患者有效应对疼痛。