Martinez-Calderon, Javier , Ho, Emma Kwan-Yee , Ferreira, Paulo Henrique , GARCÍA MUÑOZ, CRISTINA, Villar-Alises, Olga , Matias-Soto, Javier
No
J. Orthop. Sports Phys. Ther.
Review
Científica
6
1.431
01/06/2023
001023569800002
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to summarize the evidence of the effects of pain neuroscience education delivered alone or combined with other interventions for chronic pain. DESIGN: An overview of systematic reviews with meta-analysis. LITERATURE SEARCH: CINAHL (via EBSCOhost), Embase, PsycINFO (via ProQuest), PubMed, and the Cochrane Library were searched from their inception to November 14, 2022. U STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Systematic reviews (SRs) with meta-analyses including randomized clinical trials. The outcomes were pain and psychological symptoms. DATA SYNTHESIS: AMSTAR 2 assessed the methodological quality of SRs. The primary study overlap was evaluated by calculating the corrected covered area (CCA). RESULTS: We included 8 SRs including 30 meta-analyses of interest that comprised 28 distinct clinical trials. In some meta-analyses, pain neuroscience education delivered alone or combined with other interventions was more effective than control interventions for reducing pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, anxiety symptoms, and depression symptoms at some time points. However, other meta-analyses found a lack of effects of pain neuroscience education, and there were inconsistencies between meta-analyses covering the same outcome. The methodological quality of all SRs was critically low. The overlap, including all SRs, was high (CCA = 13%), and very high for SRs covering trials on chronic low back pain (CCA = 40%), chronic spine pain (CCA = 27%), and fibromyalgia (CCA = 25%). CONCLUSION: It is impossible to make clear clinical recommendations for delivering pain neuroscience education based on current meta-analyses. Action is needed to increase and improve the quality of SRs in the field of pain neuroscience education.
chronic pain; education; meta-analysis; neurophysiology; neuroscience; systematic review