Center for Care Delivery and Outcomes Research, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Center for Care Delivery and Outcomes Research, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota; Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
J Pain. 2023 May;24(5):742-769. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2023.02.026. Epub 2023 Mar 20.
Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) have demonstrated effectiveness for improving outcomes in chronic pain. These evidence-based psychotherapies (EBPs) remain underutilized in clinical practice, however. To identify research gaps and next steps for improving uptake of EBPs, we conducted a systematic review of patient-, provider-, and system-level barriers and facilitators of their use for chronic pain. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases from inception through September 2022. Prespecified eligibility criteria included outpatient treatment of adults with chronic pain; examination of barriers and facilitators and/or evaluation of implementation strategies; conducted in the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK), Ireland, Canada or Australia; and publication in English. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and rated quality. We conducted a qualitative synthesis of results using a best-fit framework approach building upon domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). We identified 34 eligible studies (33 moderate or high quality), most (n = 28) of which addressed patient-level factors. Shared barriers across EBPs included variable patient buy-in to therapy rationale and competing responsibilities for patients; shared facilitators included positive group or patient-therapist dynamics. Most studies examining ACT and all examining MBSR assessed only group formats. No studies compared barriers, facilitators, or implementation strategies of group CBT to individual CBT, or of telehealth to in-person EBPs. Conceptual mismatches of patient knowledge and beliefs with therapy principles were largely analyzed qualitatively, and studies did not explore how these mismatches were addressed to support engagement. Future research on EBPs for chronic pain in real-world practice settings is needed to explore provider and system-level barriers and facilitators, heterogeneity of effects and uptake, and both effects and uptake of EBPs delivered in various formats, including group vs individual therapy and telehealth or asynchronous digital approaches. PERSPECTIVE: This systematic review synthesizes evidence on barriers and facilitators to uptake of cognitive behavioral therapy, acceptance and commitment therapy, and mindfulness-based stress reduction for chronic pain. Findings can guide future implementation work to increase availability and use of evidence-based psychotherapies for treatment of chronic pain. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO number CRD42021252038.
认知行为疗法(CBT)、接纳与承诺疗法(ACT)和基于正念的减压疗法(MBSR)已被证明可改善慢性疼痛的治疗效果。然而,这些循证心理疗法(EBPs)在临床实践中的应用仍然不足。为了确定提高 EBPs 利用率的研究差距和下一步措施,我们对患者、提供者和系统层面使用这些疗法治疗慢性疼痛的障碍和促进因素进行了系统评价。我们检索了 MEDLINE、Embase、PsycINFO 和 CINAHL 数据库,检索时间从建库至 2022 年 9 月。预设的纳入标准包括:门诊治疗慢性疼痛的成年人;检查障碍和促进因素和/或评估实施策略;在美国(US)、英国(UK)、爱尔兰、加拿大或澳大利亚进行;以英文发表。两名审查员独立评估纳入标准并对质量进行评分。我们使用基于实施研究综合框架(CFIR)的最佳拟合框架方法对结果进行定性综合。我们确定了 34 项符合条件的研究(33 项为中高质量),其中大多数(n=28)研究了患者层面的因素。EBPs 共有的障碍包括患者对治疗原理的接受程度不同和患者的竞争责任;共有的促进因素包括积极的小组或患者-治疗师动态。大多数研究检查了 ACT 和所有研究检查了 MBSR,只评估了小组格式。没有研究比较小组 CBT 与个体 CBT 或远程医疗与面对面 EBPs 的障碍、促进因素或实施策略。患者知识和信念与治疗原则之间的概念不匹配主要是定性分析的,并且研究没有探讨如何解决这些不匹配以支持参与。需要在现实实践环境中对慢性疼痛的 EBPs 进行未来研究,以探讨提供者和系统层面的障碍和促进因素、效果和采用的异质性,以及小组与个体治疗和远程医疗或异步数字方法等各种格式的 EBPs 的效果和采用。观点:本系统评价综合了关于采用认知行为疗法、接纳与承诺疗法和基于正念的减压疗法治疗慢性疼痛的障碍和促进因素的证据。研究结果可以指导未来的实施工作,以增加循证心理疗法治疗慢性疼痛的可及性和使用率。登记:PROSPERO 编号 CRD42021252038。