-
The Journal of Pain Jun 2024The evidence that athletes respond to and report indices of experimental pain differently to non-athlete populations was analysed. Databases screened were SPORTDiscus,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The evidence that athletes respond to and report indices of experimental pain differently to non-athlete populations was analysed. Databases screened were SPORTDiscus, PubMED, PsycArticles, the Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL. Studies that compared experimentally induced pain responses (threshold, tolerance, intensity, unpleasantness, bothersomeness, and effect on performance) in athletes and controls were included. Meta-analyses were performed where appropriate and effects were described as standardised mean differences, pooled using random effects models. Thirty-six studies (2,492 participants) met the inclusion criteria comprising 19 pain tolerance, 17 pain threshold, 21 pain intensity, 5 pain unpleasantness, 2 performance in pain and 1 bothersomeness study. Athletes demonstrated greater pain tolerance (g = .88 [95% confidence interval [CI] .65, .13]) and reported less pain intensity (g = -.80, [95% CI -1.13, -.47]) compared to controls; they also had higher pain threshold but with smaller effects (g = .41, [95% CI .08, .75]). Differences for unpleasantness did not reach statistical significance but the effects were large (g = -1.23 [95% CI -2.29, .18]). Two studies reported that performance in pain was better in contact athletes than non-athletes, and one concluded that athletes find pain less bothersome than controls. There were considerable inconsistencies in the methods employed that were reflected in the meta-analyses' findings. Sub-group analyses of tolerance and intensity were conducted between endurance, contact, and other athlete groups, but were not significant. The data suggest that athletic participation is associated with altered pain responses, but mechanisms remain unclear and more transparent methods are recommended.This study was registered on the PROSPERO site in January 2019 (ref ID: CRD42019119611). PERSPECTIVE: This review examined differences in pain outcomes (threshold, tolerance, intensity, unpleasantness, bothersomeness) and the effect of pain on performance, in athletes versus controls. Meta-analyses revealed athletes had higher threshold and tolerance and found pain less intense than controls; there was some evidence of differences in bothersomeness and performance.
Topics: Humans; Athletes; Pain Threshold; Pain
PubMed: 38154623
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2023.12.007 -
The Journal of Headache and Pain Aug 2023Headache is one of the most common neurological symptoms. Many previous studies have indicated a relationship between primary headaches and alcohol. Drinking has been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Headache is one of the most common neurological symptoms. Many previous studies have indicated a relationship between primary headaches and alcohol. Drinking has been associated with increased risk of tension-type headache (TTH) and migraine. However, recently published studies have not confirmed this relationship. The existing literature is inconclusive; however, migraine patients avoid alcohol. Therefore, the primary objective was to provide a reliable assessment of alcohol intake in people with primary headaches; the secondary objective was to identify any potential relationship between alcohol consumption and headache risk.
METHODS
This study was based on PubMed, Embase and Web of Science database searches performed on 11 July 2023. This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023412926). Risk of bias for the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Meta-analyses were performed using Statistica software. The Risk Ratio (RR) was adopted as the measure of the final effect. Analyses were based on a dichotomous division of the respondents into "non-drinkers" and "drinkers" for headache patients and matched non-headache groups.
RESULTS
From a total of 1892 articles, 22 were included in the meta-analysis. The majority demonstrated a moderate or high risk of bias. The first part of the meta-analysis was performed on data obtained from 19 migraine studies with 126 173 participants. The risk of migraine in alcohol drinkers is approximately 1.5 times lower than in the group of non-drinkers (RR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.57-0.89). The second part involved 9 TTH studies with 28 715 participants. No relationship was found between TTH diagnosis and alcohol consumption (RR = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.93-1.27). Two of the included cluster-headache articles had inconclusive results.
CONCLUSIONS
Alcohol consumption and migraine are inversely correlated. The exact mechanism behind this observation may indicate that migraine leads to alcohol-avoidance, rather than alcohol having any protective role against migraine. There was no relationship between TTH and drinking. However, further studies related to primary headaches and alcohol consumption with low risk of bias are required. Additionally, patients and physicians should consider the latest medical data, in order to avoid the myths about alcohol consumption and primary headaches.
Topics: Humans; Ethanol; Headache; Migraine Disorders; Tension-Type Headache; Cluster Headache
PubMed: 37612595
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-023-01653-7 -
Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Aug 2023Shared decision making is crucial in the pain domain. The subjective nature of pain demands solutions that can facilitate pain assessment and management. The aim of the... (Review)
Review
Shared decision making is crucial in the pain domain. The subjective nature of pain demands solutions that can facilitate pain assessment and management. The aim of the current study is to review the current trends in both the commercial and the research domains in order to reveal the key issues and guidelines that could further help in the effective development of pain-focused apps. We searched for scientific publications and commercial apps in 22 databases and the two major app stores. Out of 3612 articles and 336 apps, 69 met the requirements for inclusion following the PRISMA guidelines. An analysis of their features (technological approach, design methodology, evaluation strategy, and others) identified critical points that have to be taken into consideration in future efforts. For example, commercial and research efforts target different types of pain, while no participatory design is followed in the majority of the cases examined. Moreover, the evaluation of the final apps remains a challenge that hinders their success. The examined domain is expected to experience a substantial increase. More research is needed towards the development of non-intrusive wearables and sensors for pain detection and assessment, along with artificial intelligence techniques and open data.
Topics: Humans; Mobile Applications; Pain Management; Artificial Intelligence; Telemedicine; Pain
PubMed: 37571747
DOI: 10.3390/s23156965 -
BMC Oral Health Dec 2023Virtual reality (VR) has emerged as an innovative tool in medicine and dentistry, improving anxiety and pain management in children. The immersive and interactive...
BACKGROUND
Virtual reality (VR) has emerged as an innovative tool in medicine and dentistry, improving anxiety and pain management in children. The immersive and interactive environments of VR technology facilitate positive engagement of young patients during dental procedures via distraction, potentially reducing anxiety levels and improving treatment experience. The aim of this review was to provide current evidence-based guidance on the usage of VR in the clinical practice of paediatric dentistry.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines with the following research question using the PICO format: Does VR (I) effectively manage anxiety and pain (O) during a paediatric dental consultation (P) compared to alternative behavioural control techniques (C)? PubMed/Medline®, SCOPUS and Web of Science databases were searched and analysed.
RESULTS
A total of 22 randomised control trials were included in this review. These studies have shown that VR is a highly effective method of behaviour management, successfully alleviating pain and anxiety in children during dental treatment, surpassing traditional tools. Selected studies included participants with a large age range and dental procedures varied greatly, from first consultations to infiltration of local anaesthetic and other invasive procedures. VR was mostly used during treatment delivery and different immersive VR techniques were considered. Behaviour, anxiety and pain scales were used to determine efficacy and patient satisfaction.
CONCLUSIONS
VR offers an engaging and immersive experience, effectively diverting patients' attention away from the clinical environment, fostering a positive and enjoyable treatment experience. However, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of existing studies and the need for further research to enhance the understanding of VR's full potential in paediatric dentistry.
Topics: Child; Humans; Pediatric Dentistry; Pain; Anxiety; Pain Management; Virtual Reality
PubMed: 38087294
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03595-7 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2024Massage is widely used for neck pain, but its effectiveness remains unclear. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Massage is widely used for neck pain, but its effectiveness remains unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of massage compared to placebo or sham, no treatment or exercise as an adjuvant to the same co-intervention for acute to chronic persisting neck pain in adults with or without radiculopathy, including whiplash-associated disorders and cervicogenic headache.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched multiple databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Index to Chiropractic Literature, trial registries) to 1 October 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any type of massage with sham or placebo, no treatment or wait-list, or massage as an adjuvant treatment, in adults with acute, subacute or chronic neck pain.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We transformed outcomes to standardise the direction of the effect (a smaller score is better). We used a partially contextualised approach relative to identified thresholds to report the effect size as slight-small, moderate or large-substantive.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 33 studies (1994 participants analysed). Selection (82%) and detection bias (94%) were common; multiple trials had unclear allocation concealment, utilised a placebo that may not be credible and did not test whether blinding to the placebo was effective. Massage was compared with placebo (n = 10) or no treatment (n = 8), or assessed as an adjuvant to the same co-treatment (n = 15). The trials studied adults aged 18 to 70 years, 70% female, with mean pain severity of 51.8 (standard deviation (SD) 14.1) on a visual analogue scale (0 to 100). Neck pain was subacute-chronic and classified as non-specific neck pain (85%, including n = 1 whiplash), radiculopathy (6%) or cervicogenic headache (9%). Trials were conducted in outpatient settings in Asia (n = 11), America (n = 5), Africa (n = 1), Europe (n = 12) and the Middle East (n = 4). Trials received research funding (15%) from research institutes. We report the main results for the comparison of massage versus placebo. Low-certainty evidence indicates that massage probably results in little to no difference in pain, function-disability and health-related quality of life when compared against a placebo for subacute-chronic neck pain at up to 12 weeks follow-up. It may slightly improve participant-reported treatment success. Subgroup analysis by dose showed a clinically important difference favouring a high dose (≥ 8 sessions over four weeks for ≥ 30 minutes duration). There is very low-certainty evidence for total adverse events. Data on patient satisfaction and serious adverse events were not available. Pain was a mean of 20.55 points with placebo and improved by 3.43 points with massage (95% confidence interval (CI) 8.16 better to 1.29 worse) on a 0 to 100 scale, where a lower score indicates less pain (8 studies, 403 participants; I = 39%). We downgraded the evidence to low-certainty due to indirectness; most trials in the placebo comparison used suboptimal massage doses (only single sessions). Selection, performance and detection bias were evident as multiple trials had unclear allocation concealment, utilised a placebo that may not be credible and did not test whether blinding was effective, respectively. Function-disability was a mean of 30.90 points with placebo and improved by 9.69 points with massage (95% CI 17.57 better to 1.81 better) on the Neck Disability Index 0 to 100, where a lower score indicates better function (2 studies, 68 participants; I = 0%). We downgraded the evidence to low-certainty due to imprecision (the wide CI represents slight to moderate benefit that does not rule in or rule out a clinically important change) and risk of selection, performance and detection biases. Participant-reported treatment success was a mean of 3.1 points with placebo and improved by 0.80 points with massage (95% CI 1.39 better to 0.21 better) on a Global Improvement 1 to 7 scale, where a lower score indicates very much improved (1 study, 54 participants). We downgraded the evidence to low-certainty due to imprecision (single study with a wide CI that does not rule in or rule out a clinically important change) and risk of performance as well as detection bias. Health-related quality of life was a mean of 43.2 points with placebo and improved by 5.30 points with massage (95% CI 8.24 better to 2.36 better) on the SF-12 (physical) 0 to 100 scale, where 0 indicates the lowest level of health (1 study, 54 participants). We downgraded the evidence once for imprecision (a single small study) and risk of performance and detection bias. We are uncertain whether massage results in increased total adverse events, such as treatment soreness, sweating or low blood pressure (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.08 to 11.55; 2 studies, 175 participants; I = 77%). We downgraded the evidence to very low-certainty due to unexplained inconsistency, risk of performance and detection bias, and imprecision (the CI was extremely wide and the total number of events was very small, i.e < 200 events).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The contribution of massage to the management of neck pain remains uncertain given the predominance of low-certainty evidence in this field. For subacute and chronic neck pain (closest to 12 weeks follow-up), massage may result in a little or no difference in improving pain, function-disability, health-related quality of life and participant-reported treatment success when compared to a placebo. Inadequate reporting on adverse events precluded analysis. Focused planning for larger, adequately dosed, well-designed trials is needed.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Neck Pain; Post-Traumatic Headache; Radiculopathy; Neck; Massage; Adjuvants, Immunologic
PubMed: 38415786
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004871.pub5 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Nov 2023Pain post-treatment is a debilitating symptom in the growing population of cancer survivors. While physical activity is an integral part of pain management, low levels... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Pain post-treatment is a debilitating symptom in the growing population of cancer survivors. While physical activity is an integral part of pain management, low levels of physical activity are often observed in this population. The aim of this systematic review is to gain insight into the barriers and facilitators to physical activity in cancer survivors afflicted with pain.
METHODS
In December 2021, a systematic search was conducted using PubMed and Web of Science. All studies exploring barriers and/or facilitators to physical activity in cancer survivors with pain were included. The methodological quality of the evidence was appraised with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (version 2018).
RESULTS
Six articles were included. Current literature was limited and mostly focused on female breast cancer survivors. The identified barriers and facilitators could be categorized into six different domains: the logistical, symptoms, cognitive, clinical, social, and knowledge domain. The barrier of pain was reported as a barrier on its own that is closely linked to other barriers in this specific population.
CONCLUSION
Barriers and facilitators to physical activity were categorized in six different domains. The barrier of pain distinguishes itself and brings along additional obstacles such as anxiety, fear, and avoidance behavior. Current evidence is limited and focuses mostly on female breast cancer survivors. Further research in larger cohorts representing various subsets of cancer survivors with pain is warranted, as well as studies that implement these insights in physical activity interventions.
Topics: Humans; Female; Cancer Survivors; Exercise; Breast Neoplasms; Survivors; Pain
PubMed: 37922014
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-08141-3 -
The Journal of Pain Jul 2024Interoception refers to the ability to sense internal bodily sensations. Research suggests that dysfunctions in interoception may be implicated in the transition to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Interoception refers to the ability to sense internal bodily sensations. Research suggests that dysfunctions in interoception may be implicated in the transition to chronic pain, however, little work has examined interoceptive ability in pain states. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to assess whether interoception is altered in individuals experiencing pain. Following a systematic search of 4 electronic databases from inception to February 2023, 28 studies were included. Outcomes of interoceptive accuracy, interoceptive sensibility, and interoceptive awareness were meta-analysed. The risk of bias was assessed, and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated. Meta-analyses indicated that those with chronic pain display reduced interoceptive accuracy and increased interoceptive sensibility. Subgroup analyses indicated that the change in interoceptive sensibility is dependent on the measure used, with those with chronic pain scoring higher on measures focusing on attention to bodily sensations, while also scoring lower on emotional reactivity. No difference in interoceptive awareness was observed between individuals with chronic pain and pain-free controls. Only one study was found that measured interoception in those experiencing acute pain, while another study recruited those experiencing recurrent pain. These findings suggest that while those with chronic pain self-report as more interoceptively aware, they are less accurate at detecting internal bodily signals. Further research investigating domains of interoception in those experiencing acute and recurrent pain is needed. Data should be interpreted with caution as the certainty of evidence was very low for all completed analyses. This review was registered on the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (Registration ID = CRD42022318843). PERSPECTIVE: This review considered the relationship between interoception and pain and found that an individual's ability to accurately sense internal signals is decreased in those with chronic pain, despite them reporting being more aware of internal sensations. However, there remains little research examining interoception in non-chronic pain states.
Topics: Interoception; Humans; Chronic Pain; Awareness
PubMed: 38244898
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2024.01.341 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Jul 2023Evidence exists demonstrating the negative impacts of chronic musculoskeletal pain on key measures of gait. Despite neck pain being the second most common... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Evidence exists demonstrating the negative impacts of chronic musculoskeletal pain on key measures of gait. Despite neck pain being the second most common musculoskeletal pain condition, there is a paucity of evidence exploring the impacts of neck pain specifically on these outcomes. The aims of this work were to systematically review the current evidence of the associations between chronic neck pain and measures of gait health and to conduct meta-analysis for quantitative assessment of the effect sizes under different walking conditions.
METHODS
Systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Databases searched included MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PEDro. Eligible study designs included observational studies consisting of an exposure group with chronic neck pain and control group without chronic neck pain and primary outcomes relating to gait health. For outcomes amenable to meta-analysis, a random-effects model was used to derive summary estimates of Hedge's g depicted graphically with forest plots. Other gait outcomes were narratively summarized. Risk of bias was also assessed.
RESULTS
The original search yielded 1918 articles; 12 met final eligibility criteria including 10 cross-sectional studies. Outcomes were grouped first by the five domains of gait: pace, rhythm, asymmetry, variability, and postural control; and second by the tested walking conditions. Meta-analyses for gait speed revealed large effect-sizes indicating that individuals with chronic neck pain had slower measures of gait and lower measures of cadence. Gait outcomes that were narratively summarized supported these findings.
CONCLUSION
The quantitative and qualitative findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest a negative impact of CNNP on measures of gait health, particularly gait speed, under various walking conditions. However, broad interpretation of these results should be cautious. Testing gait under dual task conditions may be particularly sensitive to the impact of CNNP, and future work is needed to better understand how pain disrupts this important functionality of the locomotor system. Additionally, consideration should be made to assess measures of variability and investigate these relationships in the older adult population.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Neck Pain; Musculoskeletal Pain; Cross-Sectional Studies; Gait; Walking
PubMed: 37516827
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-023-06721-2 -
Cephalalgia : An International Journal... Dec 2023Hypnic headache is a neurological disorder characterized by recurrent headache attacks that occur exclusively during sleep, leading to awakening. Synthesizing the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Hypnic headache is a neurological disorder characterized by recurrent headache attacks that occur exclusively during sleep, leading to awakening. Synthesizing the available epidemiological data might inform clinical decision-making.
METHODS
We searched PubMed and Embase for observational studies on hypnic headache published between 1 May 2004, and 22 December 2022. Two investigators independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis with meta-regression to estimate the prevalence of hypnic headache and its clinical features based on epidemiologic data from population-based and clinic-based studies.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies, one population-based and 13 clinic-based, met our eligibility criteria. The population-based study did not identify any people with hypnic headache. From 11 clinic-based studies, the pooled relative frequency of hypnic headache was 0.21% (95%CI, 0.13 to 0.35%; = 87%) in adult patients evaluated for headache. The pooled mean age of onset was 60.5 years, with a slight female predisposition. Hypnic headache was typically bilateral (71%), pressing (73%), of moderate (38%) or severe (44%) pain intensity, and lasted about 115 minutes per attack.
CONCLUSIONS
Our data should be cautiously interpreted due to between-study heterogeneity. The identified clinical presentation of hypnic headache can guide clinical diagnosis, in addition to the International Classification of Headache Disorders.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Female; Middle Aged; Headache Disorders, Primary; Sleep; Headache
PubMed: 38051816
DOI: 10.1177/03331024231218389 -
Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders Dec 2023The effectiveness of electrical stimulation therapy (EST) for pain, depression, fatigue, disability, and quality of life in multiple sclerosis (MS) remains uncertain.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The effectiveness of electrical stimulation therapy (EST) for pain, depression, fatigue, disability, and quality of life in multiple sclerosis (MS) remains uncertain. This study aims to analyze and discuss the efficacy of various EST treatments in alleviating pain among MS patients.
METHODS
The primary search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases until September 25, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including patients with MS pain receiving EST compared with other therapies were included. Pain intensity, quality of life, and neuropsychiatric symptoms were reported. The mean difference (MD) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) was estimated separately for outcomes to understand the mean effect size.
RESULTS
Ten RCTs containing 315 participants were included. The pooled data from 8 trials including 267 participants showed that the EST was superior in alleviating pain (MD = -1.75, 95 % CI -2.85--0.64, P = 0.002, I=73 %) evaluated by the visual analog scale. In subgroup analysis, medium-term EST treatment showed the highest effect size compared to short-term and long-term treatment (MD = -2.17, 95 % CI -3.51--0.84, P = 0.001, I = 0 %). However, no significant differences were found in terms of pain-related quality of life, depression, fatigue, and pain-related disability. No adverse events related to EST were reported. A high risk of bias was identified in three of the ten included studies.
CONCLUSIONS
EST is effective and safe for alleviating pain in MS, but it should be noted that limited sample sizes and methodological issues were present in the included studies. More robust assessment criteria and high-quality RCTs are required for patients with MS.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
CRD42023406787. (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=406787).
Topics: Humans; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Fatigue; Pain; Quality of Life; Multiple Sclerosis; Pain Management
PubMed: 37944194
DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2023.105114