Dataset Information

Are mind-body therapies effective for relieving cancer-related pain in adults? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess whether mind-body therapies are effective for relieving cancer-related pain in adults, since at least one-third of adults with cancer are affected by moderate or severe pain.

Methods

We searched for all randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials that included adults (≥18 years) with cancer-related pain who were treated with mind-body therapies (mindfulness, hypnosis, yoga, guided imagery, and progressive muscle relaxation) in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Science Citation Index, Web of Science, trials registers, and reference lists. The primary outcome was pain intensity. We calculated the standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and assessed the risk of bias.

Results

We identified 40 primary studies involving a total of 3569 participants. The meta-analysis included 24 studies (2404 participants) and showed a significant effect of -0.39 (95% CI -0.62 to -0.16) with considerable heterogeneity (I² = 86.3%, p < 0.001). After we excluded four "outlier" studies in sensitivity analyses, the effect size remained significant but weaker. There was a high risk of bias in all studies, for example, performance bias due to lack of participant blinding. Patients in multiple settings were included but many studies were of low quality.

Conclusions

Mind-body therapies may be effective in improving cancer pain, but the quality of the evidence is low. There is a need for further high-quality clinical trials.

SUBMITTER: Danon N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9291932 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Mind-body therapies (MBTs) are emerging as potential tools for addressing the opioid crisis. Knowing whether mind-body therapies may benefit patients treated with opioids for acute, procedural, and chronic pain conditions may be useful for prescribers, payers, policy makers, and patients. Objective:To evaluate the association of MBTs with pain and opioid dose reduction in a diverse adult population with clinical pain. Data Sources:For this systematic review and meta-analysis, the MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for English-language randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews from date of inception to March 2018. Search logic included (pain OR analgesia OR opioids) AND mind-body therapies. The gray literature, ClinicalTrials.gov, and relevant bibliographies were also searched. Study Selection:Randomized clinical trials that evaluated the use of MBTs for symptom management in adults also prescribed opioids for clinical pain. Data Extraction and Synthesis:Independent reviewers screened citations, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted using standardized mean differences in pain and opioid dose to obtain aggregate estimates of effect size with 95% CIs. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was pain intensity. The secondary outcomes were opioid dose, opioid misuse, opioid craving, disability, or function. Results:Of 4212 citations reviewed, 60 reports with 6404 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, MBTs were associated with pain reduction (Cohen d?=?-0.51; 95% CI, -0.76 to -0.26) and reduced opioid dose (Cohen d?=?-0.26; 95% CI, -0.44 to -0.08). Studies tested meditation (n?=?5), hypnosis (n?=?25), relaxation (n?=?14), guided imagery (n?=?7), therapeutic suggestion (n?=?6), and cognitive behavioral therapy (n?=?7) interventions. Moderate to large effect size improvements in pain outcomes were found for meditation (Cohen d?=?-0.70), hypnosis (Cohen d?=?-0.54), suggestion (Cohen d?=?-0.68), and cognitive behavioral therapy (Cohen d?=?-0.43) but not for other MBTs. Although most meditation (n?=?4 [80%]), cognitive-behavioral therapy (n?=?4 [57%]), and hypnosis (n?=?12 [63%]) studies found improved opioid-related outcomes, fewer studies of suggestion, guided imagery, and relaxation reported such improvements. Most MBT studies used active or placebo controls and were judged to be at low risk of bias. Conclusions and Relevance:The findings suggest that MBTs are associated with moderate improvements in pain and small reductions in opioid dose and may be associated with therapeutic benefits for opioid-related problems, such as opioid craving and misuse. Future studies should carefully quantify opioid dosing variables to determine the association of mind-body therapies with opioid-related outcomes.

Project description:PurposeWalking and mind-body therapies (MBTs) are commonly recommended to relieve pain and improve function in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of walking and MBTs in CLBP.MethodsWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing walking or MBTs to any other intervention or control in adults with CLBP. Studies were identified through PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Scopus, and ScienceDirect databases. The research was limited to studies published in English and French between January 2008 and December 2018. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted data, and assessed studies quality using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Statistical analyses were performed under a random-effects model. We analyzed pain and activity limitation, with the calculation of standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals for the different treatment effects.ResultsThirty one randomized controlled trials involving 3193 participants were analyzed. Walking was as effective as control interventions in the short-term and slightly superior in the intermediate term with respect to pain (Standardized mean differences (SMD) = -0.34; 95% CI, -0.65 to -0.03; P = .03) and activity limitation (SMD = -0.30; 95% CI, -0.50 to -0.10; P = .003). In contrast, yoga was more effective than control interventions in the short term in terms of pain (SMD = -1.47; 95% CI, -2.26 to -0.68; P = .0003) and activity limitation (SMD = -1.17; 95% CI, -1.80 to -0.55; P = .0002). Yoga was no longer superior to the control interventions for pain at the 6-month follow-up.ConclusionMBTs, especially yoga, seem to be more effective in the short term, and walking seems to be more effective in the intermediate term, for the relief of pain and activity limitation in patients with CLBP. A combination of walking and MBTs fits the biopsychosocial model and might be valuable therapy for CLBP throughout follow-up due to combined effects.

Project description:ImportancePsychological and health-restorative benefits of mind-body therapies have been investigated, but their impact on the immune system remain less defined.ObjectiveTo conduct the first comprehensive review of available controlled trial evidence to evaluate the effects of mind-body therapies on the immune system, focusing on markers of inflammation and anti-viral related immune responses.MethodsData sources included MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and PsycINFO through September 1, 2013. Randomized controlled trials published in English evaluating at least four weeks of Tai Chi, Qi Gong, meditation, or Yoga that reported immune outcome measures were selected. Studies were synthesized separately by inflammatory (n = 18), anti-viral related immunity (n = 7), and enumerative (n = 14) outcomes measures. We performed random-effects meta-analyses using standardized mean difference when appropriate.ResultsThirty-four studies published in 39 articles (total 2, 219 participants) met inclusion criteria. For inflammatory measures, after 7 to 16 weeks of mind-body intervention, there was a moderate effect on reduction of C-reactive protein (effect size [ES], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04 to 1.12), a small but not statistically significant reduction of interleukin-6 (ES, 0.35; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.75), and negligible effect on tumor necrosis factor-α (ES, 0.21; 95% CI, -0.15 to 0.58). For anti-viral related immune and enumerative measures, there were negligible effects on CD4 counts (ES, 0.15; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.34) and natural killer cell counts (ES, 0.12, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.45). Some evidence indicated mind-body therapies increase immune responses to vaccination.ConclusionsMind-body therapies reduce markers of inflammation and influence virus-specific immune responses to vaccination despite minimal evidence suggesting effects on resting anti-viral or enumerative measures. These immunomodulatory effects, albeit incomplete, warrant further methodologically rigorous studies to determine the clinical implications of these findings for inflammatory and infectious disease outcomes.

Project description:The self-reported health and functional status of persons with back pain in the United States have declined in recent years, despite greatly increased medical expenditures due to this problem. Although patient psychosocial factors such as pain-related beliefs, thoughts and coping behaviors have been demonstrated to affect how well patients respond to treatments for back pain, few patients receive treatments that address these factors. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), which addresses psychosocial factors, has been found to be effective for back pain, but access to qualified therapists is limited. Another treatment option with potential for addressing psychosocial issues, mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), is increasingly available. MBSR has been found to be helpful for various mental and physical conditions, but it has not been well-studied for application with chronic back pain patients. In this trial, we will seek to determine whether MBSR is an effective and cost-effective treatment option for persons with chronic back pain, compare its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness compared with CBT and explore the psychosocial variables that may mediate the effects of MBSR and CBT on patient outcomes.In this trial, we will randomize 397 adults with nonspecific chronic back pain to CBT, MBSR or usual care arms (99 per group). Both interventions will consist of eight weekly 2-hour group sessions supplemented by home practice. The MBSR protocol also includes an optional 6-hour retreat. Interviewers masked to treatment assignments will assess outcomes 5, 10, 26 and 52 weeks postrandomization. The primary outcomes will be pain-related functional limitations (based on the Roland Disability Questionnaire) and symptom bothersomeness (rated on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale) at 26 weeks.If MBSR is found to be an effective and cost-effective treatment option for patients with chronic back pain, it will become a valuable addition to the limited treatment options available to patients with significant psychosocial contributors to their pain.Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01467843.

Project description:Ethnopharmacological relevanceTibetan traditional medicine CheeZheng Pain-Relieving Plaster (CZPRP) is frequently used as an over-the-counter external analgesic for musculoskeletal pain; however, its evidence for low back pain (LBP) has not been evaluated.Aim of the studyThis study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of CZPRP for both acute, subacute and chronic LBP through a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.Materials and methodsPubMed, CENTRAL, CNKI, CQVIP, and Wanfang databases were searched through April 20, 2020 for randomized controlled trials of CZPRP for LBP. Eligible comparators were placebo, active treatment, or usual care. Clinical outcomes included pain severity, lower back function score, pain-free rate, and adverse events (AEs). Qualitative evaluations were conducted using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tools. Quantitative analyses were conducted using a random-effects model.ResultsThis study includes 1674 LBP patients from nine clinical studies. Pooled analyses among subjects with acute LBP show 1) significant pain reductions (mean difference -0.84, 95% confidence interval[CI] -1.31, -0.37) in CZPRP plus diclofenac versus diclofenac, 2) significant improvements in lower back function (standard mean difference -1.50, 95% CI -2.16, -0.85) in CZPRP versus diclofenac, and 3) a higher pain-free rate in CZPRP alone (risk ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.16, 1.89; I2 = 61%) or CZPRP plus nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (risk ratio 1.66, 95% CI 1.14, 2.40; I2 = 0%) versus NSAIDs. However, in a heterogeneous population with mixed LBP subtypes, there was no significant difference in pain outcomes between CZPRP and diclofenac. Additionally, CZPRP use did not increase AEs compared with no CZPRP (p = 0.40). All nine studies are associated with moderate to high risk of bias.ConclusionsThe use of CZPRP is associated with improved acute LBP outcomes compared to diclofenac. However, due to the moderate to high risk of bias of the studies, future rigorous randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the effects of CZPRP for acute and chronic LBP.

Project description:Background: The mind-body therapies of traditional Chinese medicine include several intervention types and combine physical poses with conscious relaxation and breathing techniques. The purpose of this Evidence Map is to describe these different interventions and report related health outcomes. Methods: This evidence map is based on the 3iE Evidence Gap Map methodology. We searched seven electronic databases (BVS, PUBMED, EMBASE, PEDro, ScienceDirect, Web of Sciences, and PschyInfo) from inception to November 2019 and included systematic reviews only. Systematic reviews were analyzed based on AMSTAR 2. We used Tableau to graphically display quality assessment, the number of reviews, outcomes, and effects. Results: The map is based on 116 systematic reviews and 44 meta-analyses. Most of the reviews were published in the last 5 years. The most researched interventions were Tai Chi and Qi Gong. The reviews presented the following quality assessment: 80 high, 43 moderate, 23 low, and 14 critically low. Every 680 distinct outcome effect was classified: 421 as potential positive; 237 as positive; 21 as inconclusive/mixed; one potential negative and none no effect. Positive effects were related to chronic diseases; mental indicators and disorders; vitality, well-being, and quality of life. Potential positive effects were related to balance, mobility, Parkinson's disease, hypertension, joint pain, cognitive performance, and sleep quality. Inconclusive/mixed-effects justify further research, especially in the following areas: Acupressure as Shiatsu and Tuiná for nausea and vomiting; Tai Chi and Qi Gong for acute diseases, prevention of stroke, stroke risk factors, and schizophrenia. Conclusions: The mind-body therapies from traditional Chinese medicine have been applied in different areas and this Evidence Map provides a visualization of valuable information for patients, professionals, and policymakers, to promote evidence-based complementary therapies.

Project description:Neuropsychiatric symptoms affect 37% of US adults and present in many important diagnoses including posttraumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, and chronic pain. However, these symptoms are difficult to treat with standard treatments, and patients may seek alternative options. In this study, we examined the use of mind-body therapies by adults with neuropsychiatric symptoms.We compared mind-body therapy use (biofeedback, energy healing, meditation, guided imagery, yoga, deep-breathing exercises, hypnosis, progressive relaxation therapy, qigong, and tai chi) between adults with and without neuropsychiatric symptoms (anxiety, depression, insomnia, headaches, memory deficits, attention deficits, and excessive daytime sleepiness) in the 2007 National Health Interview Survey (N = 23,393). Use of ≥ 1 of these therapies in the prior 12 months was the primary outcome of interest. We also examined prevalence and reasons for mind-body therapy use in adults with neuropsychiatric symptoms. We performed logistic regression to examine the association between neuropsychiatric symptoms and mind-body therapy use to adjust for sociodemographic and clinical factors.Adults with ≥ 1 neuropsychiatric symptom used mind-body therapies more than adults without symptoms (25.3% vs 15.0%, P < .001). Prevalence increased with increasing number of symptoms (21.5% for 1 symptom, 32.4% for ≥ 3 symptoms, P < .001); differences persisted after adjustment for potential confounders (odds ratios, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.26-1.53] and 2.48 [95% CI, 2.18-2.82]). Reasons for mind-body therapy use among adults with ≥ 1 symptom included the ineffectiveness or expense of conventional medicine (30.2%). Most adults (nearly 70%) with ≥ 1 symptom did not discuss their mind-body therapy use with a conventional provider.Adults with ≥ 1 neuropsychiatric symptom use mind-body therapies frequently; more symptoms are associated with increased use. Future research is needed to understand the efficacy of these therapies.

Project description:Mind-Body Physical Activity (MBPA) in educational settings is one possible preventive strategy for ameliorating stress-related physiological health parameters. The objectives of this study were to conduct a systematic review of the literature with meta-analyses on the effects of MBPA on stress-related physiological health markers in primary, secondary, and higher education students. In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, the search for peer-reviewed articles published in English was conducted in PubMed, EBSCOhost, PsychInfo, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. Criteria for inclusion consisted of empirical studies targeting the student population (primary, secondary, higher education), studies examining the effectiveness of an MBPA intervention, studies including a control or comparison group (pre-test/post-test studies excluded), studies targeting physiological marker outcomes such as heart rate, blood glucose, cortisol, and blood pressure, and finally, studies examining interventions implemented within educational settings. Twenty-six interventions were eligible for the review and quantitative synthesis, which comprised a total of 1625 participants, with 783 students serving within the control/comparison group. There were statistically significant and large pooled effects for MBPA effectiveness for lowering heart rate (Hedges' g = -1.71, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): -2.43, -0.98), cortisol (Hedges' g = -1.32, 95% CI: -2.50, -0.16), and systolic and diastolic blood pressure (Hedges' g = -1.04, 95% CI: -1.53, -0.58). These effects tended to be stronger in older students compared to younger students. Most analyses were characterized as having high heterogeneity and only 10 of the 26 studies were characterized as good quality (38.4%). MBPA interventions may have a positive impact on specific physiological health markers in students, especially in students within higher education. However, higher-quality research is needed in this area.