Suppr超能文献

从说教式解释到共同设计、序列艺术与体验式学习:患者疼痛教育的挑战、批评与未来方向

From didactic explanations to co-design, sequential art and embodied learning: challenges, criticisms and future directions of patient pain education.

作者信息

Moseley G Lorimer, Mardon Amelia, Watson James, Braithwaite Felicity, Wilson Monique V, Barker Trevor, Lawrence James, Sheppard Dianne, Reneman Michiel F, Stinson Jennifer, Ryan Cormac G

机构信息

The Pain Education Team to Advance Learning (PETAL) Collaboration.

IIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Kaurna Country, Adelaide, SA, Australia.

出版信息

Front Pain Res (Lausanne). 2025 May 9;6:1536112. doi: 10.3389/fpain.2025.1536112. eCollection 2025.

Abstract

Pain Neuroscience Education (PNE) emerged over two decades ago in response to the incoherence between evidence-based pain management strategies, and consumer and clinician understandings of "how pain works". Many clinical trials have investigated the effects of PNE either as a standalone intervention or embedded within a more complex care package, with mixed results. A range of research methods have been used to explore the inconsistent effects of PNE. Together they (i) identify significant shortcomings and limitations of PNE and (ii) raise the possibility that gaining a broadly scientifically accurate understanding of "how pain works" may be critical for subsequent pain and disability improvements. Both learnings strongly suggest that we need to do better. Extensive research incorporating several interest-holders has led to updated content and language and criticisms of both are addressed. The method of PNE has also been updated, with integration of educational frameworks, teaching strategies and tactics, patient resources and clinical tools that all aim to promote the likelihood that patients will learn key concepts and operationalise them to improve their pain, function and quality of life. Pain Science Education is used to differentiate the new approach from PNE.

摘要

疼痛神经科学教育(PNE)起源于二十多年前,旨在应对循证疼痛管理策略与患者及临床医生对“疼痛机制”理解之间的脱节。许多临床试验研究了PNE作为一种独立干预措施或融入更复杂护理方案中的效果,结果不一。一系列研究方法被用于探究PNE效果不一致的原因。这些研究共同(i)指出了PNE的重大缺点和局限性,(ii)提出了一个可能性,即对“疼痛机制”获得广泛科学准确的理解可能对后续疼痛缓解和功能改善至关重要。这两点都有力地表明我们需要做得更好。纳入多个利益相关者的广泛研究带来了更新的内容和语言,并回应了相关批评。PNE的方法也已更新,融入了教育框架、教学策略和技巧、患者资源以及临床工具,所有这些都旨在提高患者学习关键概念并将其应用于改善疼痛、功能和生活质量的可能性。疼痛科学教育用于区分这种新方法与PNE。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/599e/12098622/eca471def2f9/fpain-06-1536112-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验