1
|
Effectiveness of Exercise and Manual Therapy as Treatment for Patients with Migraine, Tension-Type Headache or Cervicogenic Headache: An Umbrella and Mapping Review with Meta-Meta-Analysis. APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/app11156856] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
The aim of the study was to perform a mapping and umbrella review with meta-meta-analysis (MMA) to synthesise and critically evaluate the effectiveness of manual therapy (MT) and aerobic exercise (AE) in relation to pain intensity, frequency, disability and quality of life in patients with migraines, tension-type headaches (TTH) and cervicogenic headaches (CGH). A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, PEDro, Scielo and Google Scholar up to December 2020. A total of 18 articles met the inclusion criteria, and only 8 were included in the quantitative analysis. The MMA showed results in favour of the interventions in terms of pain intensity and quality of life in migraine, TTH and CCH. Data were also in favour of the intervention in terms of pain frequency in migraine and in terms of disability in TTH. However, there were no significant effects on pain frequency in TTH and CGH. The results showed moderate evidence to suggest that AE reduces pain intensity in patients with migraine. In addition, the evidence in favour of MT or a mixed intervention (including therapeutic exercise) was also moderate in terms of reducing pain intensity in patients with TTH.
Collapse
|
2
|
Brunyé TT, Patterson JE, Wooten T, Hussey EK. A Critical Review of Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation for Neuromodulation in Clinical and Non-clinical Samples. Front Hum Neurosci 2021; 15:625321. [PMID: 33597854 PMCID: PMC7882621 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.625321] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2020] [Accepted: 01/07/2021] [Indexed: 01/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) is a neuromodulation tool used for treating several clinical disorders, including insomnia, anxiety, and depression. More recently, a limited number of studies have examined CES for altering affect, physiology, and behavior in healthy, non-clinical samples. The physiological, neurochemical, and metabolic mechanisms underlying CES effects are currently unknown. Computational modeling suggests that electrical current administered with CES at the earlobes can reach cortical and subcortical regions at very low intensities associated with subthreshold neuromodulatory effects, and studies using electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) show some effects on alpha band EEG activity, and modulation of the default mode network during CES administration. One theory suggests that CES modulates brain stem (e.g., medulla), limbic (e.g., thalamus, amygdala), and cortical (e.g., prefrontal cortex) regions and increases relative parasympathetic to sympathetic drive in the autonomic nervous system. There is no direct evidence supporting this theory, but one of its assumptions is that CES may induce its effects by stimulating afferent projections of the vagus nerve, which provides parasympathetic signals to the cardiorespiratory and digestive systems. In our critical review of studies using CES in clinical and non-clinical populations, we found severe methodological concerns, including potential conflicts of interest, risk of methodological and analytic biases, issues with sham credibility, lack of blinding, and a severe heterogeneity of CES parameters selected and employed across scientists, laboratories, institutions, and studies. These limitations make it difficult to derive consistent or compelling insights from the extant literature, tempering enthusiasm for CES and its potential to alter nervous system activity or behavior in meaningful or reliable ways. The lack of compelling evidence also motivates well-designed and relatively high-powered experiments to assess how CES might modulate the physiological, affective, and cognitive responses to stress. Establishing reliable empirical links between CES administration and human performance is critical for supporting its prospective use during occupational training, operations, or recovery, ensuring reliability and robustness of effects, characterizing if, when, and in whom such effects might arise, and ensuring that any benefits of CES outweigh the risks of adverse events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tad T. Brunyé
- U. S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Soldier Center, Cognitive Science Team, Natick, MA, United States
- Center for Applied Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Tufts University, Medford, MA, United States
| | - Joseph E. Patterson
- Center for Applied Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Tufts University, Medford, MA, United States
| | - Thomas Wooten
- Department of Psychology, Tufts University, Medford, MA, United States
| | - Erika K. Hussey
- U. S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Soldier Center, Cognitive Science Team, Natick, MA, United States
- Center for Applied Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Tufts University, Medford, MA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Falsiroli Maistrello L, Rafanelli M, Turolla A. Manual Therapy and Quality of Life in People with Headache: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Curr Pain Headache Rep 2019; 23:78. [PMID: 31401702 DOI: 10.1007/s11916-019-0815-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW People with headache usually experienced significantly lower health-related quality of life (HRQoL) than the healthy subjects. The goal of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of manual therapy on HRQoL in patients with tension-type headache (TTH), migraine (MH) or cervicogenic headache (CGH). RECENT FINDINGS We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on MEDLINE, COCHRANE and PEDro databases. Treatment was manual therapy compared to usual care or placebo. The outcome was the HRQoL that could be measured by Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), Headache Disability Inventory (HDI), Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire (MIDAS) and Short Form Health Survey 12/36 (SF-12/36). For the RCT internal validity, we used the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool. For the level of evidence, we used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach (GRADE). We identified a total of 10 RCTs, 7 of which were included into the meta-analysis. For HIT-6 scale, meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in favour to manual therapy both after treatment (mean difference (MD) - 3.67; 95% CI from - 5.71 to - 1.63) and at follow-up (MD - 2.47; 95% CI from - 3.27 to - 1.68). For HDI scale, meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in favour to manual therapy both after treatment (MD - 4.01; 95% CI from - 5.82 to - 2.20) and at follow-up (MD - 5.62; 95% CI from - 10.69 to - 0.54). Other scales provided inconclusive results. Manual therapy should be considered as an effective approach in improving the quality of life in patients with TTH and MH, while in patients with CGH, the results were inconsistent. Those positive results should be considered with caution due to the very low level of evidence. Researchers should in future design primary studies using valid and reliable disease-specific outcome measures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luca Falsiroli Maistrello
- Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health, University of Genova, Campus of Savona, Savona, Italy.
| | | | - Andrea Turolla
- Laboratory of Neurorehabilitation Technologies, Fondazione Ospedale San Camillo IRCCS, Venice, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Brønfort G, Evans RL, Goldsmith CH, Haas M, Leininger B, Levin M, Schmitt J, Westrom K. Spinal rehabilitative exercise and manual treatment for the prevention of migraine attacks in adults. Hippokratia 2017. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011848.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Gert Brønfort
- University of Minnesota; Integrative Health & Wellbeing Research Program, Center for Spirituality & Healing; 420 Delaware Street SE, MMC505 Minneapolis MN USA 55455
| | - Roni L Evans
- University of Minnesota; Integrative Health & Wellbeing Research Program, Center for Spirituality & Healing; 420 Delaware Street SE, MMC505 Minneapolis MN USA 55455
| | - Charles H Goldsmith
- Simon Fraser University; Faculty of Health Sciences; Blossom Hall, Room 9510 8888 University Drive Burnaby BC Canada V5A 1S6
| | - Mitchell Haas
- University of Western States; 2900 NE 132nd Avenue Portland OR USA 97230
| | - Brent Leininger
- University of Minnesota; Integrative Health & Wellbeing Research Program, Center for Spirituality & Healing; 420 Delaware Street SE, MMC505 Minneapolis MN USA 55455
| | - Morris Levin
- UCSF School of Medicine; Neurology; 2330 Post Street San Francisco California USA 94115
| | - John Schmitt
- St Catherine University; 601 25th Avenue S. Minneapolis MN USA 55454
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Leininger B, Brønfort G, Haas M, Schmitt J, Evans RL, Levin M, Westrom K, Goldsmith CH. Spinal rehabilitative exercise or manual treatment for the prevention of tension-type headache in adults. Hippokratia 2017. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012139.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Brent Leininger
- University of Minnesota; Integrative Health & Wellbeing Research Program, Center for Spirituality & Healing; 420 Delaware Street SE Minneapolis MN USA 55455
| | - Gert Brønfort
- University of Minnesota; Integrative Health & Wellbeing Research Program, Center for Spirituality & Healing; 420 Delaware Street SE Minneapolis MN USA 55455
| | - Mitchell Haas
- University of Western States; 2900 NE 132nd Avenue Portland OR USA 97230
| | - John Schmitt
- St Catherine University; 601 25th Avenue S. Minneapolis MN USA 55454
| | - Roni L Evans
- University of Minnesota; Integrative Health & Wellbeing Research Program, Center for Spirituality & Healing; 420 Delaware Street SE Minneapolis MN USA 55455
| | - Morris Levin
- UCSF School of Medicine; Neurology; 2330 Post Street San Francisco California USA 94115
| | | | - Charles H Goldsmith
- Simon Fraser University; Faculty of Health Sciences; Blossom Hall, Room 9510 8888 University Drive Burnaby BC Canada V5A 1S6
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Haas M, Brønfort G, Evans RL, Leininger B, Schmitt J, Levin M, Westrom K, Goldsmith CH. Spinal rehabilitative exercise or manual treatment for the prevention of cervicogenic headache in adults. Hippokratia 2017. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012205.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Mitchell Haas
- University of Western States; 2900 NE 132nd Avenue Portland OR USA 97230
| | - Gert Brønfort
- University of Minnesota; Integrative Health & Wellbeing Research Program, Center for Spirituality & Healing; 420 Delaware Street SE, MMC505 Minneapolis MN USA 55455
| | - Roni L Evans
- University of Minnesota; Integrative Health & Wellbeing Research Program, Center for Spirituality & Healing; 420 Delaware Street SE, MMC505 Minneapolis MN USA 55455
| | - Brent Leininger
- University of Minnesota; Integrative Health & Wellbeing Research Program, Center for Spirituality & Healing; 420 Delaware Street SE, MMC505 Minneapolis MN USA 55455
| | - John Schmitt
- St Catherine University; 601 25th Avenue S. Minneapolis MN USA 55454
| | - Morris Levin
- UCSF School of Medicine; Neurology; 2330 Post Street San Francisco California USA 94115
| | | | - Charles H Goldsmith
- Simon Fraser University; Faculty of Health Sciences; Blossom Hall, Room 9510 8888 University Drive Burnaby BC Canada V5A 1S6
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Geneen LJ, Moore RA, Clarke C, Martin D, Colvin LA, Smith BH. Physical activity and exercise for chronic pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 4:CD011279. [PMID: 28436583 PMCID: PMC5461882 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011279.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 230] [Impact Index Per Article: 32.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic pain is defined as pain lasting beyond normal tissue healing time, generally taken to be 12 weeks. It contributes to disability, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbances, poor quality of life, and healthcare costs. Chronic pain has a weighted mean prevalence in adults of 20%.For many years, the treatment choice for chronic pain included recommendations for rest and inactivity. However, exercise may have specific benefits in reducing the severity of chronic pain, as well as more general benefits associated with improved overall physical and mental health, and physical functioning.Physical activity and exercise programmes are increasingly being promoted and offered in various healthcare systems, and for a variety of chronic pain conditions. It is therefore important at this stage to establish the efficacy and safety of these programmes, and furthermore to address the critical factors that determine their success or failure. OBJECTIVES To provide an overview of Cochrane Reviews of adults with chronic pain to determine (1) the effectiveness of different physical activity and exercise interventions in reducing pain severity and its impact on function, quality of life, and healthcare use; and (2) the evidence for any adverse effects or harm associated with physical activity and exercise interventions. METHODS We searched theCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) on the Cochrane Library (CDSR 2016, Issue 1) for systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), after which we tracked any included reviews for updates, and tracked protocols in case of full review publication until an arbitrary cut-off date of 21 March 2016 (CDSR 2016, Issue 3). We assessed the methodological quality of the reviews using the AMSTAR tool, and also planned to analyse data for each painful condition based on quality of the evidence.We extracted data for (1) self-reported pain severity, (2) physical function (objectively or subjectively measured), (3) psychological function, (4) quality of life, (5) adherence to the prescribed intervention, (6) healthcare use/attendance, (7) adverse events, and (8) death.Due to the limited data available, we were unable to directly compare and analyse interventions, and have instead reported the evidence qualitatively. MAIN RESULTS We included 21 reviews with 381 included studies and 37,143 participants. Of these, 264 studies (19,642 participants) examined exercise versus no exercise/minimal intervention in adults with chronic pain and were used in the qualitative analysis.Pain conditions included rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, low back pain, intermittent claudication, dysmenorrhoea, mechanical neck disorder, spinal cord injury, postpolio syndrome, and patellofemoral pain. None of the reviews assessed 'chronic pain' or 'chronic widespread pain' as a general term or specific condition. Interventions included aerobic, strength, flexibility, range of motion, and core or balance training programmes, as well as yoga, Pilates, and tai chi.Reviews were well performed and reported (based on AMSTAR), and included studies had acceptable risk of bias (with inadequate reporting of attrition and reporting biases). However the quality of evidence was low due to participant numbers (most included studies had fewer than 50 participants in total), length of intervention and follow-up (rarely assessed beyond three to six months). We pooled the results from relevant reviews where appropriate, though results should be interpreted with caution due to the low quality evidence. Pain severity: several reviews noted favourable results from exercise: only three reviews that reported pain severity found no statistically significant changes in usual or mean pain from any intervention. However, results were inconsistent across interventions and follow-up, as exercise did not consistently bring about a change (positive or negative) in self-reported pain scores at any single point. Physical function: was the most commonly reported outcome measure. Physical function was significantly improved as a result of the intervention in 14 reviews, though even these statistically significant results had only small-to-moderate effect sizes (only one review reported large effect sizes). Psychological function and quality of life: had variable results: results were either favourable to exercise (generally small and moderate effect size, with two reviews reporting significant, large effect sizes for quality of life), or showed no difference between groups. There were no negative effects. Adherence to the prescribed intervention: could not be assessed in any review. However, risk of withdrawal/dropout was slightly higher in the exercising group (82.8/1000 participants versus 81/1000 participants), though the group difference was non-significant. Healthcare use/attendance: was not reported in any review. Adverse events, potential harm, and death: only 25% of included studies (across 18 reviews) actively reported adverse events. Based on the available evidence, most adverse events were increased soreness or muscle pain, which reportedly subsided after a few weeks of the intervention. Only one review reported death separately to other adverse events: the intervention was protective against death (based on the available evidence), though did not reach statistical significance. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The quality of the evidence examining physical activity and exercise for chronic pain is low. This is largely due to small sample sizes and potentially underpowered studies. A number of studies had adequately long interventions, but planned follow-up was limited to less than one year in all but six reviews.There were some favourable effects in reduction in pain severity and improved physical function, though these were mostly of small-to-moderate effect, and were not consistent across the reviews. There were variable effects for psychological function and quality of life.The available evidence suggests physical activity and exercise is an intervention with few adverse events that may improve pain severity and physical function, and consequent quality of life. However, further research is required and should focus on increasing participant numbers, including participants with a broader spectrum of pain severity, and lengthening both the intervention itself, and the follow-up period.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Clare Clarke
- Division of Population Health Sciences, University of DundeeNinewells Hospital & Medical SchoolKirsty Semple WayDundeeUKDD2 4DB
| | - Denis Martin
- Teesside UniversityInstitute of Health and Social CareParksideMiddlesbroughUKTS1 3BA
| | - Lesley A Colvin
- University of Edinburgh, Western General HospitalAnaesthesia & Pain MedicineEdinburghUK
| | - Blair H Smith
- University of DundeeDivision of Population Health SciencesDundeeUKDD2 4BF
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Geneen LJ, Moore RA, Clarke C, Martin D, Colvin LA, Smith BH. Physical activity and exercise for chronic pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 1:CD011279. [PMID: 28087891 PMCID: PMC6469540 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011279.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 339] [Impact Index Per Article: 48.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic pain is defined as pain lasting beyond normal tissue healing time, generally taken to be 12 weeks. It contributes to disability, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbances, poor quality of life, and healthcare costs. Chronic pain has a weighted mean prevalence in adults of 20%.For many years, the treatment choice for chronic pain included recommendations for rest and inactivity. However, exercise may have specific benefits in reducing the severity of chronic pain, as well as more general benefits associated with improved overall physical and mental health, and physical functioning.Physical activity and exercise programmes are increasingly being promoted and offered in various healthcare systems, and for a variety of chronic pain conditions. It is therefore important at this stage to establish the efficacy and safety of these programmes, and furthermore to address the critical factors that determine their success or failure. OBJECTIVES To provide an overview of Cochrane Reviews of adults with chronic pain to determine (1) the effectiveness of different physical activity and exercise interventions in reducing pain severity and its impact on function, quality of life, and healthcare use; and (2) the evidence for any adverse effects or harm associated with physical activity and exercise interventions. METHODS We searched theCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) on the Cochrane Library (CDSR 2016, Issue 1) for systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), after which we tracked any included reviews for updates, and tracked protocols in case of full review publication until an arbitrary cut-off date of 21 March 2016 (CDSR 2016, Issue 3). We assessed the methodological quality of the reviews using the AMSTAR tool, and also planned to analyse data for each painful condition based on quality of the evidence.We extracted data for (1) self-reported pain severity, (2) physical function (objectively or subjectively measured), (3) psychological function, (4) quality of life, (5) adherence to the prescribed intervention, (6) healthcare use/attendance, (7) adverse events, and (8) death.Due to the limited data available, we were unable to directly compare and analyse interventions, and have instead reported the evidence qualitatively. MAIN RESULTS We included 21 reviews with 381 included studies and 37,143 participants. Of these, 264 studies (19,642 participants) examined exercise versus no exercise/minimal intervention in adults with chronic pain and were used in the qualitative analysis.Pain conditions included rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, low back pain, intermittent claudication, dysmenorrhoea, mechanical neck disorder, spinal cord injury, postpolio syndrome, and patellofemoral pain. None of the reviews assessed 'chronic pain' or 'chronic widespread pain' as a general term or specific condition. Interventions included aerobic, strength, flexibility, range of motion, and core or balance training programmes, as well as yoga, Pilates, and tai chi.Reviews were well performed and reported (based on AMSTAR), and included studies had acceptable risk of bias (with inadequate reporting of attrition and reporting biases). However the quality of evidence was low due to participant numbers (most included studies had fewer than 50 participants in total), length of intervention and follow-up (rarely assessed beyond three to six months). We pooled the results from relevant reviews where appropriate, though results should be interpreted with caution due to the low quality evidence. Pain severity: several reviews noted favourable results from exercise: only three reviews that reported pain severity found no statistically significant changes in usual or mean pain from any intervention. However, results were inconsistent across interventions and follow-up, as exercise did not consistently bring about a change (positive or negative) in self-reported pain scores at any single point. Physical function: was the most commonly reported outcome measure. Physical function was significantly improved as a result of the intervention in 14 reviews, though even these statistically significant results had only small-to-moderate effect sizes (only one review reported large effect sizes). Psychological function and quality of life: had variable results: results were either favourable to exercise (generally small and moderate effect size, with two reviews reporting significant, large effect sizes for quality of life), or showed no difference between groups. There were no negative effects. Adherence to the prescribed intervention: could not be assessed in any review. However, risk of withdrawal/dropout was slightly higher in the exercising group (82.8/1000 participants versus 81/1000 participants), though the group difference was non-significant. Healthcare use/attendance: was not reported in any review. Adverse events, potential harm, and death: only 25% of included studies (across 18 reviews) actively reported adverse events. Based on the available evidence, most adverse events were increased soreness or muscle pain, which reportedly subsided after a few weeks of the intervention. Only one review reported death separately to other adverse events: the intervention was protective against death (based on the available evidence), though did not reach statistical significance. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The quality of the evidence examining physical activity and exercise for chronic pain is low. This is largely due to small sample sizes and potentially underpowered studies. A number of studies had adequately long interventions, but planned follow-up was limited to less than one year in all but six reviews.There were some favourable effects in reduction in pain severity and improved physical function, though these were mostly of small-to-moderate effect, and were not consistent across the reviews. There were variable effects for psychological function and quality of life.The available evidence suggests physical activity and exercise is an intervention with few adverse events that may improve pain severity and physical function, and consequent quality of life. However, further research is required and should focus on increasing participant numbers, including participants with a broader spectrum of pain severity, and lengthening both the intervention itself, and the follow-up period.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louise J Geneen
- University of DundeeDivision of Population Health SciencesDundeeUK
| | - R Andrew Moore
- University of OxfordPain Research and Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (Nuffield Division of Anaesthetics)Pain Research UnitChurchill HospitalOxfordUKOX3 7LE
| | - Clare Clarke
- Division of Population Health Sciences, University of DundeeNinewells Hospital & Medical SchoolKirsty Semple WayDundeeUKDD2 4DB
| | - Denis Martin
- Teesside UniversityInstitute of Health and Social CareParksideMiddlesbroughUKTS1 3BA
| | - Lesley A Colvin
- University of Edinburgh, Western General HospitalAnaesthesia & Pain MedicineEdinburghUK
| | - Blair H Smith
- University of DundeeDivision of Population Health SciencesDundeeUK
| |
Collapse
|