NONINVASIVE NONPHARMACOLOGICAL TREATMENT FOR CHRONIC PAIN: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW UPDATE (2020)
 
   
 

Noninvasive Nonpharmacological Treatment for Chronic Pain:
A Systematic Review Update
(April 16, 2020).

Andrea C. Skelly, Ph.D., M.P.H., Roger Chou, M.D., Joseph R. Dettori, Ph.D., M.P.H., M.P.T.,
Judith A. Turner, Ph.D., et al.

Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2020 (Apr)


This section was compiled by Frank M. Painter, D.C.
Send all comments or additions to:
  Frankp@chiro.org
 
   

Abstract

Jump to Full-Text

Objectives:

We updated the evidence from our 2018 report assessing persistent improvement in outcomes following completion of therapy for noninvasive nonpharmacological treatment for selected chronic pain conditions.

Data sources:

Electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) through November 2017 (for prior report) and from September 2017 through September 2019 (for this update report), reference lists, ClinicalTrials.gov, and our previous report.

Review methods:

Using predefined criteria, we selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of noninvasive nonpharmacological treatments for five common chronic pain conditions (chronic low back pain; chronic neck pain; osteoarthritis of the knee, hip, or hand; fibromyalgia; and tension headache) that reported results for a at least 1 month postintervention. We analyzed effects and assessed strength of evidence () at short term (1 to <6 months following treatment completion), intermediate term (≥6 to <12 months), and long term (≥12 months).

Results:

We included 233 RCTs (31 new to this update). Many were small (N<70), and evidence beyond 12 months after treatment completion was sparse. The most common comparison was with usual care. Evidence on harms was limited, with no evidence suggesting increased risk for serious treatment-related harms for any intervention. Effect sizes were generally small for function and pain.

Chronic low back pain:   Psychological therapies were associated with small improvements compared with usual care or an attention control for both function and pain at short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term followup (: moderate). Function improved over short and/or intermediate term for exercise, low-level laser therapy, spinal manipulation, massage, yoga, acupuncture, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE moderate at short term for exercise, massage, and yoga; low for all others). Improvements in pain at short term were seen for massage, mindfulness-based stress reduction, acupuncture, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE: moderate), and exercise, low-level laser therapy, and yoga (SOE: low). At intermediate term, spinal manipulation, yoga, multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE: moderate) and exercise and mindfulness-based stress reduction (SOE: low) were associated with improved pain. Compared with exercise, multidisciplinary rehabilitation improved both function and pain at short and intermediate terms (small effects, SOE: moderate.)

Chronic neck pain:   In the short term, low-level laser therapy (: moderate) and massage (SOE: low) improved function and pain. Exercise in general improved function long term, and combination exercise improved function and pain both short and long term compared with usual care (SOE: low). Acupuncture improved function short and intermediate term, but there was no pain improvement compared with sham acupuncture (SOE: low). Compared with acetaminophen, Pilates improved both function and pain (SOE: low).

Osteoarthritis pain:   Exercise resulted in small improvements in function and pain at short-term (: moderate) and long-term (SOE: low), and moderate improvement at intermediate-term (SOE: low) followup for knee osteoarthritis versus nonactive comparators. Small improvements in function and pain with exercise were seen for hip osteoarthritis short term (SOE: low). Functional improvement persisted into intermediate term, but pain improvement did not (SOE: low).

Fibromyalgia:   Functional improvements were seen with exercise, mind-body practices, multidisciplinary rehabilitation (: low) and acupuncture (SOE: moderate) short term compared with usual care, attention control, or sham treatment. At intermediate term, there was functional improvement with exercise and acupuncture (SOE: moderate), cognitive-behavioral therapy (), mindfulness-based stress reduction, myofascial release, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (SOE: low). Long term, functional improvements persisted for multidisciplinary rehabilitation without improvement in pain (SOE: low). Compared with exercise, tai chi conferred improvement in function short and intermediate term (SOE: low). Pain was improved with exercise (short and intermediate term, SOE moderate), and for CBT (short term), mindfulness practices, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation (intermediate term) (SOE low).

Chronic tension headache:   Evidence was sparse and the majority of trials were of poor quality. Spinal manipulation resulted in moderate improvement in pain short term.

Conclusions:

Trials identified subsequent to the earlier report largely support previous findings—namely that exercise, multidisciplinary rehabilitation, acupuncture, , mindfulness practices, massage, and mind-body practices most consistently improve function and/or pain beyond the course of therapy for specific chronic pain conditions. Additional research, including comparisons with pharmacological and other active controls, on effects beyond the immediate post-treatment period is needed, particularly for conditions other than low back pain.

 
   

Contents

  • References
  • Acronyms and Abbreviations
  • Appendixes
  • Appendix A. Search Strategies
  • Appendix B. Included Studies
  • Appendix C. Excluded Studies
  • Appendix D. Evidence Table
  • Appendix E. Quality Assessment
  • Appendix F. Exercise Categories
  • Appendix G. Strength of Evidence
  • Appendix H. Definitions for Magnitude of Effects

    • Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857; www.ahrq.gov Contract No. 290-2015-00009-I Prepared by: Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Portland, OR


      Suggested citation:   Skelly AC, Chou R, Dettori JR, Turner JA, Friedly JL, Rundell SD, Fu R, Brodt ED, Wasson N, Kantner S, Ferguson AJR.
      Noninvasive Nonpharmacological Treatment for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review Update.
      Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 227.
      (Prepared by the Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2015-00009-I.)
      AHRQ Publication No. 20-EHC009. Rockville, MD:
      Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; April 16, 2020.
      DOI: https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPCCER227.
      Posted final reports are located on the Effective Health Care Program search page.


      This report is based on research conducted by the Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 290-2015-00009-I). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.


      None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.

      The information in this report is intended to help healthcare decision makers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of healthcare services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients.

      This report is made available to the public under the terms of a licensing agreement between the author and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. This report may be used and reprinted without permission except those copyrighted materials that are clearly noted in the report. Further reproduction of those copyrighted materials is prohibited without the express permission of copyright holders.

      AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of any derivative products that may be developed from this report, such as clinical practice guidelines, other quality enhancement tools, or reimbursement or coverage policies, may not be stated or implied.

      This report may periodically be assessed for the currency of conclusions. If an assessment is done, the resulting surveillance report describing the methodology and findings will be found on the Effective Health Care Program website at www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov. Search on the title of the report.

      People using assistive technology may not be able to fully access information in this report. For assistance contact vog.shh.qrha@CPE.


                             © 1995–2020 ~ The Chiropractic Resource Organization ~ All Rights Reserved