Quirk Shae E, Koivumaa-Honkanen Heli, Honkanen Risto J, Mohebbi Mohammadreza, Stuart Amanda L, Heikkinen Jeremi, Williams Lana J
Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, School of Medicine, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Institute of Clinical Medicine, Psychiatry, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Front Psychiatry. 2024 May 21;15:1288874. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1288874. eCollection 2024.
We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the quality and extent of evidence on associations between personality disorders (PDs) and musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) in population-based studies, since these disorders are leading causes of disease burden worldwide.
A search strategy of published, peer-reviewed and gray literature was developed in consultation with a liaison librarian and implemented for Embase, CINAHL Complete, Medline Complete, and PsycINFO via the EBSCOhost platform from 1990 to the present and CORDIS and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, respectively. The inclusion criteria were as follows: I) general population participants aged ≥15 years; II) self-report, probable PD based on positive screen, or threshold PD according to the DSM-IV/5 (groupings: any, Clusters A/B/C, specific PD) or ICD-10/11; III) MSDs identified by self-report or ICD criteria (arthritis, back/neck conditions, fibromyalgia, osteopenia/osteoporosis) and III) cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional study designs. Two reviewers independently screened articles and extracted the data. Critical appraisal was undertaken using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists for systematic reviews of etiology and risk. A descriptive synthesis presents the characteristics of included studies, critical appraisal results, and descriptions of the main findings. This review adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.
There were 11 peer-reviewed, published articles included in this review (n = 9 cross-sectional and n = 2 case-control studies); participants were ≥18 years in these studies. No published gray literature was identified. Semi-structured interviews were the most common method to ascertain PDs; all studies utilized self-reported measures to identify MSDs. Overall, we detected limited and conflicting evidence for associations between PDs and MSDs.
The main result may be explained by lack of population-based longitudinal evidence, heterogenous groupings of PD, and few comparable cross-sectional and case-control studies. Strengths of the review include a comprehensive search strategy and a discussion of mechanisms underlying possible associations between PDs and MSDs.
The quality of most studies included in this review that examined associations between PD and MSDs in general population adults was high. However, the results demonstrated limited and conflicting evidence for these associations, in part, due to lack of comparable evidence, which should be addressed in future research.
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42021243094.
我们进行了一项系统评价，以评估基于人群的研究中人格障碍（PDs）与肌肉骨骼疾病（MSDs）之间关联的证据质量和范围，因为这些疾病是全球疾病负担的主要原因。
与一名联络图书馆员协商制定了已发表、同行评审和灰色文献的检索策略，并通过EBSCOhost平台分别在1990年至今对Embase、CINAHL Complete、Medline Complete和PsycINFO以及CORDIS和ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global实施该策略。纳入标准如下：I）年龄≥15岁的普通人群参与者；II）自我报告、基于阳性筛查的可能的PD或根据DSM-IV/5（分组：任何、A/B/C簇、特定PD）或ICD-10/11的阈值PD；III）通过自我报告或ICD标准确定的MSDs（关节炎、背部/颈部疾病、纤维肌痛、骨质减少/骨质疏松）以及III）队列研究、病例对照研究和横断面研究设计。两名评审员独立筛选文章并提取数据。使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所病因学和风险系统评价清单进行关键评估。描述性综合分析呈现了纳入研究的特征、关键评估结果以及主要发现的描述。本评价遵循PRISMA（系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目）指南。
本评价纳入了11篇同行评审的已发表文章（n = 9项横断面研究和n = 2项病例对照研究）；这些研究中的参与者年龄≥18岁。未发现已发表的灰色文献。半结构化访谈是确定PDs最常用的方法；所有研究均采用自我报告措施来识别MSDs。总体而言，我们检测到PDs与MSDs之间关联的证据有限且相互矛盾。
主要结果可能是由于缺乏基于人群的纵向证据、PD的异质性分组以及可比的横断面和病例对照研究较少。本评价的优势包括全面的检索策略以及对PDs与MSDs之间可能关联的潜在机制的讨论。
本评价中纳入的大多数研究在检查普通成年人群中PD与MSD之间的关联时质量较高。然而，结果显示这些关联的证据有限且相互矛盾，部分原因是缺乏可比证据，这应在未来研究中加以解决。
