ABSTRACT
Face-to-face pain management programs demonstrate positive clinical outcomes in the chronic pain population by improving pain intensity and attitudes, depression, and functional disability scores. The effects of this modality carried out online is less known, particularly in subgroups of chronic pain. This systematic review assessed the effects of online pain management programs in chronic, widespread musculoskeletal conditions on pain measurements (intensity, interference, coping, and catastrophizing), health-related quality of life, depression, and anxiety scores immediately post-intervention. Five electronic databases (Embase, Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, and PEDro) were searched with 3546 studies identified. Eighteen randomized controlled trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Included studies had moderate methodological quality (using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) quality assessment tool) but high risk of bias (using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2)). There were significant improvements in pain intensity (11 studies, 1397 participants, SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.10, p = 0.004), health-related quality of life (eight studies, 1054 participants, SMD 0.41, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.75, p = 0.02), and depression (nine studies, 1283 participants, SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.08, p = 0.008). However, effect sizes were small and did not meet their respective measure's minimal clinically important change score. Guided interventions (regular interaction with an instructor) appeared to be superior to self-completed interventions. Future research should standardize outcome measures for assessing pain, use active control groups, and analyze other outcome measures such as cost and long-term effects. This study was registered with Prospero on August 15, 2021 (CRD42021267565).
Subject(s)
Chronic Pain , Humans , Chronic Pain/therapy , Pain Management , Quality of Life , Depression/therapy , Chronic DiseaseABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To establish reference ranges for four most commonly used diagnostic measures of craniocervical instability (CCI) in three cervical sagittal positions. This necessitated development of a reliable measurement protocol using upright, dynamic MRI (udMRI), to determine differences in the extent of motion between positions, and whether age and sex correlate with these measures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Deidentified udMRIs of 50 adults, referred for reasons other than CCI, were captured at three positions (maximal flexion, maximal extension and neutral). Images were analyzed, providing measures of basion-axial interval, basion-axial angle, basion-dens interval (BDI) and the Grabb-Oakes line (GOL) for all three positions (12 measures per participant). All measures were independently recorded by a radiologist and neurosurgeon to determine their reliability. Descriptive statistics, correlations, paired and independent t-tests were used. Mean (± 2 SD) identified the reference range for all four measures at each craniocervical position. RESULTS: The revised measurement protocol produced inter-rater reliability indices of 0.69-0.97 (moderate-excellent). Fifty adults' (50% male; mean age 41.2 years (± 9.7)) reference ranges for all twelve measures were reported. Except for the BDI and GOL when moving between neutral and full flexion, significant extents of movement were identified between the three craniocervical positions for all four measures (p ≤ 0.005). Only a minor effect of age was found. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to provide a rigorous standardized protocol for four diagnostic measures of CCI. Reference ranges are established at mid and ends of sagittal cervical range corresponding to where exacerbations of signs and symptoms are commonly reported.
