在以慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛为主的军人群体中采用补充、综合和标准康复疗法:采用 SMART 设计的实用临床试验。

IF 5.9 1区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY PAIN® Pub Date : 2024-11-08 DOI:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003462
Diane M Flynn, Jeffrey C Ransom, Alana D Steffen, Kira P Orr, Honor M McQuinn, Tyler J Snow, Larisa A Burke, Dahee Wi, Ardith Z Doorenbos
{"title":"在以慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛为主的军人群体中采用补充、综合和标准康复疗法:采用 SMART 设计的实用临床试验。","authors":"Diane M Flynn, Jeffrey C Ransom, Alana D Steffen, Kira P Orr, Honor M McQuinn, Tyler J Snow, Larisa A Burke, Dahee Wi, Ardith Z Doorenbos","doi":"10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>There is growing acceptance for combining complementary and integrative health (CIH) therapies with standard rehabilitative care (SRC) for chronic pain management, yet little evidence on the best sequence of therapies. We investigated whether starting with CIH therapies or SRC is more effective in reducing pain impact. Participants were 280 service members with predominantly (88%) musculoskeletal chronic pain referred to an interdisciplinary pain management center who were randomized to a twice weekly program of either CIH therapies (n = 140) or SRC (n = 140) for the 3-week first stage of treatment. The composition of a second 3-week treatment stage depended upon response to the first stage. The primary outcome measure was the impact score (range 8-50) from the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low-Back Pain. Outcomes were measured after 3 and 6 weeks of treatment and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Most participants were men (76.8%) and mean age was 34.7 years (SD 8.0). At end of stage 1, pain impact decreased significantly more in the CIH group (29.8 points [SD 7.2] at baseline to 26.3 points [SD 7.9], change of -3.3 points [95% confidence interval, -4.2 to -2.5]) than in the SRC group (30.8 [SD 7.6] to 29.4 [SD 7.8], change of -0.9 points [95% confidence interval, -1.8 to -0.1]; P < 0.001). No significant between-group differences were observed after 6 weeks of treatment nor at 3- or 6-month follow-ups. Complementary and integrative health therapies may provide earlier improvement in pain impact than SRC, but this difference is not sustained.</p>","PeriodicalId":19921,"journal":{"name":"PAIN®","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Complementary, integrative, and standard rehabilitative therapies in a military population with chronic predominantly musculoskeletal pain: a pragmatic clinical trial with SMART design.\",\"authors\":\"Diane M Flynn, Jeffrey C Ransom, Alana D Steffen, Kira P Orr, Honor M McQuinn, Tyler J Snow, Larisa A Burke, Dahee Wi, Ardith Z Doorenbos\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003462\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>There is growing acceptance for combining complementary and integrative health (CIH) therapies with standard rehabilitative care (SRC) for chronic pain management, yet little evidence on the best sequence of therapies. We investigated whether starting with CIH therapies or SRC is more effective in reducing pain impact. Participants were 280 service members with predominantly (88%) musculoskeletal chronic pain referred to an interdisciplinary pain management center who were randomized to a twice weekly program of either CIH therapies (n = 140) or SRC (n = 140) for the 3-week first stage of treatment. The composition of a second 3-week treatment stage depended upon response to the first stage. The primary outcome measure was the impact score (range 8-50) from the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low-Back Pain. Outcomes were measured after 3 and 6 weeks of treatment and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Most participants were men (76.8%) and mean age was 34.7 years (SD 8.0). At end of stage 1, pain impact decreased significantly more in the CIH group (29.8 points [SD 7.2] at baseline to 26.3 points [SD 7.9], change of -3.3 points [95% confidence interval, -4.2 to -2.5]) than in the SRC group (30.8 [SD 7.6] to 29.4 [SD 7.8], change of -0.9 points [95% confidence interval, -1.8 to -0.1]; P < 0.001). No significant between-group differences were observed after 6 weeks of treatment nor at 3- or 6-month follow-ups. Complementary and integrative health therapies may provide earlier improvement in pain impact than SRC, but this difference is not sustained.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19921,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PAIN®\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PAIN®\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003462\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PAIN®","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003462","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:越来越多的人接受将补充和综合健康疗法(CIH)与标准康复护理(SRC)相结合来治疗慢性疼痛,但关于最佳疗法顺序的证据却很少。我们研究了在减轻疼痛影响方面,从 CIH 疗法开始还是从 SRC 开始更有效。280 名军人主要(88%)患有肌肉骨骼慢性疼痛,他们被转诊到一个跨学科疼痛管理中心,在为期 3 周的第一阶段治疗中,他们被随机分配到每周两次的 CIH 疗法(n = 140)或 SRC(n = 140)方案中。第二个 3 周治疗阶段的组成取决于第一阶段的反应。主要结果测量指标是美国国立卫生研究院慢性腰背痛研究标准工作组的影响评分(范围为 8-50)。结果在治疗 3 周和 6 周后以及 3 个月和 6 个月的随访中进行测量。大多数参与者为男性(76.8%),平均年龄为 34.7 岁(标准差为 8.0)。在第一阶段结束时,CIH 组疼痛影响的下降幅度(从基线时的 29.8 分 [SD 7.2] 降至 26.3 分 [SD 7.9],变化幅度为 -3.3 分 [95% 置信区间,-4.2 至 -2.5])明显高于 SRC 组(从 30.8 分 [SD 7.6] 降至 29.4 分 [SD 7.8],变化幅度为 -0.9 分 [95% 置信区间,-1.8 至 -0.1];P <0.001)。治疗 6 周后、3 个月或 6 个月随访时,均未观察到明显的组间差异。与SRC相比,补充和综合健康疗法可更早地改善疼痛影响,但这种差异并不持久。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Complementary, integrative, and standard rehabilitative therapies in a military population with chronic predominantly musculoskeletal pain: a pragmatic clinical trial with SMART design.

Abstract: There is growing acceptance for combining complementary and integrative health (CIH) therapies with standard rehabilitative care (SRC) for chronic pain management, yet little evidence on the best sequence of therapies. We investigated whether starting with CIH therapies or SRC is more effective in reducing pain impact. Participants were 280 service members with predominantly (88%) musculoskeletal chronic pain referred to an interdisciplinary pain management center who were randomized to a twice weekly program of either CIH therapies (n = 140) or SRC (n = 140) for the 3-week first stage of treatment. The composition of a second 3-week treatment stage depended upon response to the first stage. The primary outcome measure was the impact score (range 8-50) from the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low-Back Pain. Outcomes were measured after 3 and 6 weeks of treatment and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Most participants were men (76.8%) and mean age was 34.7 years (SD 8.0). At end of stage 1, pain impact decreased significantly more in the CIH group (29.8 points [SD 7.2] at baseline to 26.3 points [SD 7.9], change of -3.3 points [95% confidence interval, -4.2 to -2.5]) than in the SRC group (30.8 [SD 7.6] to 29.4 [SD 7.8], change of -0.9 points [95% confidence interval, -1.8 to -0.1]; P < 0.001). No significant between-group differences were observed after 6 weeks of treatment nor at 3- or 6-month follow-ups. Complementary and integrative health therapies may provide earlier improvement in pain impact than SRC, but this difference is not sustained.

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
PAIN®
PAIN® 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
12.50
自引率
8.10%
发文量
242
审稿时长
9 months
期刊介绍: PAIN® is the official publication of the International Association for the Study of Pain and publishes original research on the nature,mechanisms and treatment of pain.PAIN® provides a forum for the dissemination of research in the basic and clinical sciences of multidisciplinary interest.
期刊最新文献
Trpv1-lineage neuron-expressing Kcnq4 channel modulates itch sensation in mice. Enhancing healthcare professionals' biopsychosocial perspective to chronic pain: assessing the impact of implementing an interdisciplinary training program. Breaking barriers: addressing opioid stigma in chronic pain and opioid use disorder. Pharmacologically enabling the degradation of NaV1.8 channels to reduce neuropathic pain. Complementary, integrative, and standard rehabilitative therapies in a military population with chronic predominantly musculoskeletal pain: a pragmatic clinical trial with SMART design.
×
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