Efficacy of mobile health interventions in the conservative management of chronic low back pain in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis.

IF 3.4 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES Pain Reports Pub Date : 2025-02-13 eCollection Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1097/PR9.0000000000001242
Babina Rani, Mayank Gupta, Venkata Ganesh, Rajni Sharma, Anuj Bhatia, Babita Ghai
{"title":"Efficacy of mobile health interventions in the conservative management of chronic low back pain in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis.","authors":"Babina Rani, Mayank Gupta, Venkata Ganesh, Rajni Sharma, Anuj Bhatia, Babita Ghai","doi":"10.1097/PR9.0000000000001242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a major global health issue, particularly severe in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where health care resources and accessibility are limited. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions offer a promising solution by leveraging technology to deliver health care services remotely. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of mHealth interventions in managing CLBP in LMICs. A comprehensive search of electronic databases was performed for studies published until June 2024, evaluating mHealth interventions for CLBP in LMICs. Primary outcomes measured were pain intensity and disability, while secondary outcomes included quality of life (QoL). Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB2), and quality of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. Robustness of meta-analysis results was assessed via trial sequential analysis (TSA). Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. The mHealth interventions significantly reduced the overall pain intensity (MD = -1.11, 95% CI: -1.75, -0.46) and disability (MD = -6.59, 95% CI: -10.65, -2.54). Subgroup analysis indicated greater effectiveness of short-term interventions (<6 weeks) in reducing pain and Oswestry disability index (ODI) vs long-term interventions (>6 weeks). mHealth interventions notably reduced pain and ODI scores vs unsupervised programs but showed no significant difference compared to in-person programs. The z-score line remained within TSA boundaries. mHealth interventions show potential in reducing pain and disability among patients with CLBP in LMICs, although with inconclusive impact on QoL. The high heterogeneity and limited number of studies underscore the need for further research with greater sample size to validate these findings and explore the long-term benefits and implementation challenges of mHealth in resource-constrained settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":52189,"journal":{"name":"Pain Reports","volume":"10 2","pages":"e1242"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11826050/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PR9.0000000000001242","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a major global health issue, particularly severe in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where health care resources and accessibility are limited. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions offer a promising solution by leveraging technology to deliver health care services remotely. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of mHealth interventions in managing CLBP in LMICs. A comprehensive search of electronic databases was performed for studies published until June 2024, evaluating mHealth interventions for CLBP in LMICs. Primary outcomes measured were pain intensity and disability, while secondary outcomes included quality of life (QoL). Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB2), and quality of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. Robustness of meta-analysis results was assessed via trial sequential analysis (TSA). Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. The mHealth interventions significantly reduced the overall pain intensity (MD = -1.11, 95% CI: -1.75, -0.46) and disability (MD = -6.59, 95% CI: -10.65, -2.54). Subgroup analysis indicated greater effectiveness of short-term interventions (<6 weeks) in reducing pain and Oswestry disability index (ODI) vs long-term interventions (>6 weeks). mHealth interventions notably reduced pain and ODI scores vs unsupervised programs but showed no significant difference compared to in-person programs. The z-score line remained within TSA boundaries. mHealth interventions show potential in reducing pain and disability among patients with CLBP in LMICs, although with inconclusive impact on QoL. The high heterogeneity and limited number of studies underscore the need for further research with greater sample size to validate these findings and explore the long-term benefits and implementation challenges of mHealth in resource-constrained settings.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Pain Reports
Pain Reports Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
2.10%
发文量
93
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Efficacy of mobile health interventions in the conservative management of chronic low back pain in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis. Effect of osteopathic manipulative treatment on pain in palliative care patients: a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial. Forecasting migraine attacks by managing daily lifestyle: a systematic review as a basis to develop predictive algorithms. Insomnia remission and improvement of bodily pain in older adults: a randomized clinical trial. The prevalence of chronic pain and its impact on activities of daily living disability and depressive symptoms according to multiple definitions in a Japanese population: the Hisayama study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1