神经病理性疼痛治疗对脊髓损伤后疼痛干扰的影响:系统综述。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-10 DOI:10.1080/10790268.2023.2218186
David J Allison, Jessica Ahrens, Magdalena Mirkowski, Swati Mehta, Eldon Loh
{"title":"神经病理性疼痛治疗对脊髓损伤后疼痛干扰的影响:系统综述。","authors":"David J Allison, Jessica Ahrens, Magdalena Mirkowski, Swati Mehta, Eldon Loh","doi":"10.1080/10790268.2023.2218186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Neuropathic pain is a common and debilitating condition following SCI. While treatments for neuropathic pain intensity have been reviewed, the impact on pain interference has not been summarized.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically review the effect of neuropathic pain interventions on pain interference in individuals with spinal cord injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review included randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental (non-randomized) studies which assessed the impact of an intervention on pain interference in individuals with spinal cord injury and neuropathic pain. Articles were identified by searching MEDLINE (1996 to April 11, 2022), EMBASE (1996 to April 11, 2022), PsycInfo (1987 to April, week 2, 2022). Studies were assessed for methodologic quality using a modified GRADE approach and were given quality of evidence (QOE) scores on a 4-point scale ranging from very low to high.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies fell into the following categories: anticonvulsants (<i>n</i> = 2), antidepressants (<i>n</i> = 1), analgesics (<i>n</i> = 1), antispasmodics (<i>n</i> = 1), acupuncture (<i>n</i> = 2), transcranial direct current stimulation (<i>n</i> = 1), active cranial electrotherapy stimulation (<i>n</i> = 2), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (<i>n</i> = 2), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (<i>n</i> = 1), functional electrical stimulation (<i>n</i> = 1), meditation and imagery (<i>n</i> = 1), self-hypnosis and biofeedback (<i>n</i> = 1), and interdisciplinary pain programs (<i>n</i> = 4).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When considering studies of moderate to high quality, pregabalin, gabapentin, intrathecal baclofen, transcranial direct current stimulation, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (in 1 of 2 studies) were shown to have beneficial effects on pain interference. However, due to the low number of high-quality studies further research is required to confirm the efficacy of these interventions prior to recommending their use to reduce pain interference.</p>","PeriodicalId":50044,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"465-476"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11218591/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effect of neuropathic pain treatments on pain interference following spinal cord injury: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"David J Allison, Jessica Ahrens, Magdalena Mirkowski, Swati Mehta, Eldon Loh\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10790268.2023.2218186\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Neuropathic pain is a common and debilitating condition following SCI. While treatments for neuropathic pain intensity have been reviewed, the impact on pain interference has not been summarized.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically review the effect of neuropathic pain interventions on pain interference in individuals with spinal cord injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review included randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental (non-randomized) studies which assessed the impact of an intervention on pain interference in individuals with spinal cord injury and neuropathic pain. Articles were identified by searching MEDLINE (1996 to April 11, 2022), EMBASE (1996 to April 11, 2022), PsycInfo (1987 to April, week 2, 2022). Studies were assessed for methodologic quality using a modified GRADE approach and were given quality of evidence (QOE) scores on a 4-point scale ranging from very low to high.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies fell into the following categories: anticonvulsants (<i>n</i> = 2), antidepressants (<i>n</i> = 1), analgesics (<i>n</i> = 1), antispasmodics (<i>n</i> = 1), acupuncture (<i>n</i> = 2), transcranial direct current stimulation (<i>n</i> = 1), active cranial electrotherapy stimulation (<i>n</i> = 2), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (<i>n</i> = 2), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (<i>n</i> = 1), functional electrical stimulation (<i>n</i> = 1), meditation and imagery (<i>n</i> = 1), self-hypnosis and biofeedback (<i>n</i> = 1), and interdisciplinary pain programs (<i>n</i> = 4).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When considering studies of moderate to high quality, pregabalin, gabapentin, intrathecal baclofen, transcranial direct current stimulation, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (in 1 of 2 studies) were shown to have beneficial effects on pain interference. However, due to the low number of high-quality studies further research is required to confirm the efficacy of these interventions prior to recommending their use to reduce pain interference.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50044,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"465-476\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11218591/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2023.2218186\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2023.2218186","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:神经病理性疼痛是 SCI 后常见的衰弱性症状。虽然对神经性疼痛强度的治疗方法进行了综述,但尚未总结其对疼痛干扰的影响:系统回顾神经病理性疼痛干预对脊髓损伤患者疼痛干扰的影响:本系统性综述包括随机对照试验和准实验(非随机)研究,这些研究评估了干预措施对脊髓损伤和神经病理性疼痛患者疼痛干扰的影响。文章通过检索 MEDLINE(1996 年至 2022 年 4 月 11 日)、EMBASE(1996 年至 2022 年 4 月 11 日)和 PsycInfo(1987 年至 2022 年 4 月第 2 周)来确定。研究采用修改后的 GRADE 方法进行方法学质量评估,证据质量(QOE)按从很低到很高的 4 级评分:结果:20 项研究符合纳入标准。这些研究分为以下几类:抗惊厥药(n = 2)、抗抑郁药(n = 1)、镇痛药(n = 1)、解痉药(n = 1)、针灸(n = 2)、经颅直流电刺激(n = 1)、主动颅内电疗刺激(n = 2)、经皮神经电刺激(n = 2)、重复经颅磁刺激(n = 1)、功能性电刺激(n = 1)、冥想和想象(n = 1)、自我催眠和生物反馈(n = 1)以及跨学科疼痛项目(n = 4)。结论:如果考虑到中等至高质量的研究,普瑞巴林、加巴喷丁、鞘内巴氯芬、经颅直流电刺激和经皮神经电刺激(2 项研究中的 1 项)被证明对疼痛干扰有有益的影响。然而,由于高质量研究的数量较少,因此在推荐使用这些干预措施来减少疼痛干扰之前,还需要进一步的研究来确认其疗效。
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
The effect of neuropathic pain treatments on pain interference following spinal cord injury: A systematic review.

Context: Neuropathic pain is a common and debilitating condition following SCI. While treatments for neuropathic pain intensity have been reviewed, the impact on pain interference has not been summarized.

Objective: To systematically review the effect of neuropathic pain interventions on pain interference in individuals with spinal cord injury.

Methods: This systematic review included randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental (non-randomized) studies which assessed the impact of an intervention on pain interference in individuals with spinal cord injury and neuropathic pain. Articles were identified by searching MEDLINE (1996 to April 11, 2022), EMBASE (1996 to April 11, 2022), PsycInfo (1987 to April, week 2, 2022). Studies were assessed for methodologic quality using a modified GRADE approach and were given quality of evidence (QOE) scores on a 4-point scale ranging from very low to high.

Results: Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies fell into the following categories: anticonvulsants (n = 2), antidepressants (n = 1), analgesics (n = 1), antispasmodics (n = 1), acupuncture (n = 2), transcranial direct current stimulation (n = 1), active cranial electrotherapy stimulation (n = 2), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (n = 2), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (n = 1), functional electrical stimulation (n = 1), meditation and imagery (n = 1), self-hypnosis and biofeedback (n = 1), and interdisciplinary pain programs (n = 4).

Conclusion: When considering studies of moderate to high quality, pregabalin, gabapentin, intrathecal baclofen, transcranial direct current stimulation, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (in 1 of 2 studies) were shown to have beneficial effects on pain interference. However, due to the low number of high-quality studies further research is required to confirm the efficacy of these interventions prior to recommending their use to reduce pain interference.

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
Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine
Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
101
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: For more than three decades, The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine has reflected the evolution of the field of spinal cord medicine. From its inception as a newsletter for physicians striving to provide the best of care, JSCM has matured into an international journal that serves professionals from all disciplines—medicine, nursing, therapy, engineering, psychology and social work.
期刊最新文献
Embracing Inclusion, Diversity, Equity and Access (IDEA): Cultivating understanding internally to foster external change. First report of a new exoskeleton in incomplete spinal cord injury: FreeGait®. Improving current understanding of cognitive impairment in patients with a spinal cord injury: A UK-based clinician survey. Shelter-in-place during the COVID-19 pandemic: Impact on secondary health conditions, anxiety, loneliness, social isolation, social connectedness, and positive affect and well-being. The association between locus of control and general mental health in patients with lumbar spinal cord injury: A cross-sectional 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