Centre for Rehabilitation, School of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom.
Centre for Rehabilitation, School of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom.
J Pain. 2021 Jan;22(1):9-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2020.03.006. Epub 2020 Jun 22.
Pain neuroscience education (PNE) is an approach used in the management of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Previous reviews on PNE and other pain interventions, have focused on mean treatment effects, but in the context of "precision medicine," any inter-individual differences in treatment response are also important to quantify. If inter-individual differences are present, and predictors identified, PNE could be tailored to certain people for optimizing effectiveness. Such heterogeneity can be quantified using recently formulated approaches for comparing the response variance between the treatment and control groups. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the extracted standard deviations of baseline-to-follow up change to quantify the inter-individual variation in pain, disability and psychosocial outcomes in response to PNE. Electronic databases were searched between January 1, 2002 and June 14, 2018. The review included 5 randomized controlled trials (n = 428) in which disability outcomes were reported. Using a random effects meta-analysis, the pooled SD (95% confidence interval) for control group-adjusted response heterogeneity to PNE was 7.36 units /100 (95% confidence interval = -3.93 to 11.12). The 95% prediction interval for this response heterogeneity SD was wide (-10.20 to 14.57 units /100). The control group-adjusted proportion of "responders" in the population who would be estimated to exceed a clinically important change of 10/100 ranged from 18 to 45%. Therefore, when baseline-to-follow up random variability in disability is taken into account (informed by the control arm), there is currently insufficient evidence for the notion of clinically important inter-individual differences in disability responses to PNE in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. The protocol was published on PROSPERO (CRD42017068436). PERSPECTIVE: We bring a novel method to pain science for calculating inter-individual differences in response to a treatment. This is conductedwithin the context of a systematic review and meta-analysis on PNE. We highlight how using erroneous methods for calculating inter-individual differences can drastically change conclusions when compared to appropriate methods.
疼痛神经科学教育(PNE)是一种用于慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛管理的方法。以前关于 PNE 和其他疼痛干预措施的综述主要集中在平均治疗效果上,但在“精准医学”的背景下,治疗反应的个体差异也很重要,需要进行量化。如果存在个体差异,并确定了预测因素,PNE 可以针对特定人群进行定制,以优化效果。这种异质性可以使用最近提出的方法来量化,该方法用于比较治疗组和对照组之间的反应方差。因此,我们对从基线到随访变化的标准偏差进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,以量化 PNE 治疗对疼痛、残疾和心理社会结果的个体差异。电子数据库检索时间为 2002 年 1 月 1 日至 2018 年 6 月 14 日。该综述纳入了 5 项随机对照试验(n=428),其中报告了残疾结局。使用随机效应荟萃分析,PNE 控制组调整反应异质性的合并标准差(95%置信区间)为 7.36 个单位/100(95%置信区间= -3.93 至 11.12)。该反应异质性 SD 的 95%预测区间较宽(-10.20 至 14.57 个单位/100)。预计人群中“应答者”的比例会超过 10/100 的临床重要变化,从 18%到 45%不等。因此,当考虑到残疾的基线到随访的随机变异性(由对照组提供信息)时,目前尚无足够证据支持慢性肌肉骨骼疼痛患者对 PNE 的残疾反应存在临床重要个体差异的概念。该方案已在 PROSPERO(CRD42017068436)上发表。观点:我们为疼痛科学带来了一种计算治疗反应个体差异的新方法。这是在对 PNE 的系统回顾和荟萃分析的背景下进行的。我们强调了使用错误的方法计算个体差异与使用适当的方法相比,会如何极大地改变结论。