Mindfulness Meditation for Chronic Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Chronic pain patients increasingly seek treatment through mindfulness meditation.Purpose
This study aims to synthesize evidence on efficacy and safety of mindfulness meditation interventions for the treatment of chronic pain in adults.Method
We conducted a systematic review on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with meta-analyses using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random-effects models. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Outcomes included pain, depression, quality of life, and analgesic use.Results
Thirty-eight RCTs met inclusion criteria; seven reported on safety. We found low-quality evidence that mindfulness meditation is associated with a small decrease in pain compared with all types of controls in 30 RCTs. Statistically significant effects were also found for depression symptoms and quality of life.Conclusions
While mindfulness meditation improves pain and depression symptoms and quality of life, additional well-designed, rigorous, and large-scale RCTs are needed to decisively provide estimates of the efficacy of mindfulness meditation for chronic pain.
SUBMITTER: Hilton L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5368208 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Mindfulness Meditation for Chronic Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Hilton Lara L Hempel Susanne S Ewing Brett A BA Apaydin Eric E Xenakis Lea L Newberry Sydne S Colaiaco Ben B Maher Alicia Ruelaz AR Shanman Roberta M RM Sorbero Melony E ME Maglione Margaret A MA
Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine 20170401 2
<h4>Background</h4>Chronic pain patients increasingly seek treatment through mindfulness meditation.<h4>Purpose</h4>This study aims to synthesize evidence on efficacy and safety of mindfulness meditation interventions for the treatment of chronic pain in adults.<h4>Method</h4>We conducted a systematic review on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with meta-analyses using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random-effects models. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. O ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Several studies have reported that mindfulness meditation has a potential effect in controlling headaches, such as migraine and tension-type headache; however, its role remains controversial. This review assessed the evidence regarding the effects of mindfulness meditation for primary headache pain.Only English databases (PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [the Cochrane Library], PsycINFO, Psychology and behavioral science collection, PsyArticles, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched from their inception to November 2016 with the keywords ("meditation" or "mindfulness" or "vipassana" or "dzogchen" or "zen" or "integrative body-mind training" or "IBMT" or "mindfulness-based stress reduction" or "MBSR" or "mindfulness-based cognitive therapy" or "MBCT" and "Headache" or "Head pain" or "Cephalodynia" or "Cephalalgia" or "Hemicrania" or "Migraine"). Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were screened against study inclusion criteria: controlled trials of structured meditation programs for adult patients with primary headache pain. The quality of studies included in the meta-analysis was assessed with the Yates Quality Rating Scale. The meta-analysis was conducted with Revman 5.3.Ten randomized controlled trials and one controlled clinical trial with a combined study population of 315 patients were included in the study. When compared to control group data, mindfulness meditation induced significant improvement in pain intensity (standardized mean difference, -0.89; 95% confidence interval, -1.63 to -0.15; P = 0.02) and headache frequency (-0.67; -1.24 to -0.10; P = 0.02). In a subgroup analysis of different meditation forms, mindfulness-based stress reduction displayed a significant positive influence on pain intensity (P < 0.000). Moreover, 8-week intervention had a significant positive effect (P < 0.000).Mindfulness meditation may reduce pain intensity and is a promising treatment option for patients. Clinicians may consider mindfulness meditation as a viable complementary and alternative medical option for primary headache.
| S-EPMC5887742 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposePosttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a significant global mental health concern, especially in the military. This study aims to estimate the efficacy of mindfulness meditation in the treatment of military-related PTSD, by synthesizing evidences from randomized controlled trials.MethodsFive electronic databases (Pubmed, EBSCO Medline, Embase, PsychINFO and Cochrane Library) were searched for randomized controlled trials focusing on the treatment effect of mindfulness meditation on military-related PTSD. The selection of eligible studies was based on identical inclusion and exclusion criteria. Information about study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details, PTSD outcomes, as well as potential adverse effects was extracted from the included studies. Risk of bias of all the included studies was critically assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. R Statistical software was performed for data analysis.ResultsA total of 1902 records were initially identified and screened. After duplicates removal and title & abstract review, finally, 19 articles in English language with 1326 participants were included through strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results revealed that mindfulness meditation had a significantly larger effect on alleviating military-related PTSD symptoms compared with control conditions, such as treatment as usual, present-centered group therapy and PTSD health education (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.33; 95% CI [-0.45, -0.21]; p < 0.0001). Mindfulness interventions with different control conditions (active or non-active control, SMD = -0.33, 95% CI [-0.46, -0.19]; SMD = -0.49, 95% CI [-0.88, -0.10], respectively), formats of delivery (group-based or individual-based, SMD = -0.30, 95% CI [-0.42, -0.17], SMD = -0.49, 95% CI [-0.90, -0.08], respectively) and intervention durations (short-term or standard duration, SMD = -0.27, 95% CI [-0.46, -0.08], SMD = -0.40, 95% CI [-0.58, -0.21], respectively) were equally effective in improving military-related PTSD symptoms.ConclusionFindings from this meta-analysis consolidate the efficacy and feasibility of mindfulness meditation in the treatment of military-related PTSD. Further evidence with higher quality and more rigorous design is needed in the future.
| S-EPMC8344114 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: This review aims to identify, appraise, and synthesize studies reporting the relationship between mindfulness and athlete burnout and the effects of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) on athlete burnout. Methods: Studies were identified through searching six electronic databases using combinations of three groups of keywords and manual search. Two independent reviewers screened the searched studies, extracted data of the included studies, and assessed the study quality. The extracted data were synthesized qualitatively and quantitatively. Results: Ten studies consisting of two controlled trials, six surveys, and two interview studies met the inclusion criteria. The two controlled trials had weak methodological quality, and the remaining studies were of moderate to high research quality. Results of controlled trials and interview research generally showed that MBIs had positive effects in burnout prevention. Meta-analytic results indicated a negative association between mindfulness and burnout. Conclusions: There is some evidence showing that mindfulness was negatively associated with athlete burnout. However, given the small number of interventions and qualitative studies, there is limited evidence on whether MBIs are useful in preventing athlete burnout. More studies are needed to corroborate these findings.
| S-EPMC6388258 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionExisting studies have shown that mobile-based mindfulness meditation (MMM) can have a certain impact on nurses' mental health problems, but its specific effect and the effect on specific mental health problems such as stress, anxiety, depression, mindfulness, well-being and resilience are not clear.Methods and analysisThis study protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols guidelines. Electronic search through PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, Embase and three Chinese databases namely CNKI, Wan Fang and Chinese Biology Medicine disc. The inclusion criteria follow the PICO principle, which is defined translate the question into a searchable and answerable question . P (patient/population): clinical characteristics of patients; I (intervention or exposure): treatment measures or exposure factors of concern; C (comparison): control measure.; O (outcome): outcome indicator of concern. Registered nurses, preregistered nurses, midwives and nursing students will all be included, studies using MMM as intervention to improve mental health of nurses, compared with waitlist controls or traditional methods groups, outcomes assessment of stress, anxiety, depression, mindfulness, well-being and resilience will meet the inclusion criteria. Studies designed randomised controlled trails (RCTs) of quasiexperimental and written in English or Chinese will be eligible. Search time was from inception of each database to July 2022. Two reviewers screen and assess studies for inclusion and extract data independently; any dispute will be settled through discussion. If the discussion still fails, the third author will make a decision. For RCT, risk of bias will be assessed using Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2), and for non-RCT studies, risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool will be performed. Meta-analysis will be performed using RevMan software if sufficient number of comparable studies are retrieved.Ethics and disseminationThis is a study protocol of meta-analysis; no primary data will be collected, and no ethics assessment is required. The study results will be presented in a peer-reviewed scientific publication.Prospero registration numberCRD42021277932.
| S-EPMC9036462 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: Meditation, mindfulness, and acceptance (MMA) methods have gained popularity among psychotherapists and the public. The impact of these strategies as implemented in treatment packages (e.g., mindfulness-based interventions) has been studied extensively. However, the impact of integrating MMA strategies into individual psychotherapy has not been established.Methods: To address this gap in the literature, we conducted a systematic review of empirical (quantitative or qualitative) studies investigating the use of MMA methods during individual psychotherapy in adult samples.Results: After reviewing 4671 references, only three studies (one quantitative, two qualitative) met our inclusion criteria. The one experimental study (n = 162) provided no evidence that including mindfulness meditation improved outcomes beyond other active interventions (ds = 0.00-0.12 for effects on general clinical symptoms vs. progressive muscle relaxation and treatment-as-usual, respectively). Two qualitative studies (n = 5 therapist-patient dyads in one study, n = 9 adults in one study) provided preliminary evidence that patients may find MMA methods helpful.Conclusions: We highlight future directions for work in this area, including clarifying optimal dosage and timing, identifying patient characteristics associated with beneficial or adverse effects, investigating cultural adaptations, and clarifying how MMA constructs can be measured within individual psychotherapy. We conclude by highlighting training recommendations and therapeutic practices.
| S-EPMC10523914 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Unlabelled: A previous systematic review reported that topical NSAIDs were effective in relieving pain in chronic conditions like osteoarthritis and tendinitis. More trials, a better understanding of trial quality and bias, and a reclassification of certain drugs necessitate a new review.MethodsStudies were identified by searching electronic databases, and writing to manufacturers. We identified randomised, double blind trials comparing topical NSAID with either placebo or another active treatment, in adults with chronic pain. The primary outcome was a reduction in pain of approximately 50% at two weeks, and secondary outcomes were local and systemic adverse events and adverse event-related withdrawals. Relative benefit and number-needed-to-treat (NNT), and relative harm and number-needed-to-harm (NNH) were calculated, and the effects of trial quality, validity and size, outcome reported, and condition treated, were examined by sensitivity analyses.ResultsTwelve new trials were added to 13 trials from a previous review. Fourteen double blind placebo-controlled trials had information from almost 1,500 patients. Topical NSAID was significantly better than placebo with relative benefit 1.9 (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.2), NNT 4.6 (95% confidence interval 3.8 to 5.9). Results were not affected by trial quality, validity or size, outcome reported, or condition treated. Three trials with 764 patients comparing a topical with an oral NSAID found no difference in efficacy. Local adverse events (6%), systemic adverse events (3%), or the numbers withdrawing due to an adverse event were the same for topical NSAID and placebo.ConclusionsTopical NSAIDs were effective and safe in treating chronic musculoskeletal conditions for two weeks. Larger and longer trials are necessary to fully elucidate the place of topical NSAIDs in clinical practice.
| S-EPMC516039 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceHarms and benefits of opioids for chronic noncancer pain remain unclear.ObjectiveTo systematically review randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of opioids for chronic noncancer pain.Data sources and study selectionThe databases of CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, AMED, and PsycINFO were searched from inception to April 2018 for RCTs of opioids for chronic noncancer pain vs any nonopioid control.Data extraction and synthesisPaired reviewers independently extracted data. The analyses used random-effects models and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation to rate the quality of the evidence.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcomes were pain intensity (score range, 0-10 cm on a visual analog scale for pain; lower is better and the minimally important difference [MID] is 1 cm), physical functioning (score range, 0-100 points on the 36-item Short Form physical component score [SF-36 PCS]; higher is better and the MID is 5 points), and incidence of vomiting.ResultsNinety-six RCTs including 26 169 participants (61% female; median age, 58 years [interquartile range, 51-61 years]) were included. Of the included studies, there were 25 trials of neuropathic pain, 32 trials of nociceptive pain, 33 trials of central sensitization (pain present in the absence of tissue damage), and 6 trials of mixed types of pain. Compared with placebo, opioid use was associated with reduced pain (weighted mean difference [WMD], -0.69 cm [95% CI, -0.82 to -0.56 cm] on a 10-cm visual analog scale for pain; modeled risk difference for achieving the MID, 11.9% [95% CI, 9.7% to 14.1%]), improved physical functioning (WMD, 2.04 points [95% CI, 1.41 to 2.68 points] on the 100-point SF-36 PCS; modeled risk difference for achieving the MID, 8.5% [95% CI, 5.9% to 11.2%]), and increased vomiting (5.9% with opioids vs 2.3% with placebo for trials that excluded patients with adverse events during a run-in period). Low- to moderate-quality evidence suggested similar associations of opioids with improvements in pain and physical functioning compared with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (pain: WMD, -0.60 cm [95% CI, -1.54 to 0.34 cm]; physical functioning: WMD, -0.90 points [95% CI, -2.69 to 0.89 points]), tricyclic antidepressants (pain: WMD, -0.13 cm [95% CI, -0.99 to 0.74 cm]; physical functioning: WMD, -5.31 points [95% CI, -13.77 to 3.14 points]), and anticonvulsants (pain: WMD, -0.90 cm [95% CI, -1.65 to -0.14 cm]; physical functioning: WMD, 0.45 points [95% CI, -5.77 to 6.66 points]).Conclusions and relevanceIn this meta-analysis of RCTs of patients with chronic noncancer pain, evidence from high-quality studies showed that opioid use was associated with statistically significant but small improvements in pain and physical functioning, and increased risk of vomiting compared with placebo. Comparisons of opioids with nonopioid alternatives suggested that the benefit for pain and functioning may be similar, although the evidence was from studies of only low to moderate quality.
| S-EPMC6583638 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review was to summarize and evaluate the existing evidence on the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture in relieving chronic pain-related depression (CPRD).MethodsWe searched seven online databases to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture for CPRD published before September 2020. We included studies that used acupuncture as the intervention group, with or without a control group, and the control group was treated with conventional drugs. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. For outcomes, assessments were performed using the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and adverse events.ResultsEight studies involving 636 participants were identified and included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that single acupuncture treatment and drug treatment have the same effect in improving the HAMD score (MD = -0.14, 95% CI = [-0.88, 0.59], P = 0.71) and alleviating the VAS score (MD = -0.42, 95% CI = [-1.10, -0.27], P = 0.23), but acupuncture treatment is safer (OR = 0.03, 95% CI = [0.01, 0.21], P = 0.0003). In addition, acupuncture combined with drugs (control group) is more beneficial than single-drug treatment in improving the HAMD score (MD = -2.95, 95% CI = [-3.55, -2.36], P < 0.00001) and alleviating the VAS score (MD = -1.06, 95% CI = [-1.65, -0.47], P = 0.0004).ConclusionAcupuncture is an effective and safe treatment for CPRD, and acupuncture combined with drug therapy is more effective than single-drug therapy. Nevertheless, the conclusions were limited due to the low quality and a small number of included studies.
| S-EPMC7925064 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives. Acupuncture has been widely used to relieve chronic pain-related insomnia (CPRI). However, the efficacy of acupuncture for CPRI is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of acupuncture for CPRI. Methods. Seven electronic databases were searched from inception to December 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if acupuncture was compared to sham acupuncture or conventional drug therapies for treating CPRI. Two reviewers screened each study and extracted data independently. Statistical analyses were conducted by RevMan 5.3 software. Results. A total of nine studies involving 944 patients were enrolled. The pooled analysis indicated that acupuncture treatment was significantly better than control group in improving effective rate (OR = 8.09, 95%CI = [4.75, 13.79], P < 0.00001) and cure rate (OR = 3.17, 95%CI = [2.35, 4.29], P < 0.00001), but subgroup analysis showed that there was no statistically significant difference between acupuncture and sham acupuncture in improving cure rate (OR =10.36, 95% CI [0.53, 201.45], P=0.12) based on one included study. In addition, meta-analysis demonstrated that acupuncture group was superior to control group in debasing PSQI score (MD = -2.65, 95%CI = [-4.00, -1.30], P = 0.0001) and VAS score (MD = -1.44, 95%CI = [-1.58, -1.29], P < 0.00001). And there was no significant difference in adverse events (OR =1.73, 95%CI = [0.92, 3.25], P =0.09) between the two groups. Conclusions. Acupuncture therapy is an effective and safe treatment for CPRI, and this treatment can be recommended for the management of patients with CPRI. Due to the low quality and small sample size of the included studies, more rigorously designed RCTs with high quality and large sample size are recommended in future.
| S-EPMC6612974 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chronic pain (CP) is prevalent worldwide. Current reports on its prevalence in developing countries are heterogeneous, and to date, there is no quantitative synthesis providing a general estimation of its magnitude in the developing world. The goal of this study was to estimate the pooled prevalence of CP in the general population in developing countries. This was a PROSPERO-registered CRD42019118680 systematic review including population-based cross-sectional studies on CP from countries with ≤0.8 human developing index. We calculated prevalence using both random effects and fixed effects. Heterogeneity was calculated by the Cochran Q test and the I2 statistic. Publication bias was evaluated by visual inspection of the Egger funnel plot, as well as by the Begg rank test and the Egger linear test. Sources of heterogeneity were also explored in subgroup analyses. Twelve studies with a total of 29,902 individuals were included in this meta-analysis, of which 7263 individuals were identified with CP. The overall pooled prevalence of CP after correction for publication bias was 18% (95% confidence interval: 10%-29%), the sample presenting significant heterogeneity (I2 = 100%, P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that year of publication and the adopted threshold for pain chronicity could partially explain the observed heterogeneity (P < 0.05). The proportion of individuals with CP in the general population of developing countries was 18%. However, reports of prevalence have high variability, especially related to year of publication and the threshold level adopted for pain chronicity.
| S-EPMC6903356 | biostudies-literature