Lena Thiveos, Peter Kent, Natasha C Pocovi, Peter O'Sullivan, Mark J Hancock
{"title":"Cognitive Functional Therapy for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Lena Thiveos, Peter Kent, Natasha C Pocovi, Peter O'Sullivan, Mark J Hancock","doi":"10.1093/ptj/pzae128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective was to investigate the effectiveness of cognitive functional therapy (CFT) in the management of people with chronic nonspecific low back pain (LBP) and explore the variability in available trials to understand the factors which may affect the effectiveness of the intervention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review with meta-analyses was conducted. Four databases were searched from inception to October 12th 2023. Randomized controlled trials investigating CFT compared to any control group in patients with nonspecific LBP were included. Mean difference and 95% CIs were calculated for pain, disability, and pain self-efficacy. Certainty of evidence was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven trials were included. Low to moderate certainty of evidence was found that CFT was effective for disability at short, medium, and long term time points compared to alternate treatments, including usual care. Low to moderate certainty of evidence was found that CFT is effective for pain in the short and medium terms and probably in the long term. There was high certainty evidence CFT was effective in increasing pain self-efficacy in the medium and long terms. A single study found CFT was cost-effective compared to usual care. Variability was found in the training and implementation of CFT across the included trials, which may contribute to some heterogeneity in the results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results show promise in the use of CFT as an intervention likely to effectively manage disability, pain, and self-efficacy in people with chronic nonspecific LBP. The number of clinicians trained, their experience, and quality of training (including competency assessment) may be important in achieving optimal effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Impact statement: </strong>This is the most comprehensive review of CFT to date and included investigation of between-trial differences. CFT is a promising intervention for chronic LBP and high-quality synthesis of evidence of its effectiveness is important for its clinical application.</p>","PeriodicalId":20093,"journal":{"name":"Physical Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzae128","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The objective was to investigate the effectiveness of cognitive functional therapy (CFT) in the management of people with chronic nonspecific low back pain (LBP) and explore the variability in available trials to understand the factors which may affect the effectiveness of the intervention.
Methods: A systematic review with meta-analyses was conducted. Four databases were searched from inception to October 12th 2023. Randomized controlled trials investigating CFT compared to any control group in patients with nonspecific LBP were included. Mean difference and 95% CIs were calculated for pain, disability, and pain self-efficacy. Certainty of evidence was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
Results: Seven trials were included. Low to moderate certainty of evidence was found that CFT was effective for disability at short, medium, and long term time points compared to alternate treatments, including usual care. Low to moderate certainty of evidence was found that CFT is effective for pain in the short and medium terms and probably in the long term. There was high certainty evidence CFT was effective in increasing pain self-efficacy in the medium and long terms. A single study found CFT was cost-effective compared to usual care. Variability was found in the training and implementation of CFT across the included trials, which may contribute to some heterogeneity in the results.
Conclusion: The results show promise in the use of CFT as an intervention likely to effectively manage disability, pain, and self-efficacy in people with chronic nonspecific LBP. The number of clinicians trained, their experience, and quality of training (including competency assessment) may be important in achieving optimal effectiveness.
Impact statement: This is the most comprehensive review of CFT to date and included investigation of between-trial differences. CFT is a promising intervention for chronic LBP and high-quality synthesis of evidence of its effectiveness is important for its clinical application.
期刊介绍：
Physical Therapy (PTJ) engages and inspires an international readership on topics related to physical therapy. As the leading international journal for research in physical therapy and related fields, PTJ publishes innovative and highly relevant content for both clinicians and scientists and uses a variety of interactive approaches to communicate that content, with the expressed purpose of improving patient care. PTJ"s circulation in 2008 is more than 72,000. Its 2007 impact factor was 2.152. The mean time from submission to first decision is 58 days. Time from acceptance to publication online is less than or equal to 3 months and from acceptance to publication in print is less than or equal to 5 months.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
