Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Ghent University, Belgium; Pain in Motion international research group, www.paininmotion.be, University of Antwerp, Campus Drie EikenUniversiteitsplein 12610 Wilrijk, Belgium.
Department of Statistics, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, United States; Department of Applied Mathematics, Computer Science and Statistics, Ghent University, Belgium.
Clin Psychol Rev. 2022 Jun;94:102160. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2022.102160. Epub 2022 May 2.
Psychologically based interventions aim to improve pain-related functioning by targeting pain-related fears, cognitions and behaviors. Mediation and moderation analyses permit further examination of the effect of treatment on an outcome. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to synthetize the evidence of specific mediators and moderators (i.e., treatment targets) of psychologically based treatment effects on pain and disability. A total of 28 mediation and 11 moderation analyses were included. Thirteen mediation studies were included in a meta-analysis, and the rest was narratively synthetized. Reductions in pain-related fear (indirect effect [IE]: -0.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.11, -0.04) and catastrophizing (IE: -0.07; 95%CI: -0.14, -0.00), as well as increases in self-efficacy (IE: -0.07; 95%CI: -0.11, -0.04), mediated effects of cognitive behavioral therapy on disability but not on pain intensity, when compared to control treatments. Enhancing pain acceptance (IE: -0.17; 95%CI: -0.31, -0.03) and psychological flexibility (IE: -0.30; 95%CI: -0.41, -0.18) mediated acceptance and commitment therapy effects on disability. The narrative synthesis showed conflicting evidence, which did not support a robust moderated effect for any of the examined constructs. Overall, the methodological quality regarding mediation was low, and some key pitfalls are highlighted alongside recommendations to provide a platform for future research.
基于心理的干预旨在通过针对与疼痛相关的恐惧、认知和行为来改善与疼痛相关的功能。中介和调节分析允许进一步检查治疗对结果的影响。本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在综合特定中介和调节因素(即治疗目标)的证据,这些因素会影响基于心理的治疗对疼痛和残疾的效果。共纳入了 28 项中介分析和 11 项调节分析。13 项中介研究被纳入荟萃分析,其余的则进行了叙述性综合。减少与疼痛相关的恐惧(间接效应[IE]:-0.07;95%置信区间[CI]:-0.11,-0.04)和灾难化(IE:-0.07;95%CI:-0.14,-0.00),以及增加自我效能感(IE:-0.07;95%CI:-0.11,-0.04),可以介导认知行为疗法对残疾的治疗效果,但不能介导对疼痛强度的治疗效果,与对照组相比。增强疼痛接受(IE:-0.17;95%CI:-0.31,-0.03)和心理灵活性(IE:-0.30;95%CI:-0.41,-0.18)可以介导接受和承诺疗法对残疾的治疗效果。叙述性综合结果显示存在相互矛盾的证据,不支持任何检查结构的稳健调节效应。总体而言,关于中介的方法学质量较低,并且突出了一些关键的陷阱,并提出了建议,为未来的研究提供了一个平台。