The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

What is the content of virtually delivered pain management programmes for people with persistent musculoskeletal pain? A systematic review

What is the content of virtually delivered pain management programmes for people with persistent musculoskeletal pain? A systematic review
What is the content of virtually delivered pain management programmes for people with persistent musculoskeletal pain? A systematic review

Introduction: Virtual consultations (VC) have been embraced by healthcare organisations during the COVID-19 pandemic. VC allows continuation of patient care while adhering to government advised restrictions and social distancing measures. Multidisciplinary pain management programmes (PMPs) are a core element of many pain services and utilising virtual methods to deliver PMPs has allowed them to continue to provide care. This systematic review aimed to explore the content of existing virtually delivered PMPs and discuss if and how these findings can be used to guide clinical delivery. Methods: Eligible studies included adults (aged ⩾18 years) with persistent musculoskeletal pain and any virtually delivered intervention that was described as a PMP or that had components of PMPs. Databases were searched from inception until July 2020. We performed a content analysis comparing existing interventions with established evidence-based clinical guidelines published by the British Pain Society (BPS). Intervention reporting quality was assessed using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist: an established checklist developed to improve the completeness of the reporting of interventions. Results: Eight studies were included. One intervention included six of the seven components recommended by the BPS; none included all seven. ‘Skills training and activity management’ was present in all eight interventions; ‘education’ and ‘cognitive therapy methods’ were present in six interventions; ‘graded activation’ and ‘methods to enhance acceptance, mindfulness and psychological flexibility’ were present in four interventions; ‘physical exercise’ was present in two interventions and ‘graded exposure’ was present in one intervention. None of the studies described all 12 items of the TIDieR checklist adequately enough for replication. Conclusion: Published virtual PMPs partially meet established clinical guidelines. Future virtual PMPs should be based on evidence-based clinical guidelines, and more research is needed to explore the effectiveness of virtually delivered PMPs and each recommended component.

COVID-19, chronic pain, pain management programme, persistent pain, rehabilitation, virtual consultations
2049-4637
Booth, Gregory
9ebd50dc-40b0-4be2-9835-2442262a10fb
Williams, Deborah
aab095df-f042-4823-8ad3-8d35a6b9fb1d
Patel, Hasina
34052aad-d8ef-494f-b8bc-c67d0fdcbaeb
Gilbert, Anthony W
a450c811-c6d3-4853-ae35-9f5287db8efa
Booth, Gregory
9ebd50dc-40b0-4be2-9835-2442262a10fb
Williams, Deborah
aab095df-f042-4823-8ad3-8d35a6b9fb1d
Patel, Hasina
34052aad-d8ef-494f-b8bc-c67d0fdcbaeb
Gilbert, Anthony W
a450c811-c6d3-4853-ae35-9f5287db8efa

Booth, Gregory, Williams, Deborah, Patel, Hasina and Gilbert, Anthony W (2021) What is the content of virtually delivered pain management programmes for people with persistent musculoskeletal pain? A systematic review. British Journal of Pain. (doi:10.1177/20494637211023074).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Introduction: Virtual consultations (VC) have been embraced by healthcare organisations during the COVID-19 pandemic. VC allows continuation of patient care while adhering to government advised restrictions and social distancing measures. Multidisciplinary pain management programmes (PMPs) are a core element of many pain services and utilising virtual methods to deliver PMPs has allowed them to continue to provide care. This systematic review aimed to explore the content of existing virtually delivered PMPs and discuss if and how these findings can be used to guide clinical delivery. Methods: Eligible studies included adults (aged ⩾18 years) with persistent musculoskeletal pain and any virtually delivered intervention that was described as a PMP or that had components of PMPs. Databases were searched from inception until July 2020. We performed a content analysis comparing existing interventions with established evidence-based clinical guidelines published by the British Pain Society (BPS). Intervention reporting quality was assessed using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist: an established checklist developed to improve the completeness of the reporting of interventions. Results: Eight studies were included. One intervention included six of the seven components recommended by the BPS; none included all seven. ‘Skills training and activity management’ was present in all eight interventions; ‘education’ and ‘cognitive therapy methods’ were present in six interventions; ‘graded activation’ and ‘methods to enhance acceptance, mindfulness and psychological flexibility’ were present in four interventions; ‘physical exercise’ was present in two interventions and ‘graded exposure’ was present in one intervention. None of the studies described all 12 items of the TIDieR checklist adequately enough for replication. Conclusion: Published virtual PMPs partially meet established clinical guidelines. Future virtual PMPs should be based on evidence-based clinical guidelines, and more research is needed to explore the effectiveness of virtually delivered PMPs and each recommended component.

Text
What is the content of virtually delivered pain management programmes - Accepted Manuscript
Download (174kB)
Text
What is the content of virtually delivered pain management programmes ... - Accepted Manuscript
Download (185kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 19 May 2021
e-pub ahead of print date: 13 June 2021
Additional Information: Funding The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article: This study was unfunded. G.B. completed this work during an ICA Pre-doctoral Clinical Academic Fellowship supported by Health Education England and the National Institute for Health Research (grant number: NIHR300342). A.W.G., Clinical Doctoral Research Fellow (ICA-CDRF-2017-03-025) is funded by Health Education England and support by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Keywords: COVID-19, chronic pain, pain management programme, persistent pain, rehabilitation, virtual consultations

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 450047
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/450047
ISSN: 2049-4637
PURE UUID: d4ed2609-c0f7-4889-8b31-aa6cd2abf8d6

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 07 Jul 2021 16:30
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 12:48

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Gregory Booth
Author: Deborah Williams
Author: Hasina Patel
Author: Anthony W Gilbert

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×