肌肉萎缩性侧索硬化症(ALS)成人患者疼痛管理策略的疗效:系统综述。

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurological Sciences Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-05 DOI:10.1007/s10072-024-07643-0
Juan Camilo Rojas-López, Pablo Isaac Estrada-Gualdron, Sofía Ramírez-Guerrero, Maria J Velásquez-Cárdenas, Jesús Redondo-Escobar, Sofía Vargas-Arenas, Leonardo Palacios-Sánchez, Ximena Palacios-Espinosa
{"title":"肌肉萎缩性侧索硬化症(ALS)成人患者疼痛管理策略的疗效:系统综述。","authors":"Juan Camilo Rojas-López, Pablo Isaac Estrada-Gualdron, Sofía Ramírez-Guerrero, Maria J Velásquez-Cárdenas, Jesús Redondo-Escobar, Sofía Vargas-Arenas, Leonardo Palacios-Sánchez, Ximena Palacios-Espinosa","doi":"10.1007/s10072-024-07643-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a neurodegenerative disease characterized by progressive muscle weakness. Presence of pain in ALS patients is heterogeneously reported in studies, and mostly underrepresented in symptom scales. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic modalities for pain management in patients with ALS. A systematic review was conducted in four databases; PubMed, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane-Ovid. Five randomized controlled clinical trials were included regarding pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain management interventions in adult patients with confirmed diagnosis of ALS in whom pain was objectively evaluated. Risk of bias assessment was evaluated using the RoB2.0 tool. Eligible studies were reported as a descriptive analysis. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO ID: CRD42024495009. Five clinical trials regarding pain management strategies in ALS were eligible for analysis. Two out of five were non-pharmacological approaches whilst the remaining three provided pharmacological therapies. Of these, Mexiletine was efficient in terms of pain relief, particularly between 600 and 900 mg per day, whereas Mecasin showed no pain relief at both, high and low doses. Non-pharmacological therapies, such as exercise and osteopathic manual treatment also lacked efficacy in regard to pain management. Clinical trials focusing on pain management strategies for ALS patients are limited. Medical professionals, understandably focused on immediate life-threatening aspects, may inadvertently sideline the nuanced and intricate dimension of pain experienced by patients with ALS.</p>","PeriodicalId":19191,"journal":{"name":"Neurological Sciences","volume":" ","pages":"5591-5604"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11554732/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of pain management strategies in adults with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS): A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Juan Camilo Rojas-López, Pablo Isaac Estrada-Gualdron, Sofía Ramírez-Guerrero, Maria J Velásquez-Cárdenas, Jesús Redondo-Escobar, Sofía Vargas-Arenas, Leonardo Palacios-Sánchez, Ximena Palacios-Espinosa\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10072-024-07643-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a neurodegenerative disease characterized by progressive muscle weakness. Presence of pain in ALS patients is heterogeneously reported in studies, and mostly underrepresented in symptom scales. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic modalities for pain management in patients with ALS. A systematic review was conducted in four databases; PubMed, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane-Ovid. Five randomized controlled clinical trials were included regarding pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain management interventions in adult patients with confirmed diagnosis of ALS in whom pain was objectively evaluated. Risk of bias assessment was evaluated using the RoB2.0 tool. Eligible studies were reported as a descriptive analysis. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO ID: CRD42024495009. Five clinical trials regarding pain management strategies in ALS were eligible for analysis. Two out of five were non-pharmacological approaches whilst the remaining three provided pharmacological therapies. Of these, Mexiletine was efficient in terms of pain relief, particularly between 600 and 900 mg per day, whereas Mecasin showed no pain relief at both, high and low doses. Non-pharmacological therapies, such as exercise and osteopathic manual treatment also lacked efficacy in regard to pain management. Clinical trials focusing on pain management strategies for ALS patients are limited. Medical professionals, understandably focused on immediate life-threatening aspects, may inadvertently sideline the nuanced and intricate dimension of pain experienced by patients with ALS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurological Sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"5591-5604\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11554732/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurological Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-024-07643-0\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-024-07643-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

肌萎缩侧索硬化症(ALS)是一种以进行性肌无力为特征的神经退行性疾病。有关 ALS 患者疼痛的研究报告不尽相同,而且大多在症状量表中代表性不足。本研究旨在评估药物和非药物治疗方法对 ALS 患者疼痛控制的疗效。我们在 PubMed、Scopus、Clinicaltrials.gov 和 Cochrane-Ovid 四个数据库中进行了系统回顾。共纳入了五项随机对照临床试验,内容涉及对确诊为 ALS 的成年患者进行药物和非药物疼痛治疗干预,并对患者的疼痛进行了客观评估。使用 RoB2.0 工具对偏倚风险进行了评估。符合条件的研究报告均为描述性分析。本系统综述的注册号为 PROSPERO ID:CRD42024495009。五项有关 ALS 疼痛管理策略的临床试验符合分析条件。其中两项为非药物疗法,其余三项为药物疗法。其中,麦西来汀能有效缓解疼痛,尤其是在每天 600 至 900 毫克的剂量范围内,而美卡辛在高剂量和低剂量时均不能缓解疼痛。运动和整骨疗法等非药物疗法在疼痛控制方面也缺乏疗效。针对 ALS 患者疼痛管理策略的临床试验非常有限。可以理解的是,医疗专业人员只关注直接威胁生命的方面,可能会无意中忽略 ALS 患者所经历的细微而复杂的疼痛问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Efficacy of pain management strategies in adults with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS): A Systematic Review.

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a neurodegenerative disease characterized by progressive muscle weakness. Presence of pain in ALS patients is heterogeneously reported in studies, and mostly underrepresented in symptom scales. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapeutic modalities for pain management in patients with ALS. A systematic review was conducted in four databases; PubMed, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane-Ovid. Five randomized controlled clinical trials were included regarding pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain management interventions in adult patients with confirmed diagnosis of ALS in whom pain was objectively evaluated. Risk of bias assessment was evaluated using the RoB2.0 tool. Eligible studies were reported as a descriptive analysis. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO ID: CRD42024495009. Five clinical trials regarding pain management strategies in ALS were eligible for analysis. Two out of five were non-pharmacological approaches whilst the remaining three provided pharmacological therapies. Of these, Mexiletine was efficient in terms of pain relief, particularly between 600 and 900 mg per day, whereas Mecasin showed no pain relief at both, high and low doses. Non-pharmacological therapies, such as exercise and osteopathic manual treatment also lacked efficacy in regard to pain management. Clinical trials focusing on pain management strategies for ALS patients are limited. Medical professionals, understandably focused on immediate life-threatening aspects, may inadvertently sideline the nuanced and intricate dimension of pain experienced by patients with ALS.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neurological Sciences
Neurological Sciences 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
3.00%
发文量
743
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: Neurological Sciences is intended to provide a medium for the communication of results and ideas in the field of neuroscience. The journal welcomes contributions in both the basic and clinical aspects of the neurosciences. The official language of the journal is English. Reports are published in the form of original articles, short communications, editorials, reviews and letters to the editor. Original articles present the results of experimental or clinical studies in the neurosciences, while short communications are succinct reports permitting the rapid publication of novel results. Original contributions may be submitted for the special sections History of Neurology, Health Care and Neurological Digressions - a forum for cultural topics related to the neurosciences. The journal also publishes correspondence book reviews, meeting reports and announcements.
期刊最新文献
Correction to: Endovascular thrombectomy for ischemic stroke with large infarct, short‑ and long‑term outcomes: a meta‑analysis of 6 randomised control trials. Correction to: Clinical, electrophysiological, and genetic analysis of a family with two rare neuromuscular disorders: congenital myasthenic syndrome and hereditary polyneuropathy. Endovascular thrombectomy for ischemic stroke with large infarct, short- and long-term outcomes: a meta-analysis of 6 randomised control trials. Effect of intravenous thrombolysis before endovascular therapy on outcomes in acute ischemic stroke with large core: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Efficacy of pain management strategies in adults with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS): A Systematic Review.
×
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