1
|
Navarro-Ledesma S, Hamed-Hamed D, Gonzalez-Muñoz A, Pruimboom L. Impact of physical therapy techniques and common interventions on sleep quality in patients with chronic pain: A systematic review. Sleep Med Rev 2024; 76:101937. [PMID: 38669729 DOI: 10.1016/j.smrv.2024.101937] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2023] [Revised: 03/20/2024] [Accepted: 03/30/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024]
Abstract
This systematic review aims to find effectful healthcare strategies, with special focus on drug-free interventions and physical therapy, as part of the treatment for sleep in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Data search was conducted across seven scientific databases. This review is deposited in the Prospero International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42023452574). Seventeen RCTs from different healthcare fields complied with our inclusion criteria. Two RCTs investigated manual therapy, five RCTs therapeutic exercise, one RCT Fu's subcutaneous needling, two RCTs physical agents (one on balneotherapy and one on cryo-stimulation), two RCTs cognitive-behavioral therapy, and four RCTs pharmacological therapy and their effect on sleep quality and/or quantity in patients suffering from chronic pain. We included the four RCT's in this systematic review with the purpose to be able to compare natural interventions with allopathic ones. As allopathic interventions are more prone to have secondary negative effects than physical therapy, compare the two types of interventions could be in favor of choosing the most effective treatment with the least secondary negative effects. Additionally, two RCTs on neurofeedback and limbic neuromodulation were also included. The results of the included studies suggest that strategies such as manual therapy, therapeutic exercise, Fu's subcutaneous needling, balneotherapy, cryo-stimulation, neurofeedback, limbic neuromodulation, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and pharmacological therapies have positive effects on patients suffering from chronic pain and sleep disturbances, especially when they suffer musculoskeletal pain. Secondary negative effects were found for the possible overuse of certain medicines such as morphine, a huge problem in the United States. Sleep deficiency is an independent risk factor for many diseases, including chronic pain syndrome and therefore more studies are needed to find non-toxic interventions for people suffering sleep disorders associated with systemic diseases and pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Santiago Navarro-Ledesma
- Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Campus of Melilla, University of Granada, Spain; University Chair in Clinical Psychoneuroimmunology (University of Granada and PNI Europe), Spain.
| | - Dina Hamed-Hamed
- Clinical Medicine and Public Health PhD Program, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
| | - Ana Gonzalez-Muñoz
- Clinical Medicine and Public Health PhD Program, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain; Clinica Ana Gonzalez, Avenida Hernan Nuñez de Toledo 6, 29018, Malaga, Spain
| | - Leo Pruimboom
- University Chair in Clinical Psychoneuroimmunology (University of Granada and PNI Europe), Spain
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Henley P, Martins T, Zamani R. Assessing Ethnic Minority Representation in Fibromyalgia Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review of Recruitment Demographics. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2023; 20:7185. [PMID: 38131736 PMCID: PMC10742509 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20247185] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2023] [Revised: 12/04/2023] [Accepted: 12/07/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023]
Abstract
The under-representation of non-White participants in Western countries in clinical research has received increased attention, due to recognized physiological differences between ethnic groups, which may affect the efficacy and optimal dosage of some treatments. This review assessed ethnic diversity in pharmaceutical trials for fibromyalgia, a poorly understood chronic pain disorder. We also investigated longitudinal change to non-White participant proportions in trials and non-White participants' likelihood to discontinue with fibromyalgia research between trial stages (retention). First, we identified relevant trials conducted in the United States and Canada between 2000 and 2022, by searching PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases. In trials conducted both across the United States and Canada, and exclusively within the United States, approximately 90% of participants were White. A longitudinal analysis also found no change in the proportion of non-White participants in trials conducted across the United States and Canada between 2000 and 2022. Finally, we found no significant differences in trial retention between White and non-White participants. This review highlights the low numbers of ethnic minorities in fibromyalgia trials conducted in the United States and Canada, with no change to these proportions over the past 22 years. Furthermore, non-White participants were not more likely to discontinue with the fibromyalgia research once they were recruited.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Reza Zamani
- Medical School, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter EX1 2LU, UK (T.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Birkinshaw H, Friedrich CM, Cole P, Eccleston C, Serfaty M, Stewart G, White S, Moore RA, Phillippo D, Pincus T. Antidepressants for pain management in adults with chronic pain: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 5:CD014682. [PMID: 37160297 PMCID: PMC10169288 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd014682.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/11/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chronic pain is common in adults, and often has a detrimental impact upon physical ability, well-being, and quality of life. Previous reviews have shown that certain antidepressants may be effective in reducing pain with some benefit in improving patients' global impression of change for certain chronic pain conditions. However, there has not been a network meta-analysis (NMA) examining all antidepressants across all chronic pain conditions. OBJECTIVES To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of antidepressants for adults with chronic pain (except headache). SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, AMED and PsycINFO databases, and clinical trials registries, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of antidepressants for chronic pain conditions in January 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA We included RCTs that examined antidepressants for chronic pain against any comparator. If the comparator was placebo, another medication, another antidepressant, or the same antidepressant at different doses, then we required the study to be double-blind. We included RCTs with active comparators that were unable to be double-blinded (e.g. psychotherapy) but rated them as high risk of bias. We excluded RCTs where the follow-up was less than two weeks and those with fewer than 10 participants in each arm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors separately screened, data extracted, and judged risk of bias. We synthesised the data using Bayesian NMA and pairwise meta-analyses for each outcome and ranked the antidepressants in terms of their effectiveness using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). We primarily used Confidence in Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) and Risk of Bias due to Missing Evidence in Network meta-analysis (ROB-MEN) to assess the certainty of the evidence. Where it was not possible to use CINeMA and ROB-MEN due to the complexity of the networks, we used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Our primary outcomes were substantial (50%) pain relief, pain intensity, mood, and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were moderate pain relief (30%), physical function, sleep, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), serious adverse events, and withdrawal. MAIN RESULTS This review and NMA included 176 studies with a total of 28,664 participants. The majority of studies were placebo-controlled (83), and parallel-armed (141). The most common pain conditions examined were fibromyalgia (59 studies); neuropathic pain (49 studies) and musculoskeletal pain (40 studies). The average length of RCTs was 10 weeks. Seven studies provided no useable data and were omitted from the NMA. The majority of studies measured short-term outcomes only and excluded people with low mood and other mental health conditions. Across efficacy outcomes, duloxetine was consistently the highest-ranked antidepressant with moderate- to high-certainty evidence. In duloxetine studies, standard dose was equally efficacious as high dose for the majority of outcomes. Milnacipran was often ranked as the next most efficacious antidepressant, although the certainty of evidence was lower than that of duloxetine. There was insufficient evidence to draw robust conclusions for the efficacy and safety of any other antidepressant for chronic pain. Primary efficacy outcomes Duloxetine standard dose (60 mg) showed a small to moderate effect for substantial pain relief (odds ratio (OR) 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.69 to 2.17; 16 studies, 4490 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and continuous pain intensity (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.31, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.24; 18 studies, 4959 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For pain intensity, milnacipran standard dose (100 mg) also showed a small effect (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.06; 4 studies, 1866 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mirtazapine (30 mg) had a moderate effect on mood (SMD -0.5, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.22; 1 study, 406 participants; low-certainty evidence), while duloxetine showed a small effect (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.22 to -0.1; 26 studies, 7952 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); however it is important to note that most studies excluded participants with mental health conditions, and so average anxiety and depression scores tended to be in the 'normal' or 'subclinical' ranges at baseline already. Secondary efficacy outcomes Across all secondary efficacy outcomes (moderate pain relief, physical function, sleep, quality of life, and PGIC), duloxetine and milnacipran were the highest-ranked antidepressants with moderate-certainty evidence, although effects were small. For both duloxetine and milnacipran, standard doses were as efficacious as high doses. Safety There was very low-certainty evidence for all safety outcomes (adverse events, serious adverse events, and withdrawal) across all antidepressants. We cannot draw any reliable conclusions from the NMAs for these outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Our review and NMAs show that despite studies investigating 25 different antidepressants, the only antidepressant we are certain about for the treatment of chronic pain is duloxetine. Duloxetine was moderately efficacious across all outcomes at standard dose. There is also promising evidence for milnacipran, although further high-quality research is needed to be confident in these conclusions. Evidence for all other antidepressants was low certainty. As RCTs excluded people with low mood, we were unable to establish the effects of antidepressants for people with chronic pain and depression. There is currently no reliable evidence for the long-term efficacy of any antidepressant, and no reliable evidence for the safety of antidepressants for chronic pain at any time point.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hollie Birkinshaw
- Department of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | | | - Peter Cole
- Oxford Pain Relief Unit, Churchill Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK
| | | | | | | | - Simon White
- School of Pharmacy and Bioengineering, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | | | | | - Tamar Pincus
- Department of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Farag HM, Yunusa I, Goswami H, Sultan I, Doucette JA, Eguale T. Comparison of Amitriptyline and US Food and Drug Administration-Approved Treatments for Fibromyalgia: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open 2022; 5:e2212939. [PMID: 35587348 PMCID: PMC9121190 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.12939] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Amitriptyline is an established medication used off-label for the treatment of fibromyalgia, but pregabalin, duloxetine, and milnacipran are the only pharmacological agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat fibromyalgia. OBJECTIVE To investigate the comparative effectiveness and acceptability associated with pharmacological treatment options for fibromyalgia. DATA SOURCES Searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Clinicaltrials.gov were conducted on November 20, 2018, and updated on July 29, 2020. STUDY SELECTION Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing amitriptyline or any FDA-approved doses of investigated drugs. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS This study follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guideline. Four independent reviewers extracted data using a standardized data extraction sheet and assessed quality of RCTs. A random-effects bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted. Data were analyzed from August 2020 to January 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Comparative effectiveness and acceptability (defined as discontinuation of treatment owing to adverse drug reactions) associated with amitriptyline (off-label), pregabalin, duloxetine, and milnacipran (on-label) in reducing fibromyalgia symptoms. The following doses were compared: 60-mg and 120-mg duloxetine; 150-mg, 300-mg, 450-mg, and 600-mg pregabalin; 100-mg and 200-mg milnacipran; and amitriptyline. Effect sizes are reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). Findings were considered statistically significant when the 95% CrI did not include the null value (0 for SMD and 1 for OR). Relative treatment ranking using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was also evaluated. RESULTS A total of 36 studies (11 930 patients) were included. The mean (SD) age of patients was 48.4 (10.4) years, and 11 261 patients (94.4%) were women. Compared with placebo, amitriptyline was associated with reduced sleep disturbances (SMD, -0.97; 95% CrI, -1.10 to -0.83), fatigue (SMD, -0.64; 95% CrI, -0.75 to -0.53), and improved quality of life (SMD, -0.80; 95% CrI, -0.94 to -0.65). Duloxetine 120 mg was associated with the highest improvement in pain (SMD, -0.33; 95% CrI, -0.36 to -0.30) and depression (SMD, -0.25; 95% CrI, -0.32 to -0.17) vs placebo. All treatments were associated with inferior acceptability (higher dropout rate) than placebo, except amitriptyline (OR, 0.78; 95% CrI, 0.31 to 1.66). According to the SUCRA-based relative ranking of treatments, duloxetine 120 mg was associated with higher efficacy for treating pain and depression, while amitriptyline was associated with higher efficacy for improving sleep, fatigue, and overall quality of life. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE These findings suggest that clinicians should consider how treatments could be tailored to individual symptoms, weighing the benefits and acceptability, when prescribing medications to patients with fibromyalgia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hussein M. Farag
- Department of Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston
| | - Ismaeel Yunusa
- Department of Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Outcomes Sciences, College of Pharmacy, University of South Carolina, Colombia
| | - Hardik Goswami
- Department of Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston
- Biostatistics and Research Decision Sciences and Health Economics and Decision Sciences, Merck & Co, North Wales, Pennsylvania
| | - Ihtisham Sultan
- Department of Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston
- Health Economics and Outcomes Research Neuroscience, AbbVie, Cambridge, Massachusetts
| | - Joanne A. Doucette
- Department of Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston
| | - Tewodros Eguale
- Department of Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston
- Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Husak AJ, Bair MJ. Chronic Pain and Sleep Disturbances: A Pragmatic Review of Their Relationships, Comorbidities, and Treatments. PAIN MEDICINE 2020; 21:1142-1152. [DOI: 10.1093/pm/pnz343] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
AbstractObjectiveThe objective of this review is to answer three questions: 1) How are chronic pain severity and pain duration affected in patients with chronic pain and sleep disturbances that occur simultaneously? 2) What are common comorbidities and pain-related symptoms seen in patients with chronic pain and sleep disturbances? and 3) What are potentially effective pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment options for both conditions?MethodsOvid Medline and PubMed were searched. Search terms included sleep wake disorder, chronic pain, fibromyalgia, treatment outcome, psychotherapy, complementary therapies, and therapeutics. Studies that assessed outcomes between individuals with chronic pain and those with concurrent chronic pain and sleep disturbances were included. Randomized controlled clinical trials of treatments for both conditions were included.ResultsSixteen studies indicated that patients with both chronic pain and sleep disturbances have greater pain severity, longer duration of pain, greater disability, and are less physically active than those without sleep disturbances. Patients with both conditions are more likely to have concurrent depression, catastrophizing, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. Thirty-three randomized controlled trials assessed treatment for both chronic pain and sleep disturbances. Pregabalin was the most frequently studied medication, showing improvement in pain and sleep symptoms. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia showed long-term improvement in sleep for patients with chronic pain.ConclusionsIndividuals with chronic pain and sleep disturbances have greater symptom severity, longer duration of symptoms, more disability, and additional comorbidities. Pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments may be useful in the treatment of concurrent chronic pain and sleep disturbances, but further study is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aubrey J Husak
- Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
| | - Matthew J Bair
- Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana
- VA Health Services Research and Development Center for Health Information and Communication, Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana
- Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Everitt H, Baldwin DS, Stuart B, Lipinska G, Mayers A, Malizia AL, Manson CCF, Wilson S. Antidepressants for insomnia in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 5:CD010753. [PMID: 29761479 PMCID: PMC6494576 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd010753.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Insomnia disorder is a subjective condition of unsatisfactory sleep (e.g. sleep onset, maintenance, early waking, impairment of daytime functioning). Insomnia disorder impairs quality of life and is associated with an increased risk of physical and mental health problems including anxiety, depression, drug and alcohol abuse, and increased health service use. hypnotic medications (e.g. benzodiazepines and 'Z' drugs) are licensed for sleep promotion, but can induce tolerance and dependence, although many people remain on long-term treatment. Antidepressant use for insomnia is widespread, but none is licensed for insomnia and the evidence for their efficacy is unclear. This use of unlicensed medications may be driven by concern over longer-term use of hypnotics and the limited availability of psychological treatments. OBJECTIVES To assess the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of antidepressants for insomnia in adults. SEARCH METHODS This review incorporated the results of searches to July 2015 conducted on electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1950 to 2015), Embase (1980 to 2015) and PsycINFO (1806 to 2015). We updated the searches to December 2017, but these results have not yet been incorporated into the review. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults (aged 18 years or older) with a primary diagnosis of insomnia and all participant types including people with comorbidities. Any antidepressant as monotherapy at any dose whether compared with placebo, other medications for insomnia (e.g. benzodiazepines and 'Z' drugs), a different antidepressant, waiting list control or treatment as usual. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and extracted data using a data extraction form. A third review author resolved disagreements on inclusion or data extraction. MAIN RESULTS The search identified 23 RCTs (2806 participants).Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) compared with placebo: three studies (135 participants) compared SSRIs with placebo. Combining results was not possible. Two paroxetine studies showed significant improvements in subjective sleep measures at six (60 participants, P = 0.03) and 12 weeks (27 participants, P < 0.001). There was no difference in the fluoxetine study (low quality evidence).There were either no adverse events or they were not reported (very low quality evidence).Tricyclic antidepressants (TCA) compared with placebo: six studies (812 participants) compared TCA with placebo; five used doxepin and one used trimipramine. We found no studies of amitriptyline. Four studies (518 participants) could be pooled, showing a moderate improvement in subjective sleep quality over placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.56 to -0.21) (moderate quality evidence). Moderate quality evidence suggested that TCAs possibly improved sleep efficiency (mean difference (MD) 6.29 percentage points, 95% CI 3.17 to 9.41; 4 studies; 510 participants) and increased sleep time (MD 22.88 minutes, 95% CI 13.17 to 32.59; 4 studies; 510 participants). There may have been little or no impact on sleep latency (MD -4.27 minutes, 95% CI -9.01 to 0.48; 4 studies; 510 participants).There may have been little or no difference in adverse events between TCAs and placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.02, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.21; 6 studies; 812 participants) (low quality evidence).'Other' antidepressants with placebo: eight studies compared other antidepressants with placebo (one used mianserin and seven used trazodone). Three studies (370 participants) of trazodone could be pooled, indicating a moderate improvement in subjective sleep outcomes over placebo (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.02). Two studies of trazodone measured polysomnography and found little or no difference in sleep efficiency (MD 1.38 percentage points, 95% CI -2.87 to 5.63; 169 participants) (low quality evidence).There was low quality evidence from two studies of more adverse effects with trazodone than placebo (i.e. morning grogginess, increased dry mouth and thirst). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS We identified relatively few, mostly small studies with short-term follow-up and design limitations. The effects of SSRIs compared with placebo are uncertain with too few studies to draw clear conclusions. There may be a small improvement in sleep quality with short-term use of low-dose doxepin and trazodone compared with placebo. The tolerability and safety of antidepressants for insomnia is uncertain due to limited reporting of adverse events. There was no evidence for amitriptyline (despite common use in clinical practice) or for long-term antidepressant use for insomnia. High-quality trials of antidepressants for insomnia are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hazel Everitt
- University of SouthamptonPrimary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of MedicineAldermoor Health CentreAldermoor CloseSouthamptonUKSO16 5ST
| | - David S Baldwin
- University of SouthamptonUniversity Department of Psychiatry, Faculty of MedicineSouthamptonUK
| | - Beth Stuart
- University of SouthamptonPrimary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of MedicineAldermoor Health CentreAldermoor CloseSouthamptonUKSO16 5ST
| | - Gosia Lipinska
- University of Cape TownUCT Sleep Sciences, Department of PsychologyCape TownSouth Africa
| | - Andrew Mayers
- Bournemouth UniversityDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Science and TechnologyPoole House, Talbot CampusFern BarrowPooleUKBH12 5BB
| | - Andrea L Malizia
- The Burden Centre, Frenchay hospitalDepartment of NeurosurgeryBristolUKBS16 1LE
| | - Christopher CF Manson
- Faculty of Medicine, University of SouthamptonUniversity Department of PsychiatryAcademic Centre, College Keep 4‐12 Terminus TerraceSouthamptonUKSO14 3DT
| | - Sue Wilson
- Imperial College LondonCentre for Neuropsychopharmacology, Division of Brain SciencesBurlington Danes BuildingHammersmith Hospital campusLondonUKW12 0NN
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Welsch P, Üçeyler N, Klose P, Walitt B, Häuser W. Serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) for fibromyalgia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 2:CD010292. [PMID: 29489029 PMCID: PMC5846183 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd010292.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fibromyalgia is a clinically defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterized by chronic widespread pain that often co-exists with sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction and fatigue. People with fibromyalgia often report high disability levels and poor quality of life. Drug therapy, for example, with serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), focuses on reducing key symptoms and improving quality of life. This review updates and extends the 2013 version of this systematic review. OBJECTIVES To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) compared with placebo or other active drug(s) in the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults. SEARCH METHODS For this update we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the US National Institutes of Health and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for published and ongoing trials and examined the reference lists of reviewed articles, to 8 August 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA We selected randomized, controlled trials of any formulation of SNRIs against placebo or any other active treatment of fibromyalgia in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Three review authors independently extracted data, examined study quality, and assessed risk of bias. For efficacy, we calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) for pain relief of 50% or greater and of 30% or greater, patient's global impression to be much or very much improved, dropout rates due to lack of efficacy, and the standardized mean differences (SMD) for fatigue, sleep problems, health-related quality of life, mean pain intensity, depression, anxiety, disability, sexual function, cognitive disturbances and tenderness. For tolerability we calculated number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for withdrawals due to adverse events and for nausea, insomnia and somnolence as specific adverse events. For safety we calculated NNTH for serious adverse events. We undertook meta-analysis using a random-effects model. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS We added eight new studies with 1979 participants for a total of 18 included studies with 7903 participants. Seven studies investigated duloxetine and nine studies investigated milnacipran against placebo. One study compared desvenlafaxine with placebo and pregabalin. One study compared duloxetine with L-carnitine. The majority of studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in three to five domains.The quality of evidence of all comparisons of desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran versus placebo in studies with a parallel design was low due to concerns about publication bias and indirectness, and very low for serious adverse events due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness. The quality of evidence of all comparisons of duloxetine and desvenlafaxine with other active drugs was very low due to concerns about publication bias, imprecision and indirectness.Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit over placebo for pain relief of 50% or greater: 1274 of 4104 (31%) on duloxetine and milnacipran reported pain relief of 50% or greater compared to 591 of 2814 (21%) participants on placebo (risk difference (RD) 0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.11; NNTB 11, 95% CI 9 to 14). Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit over placebo in patient's global impression to be much or very much improved: 888 of 1710 (52%) on duloxetine and milnacipran (RD 0.19, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.26; NNTB 5, 95% CI 4 to 8) reported to be much or very much improved compared to 354 of 1208 (29%) of participants on placebo. Duloxetine and milnacipran had a clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo for pain relief of 30% or greater. RD was 0.10; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.12; NNTB 10, 95% CI 8 to 12. Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit for fatigue (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.08; NNTB 18, 95% CI 12 to 29), compared to placebo. There were no differences between either duloxetine or milnacipran and placebo in reducing sleep problems (SMD -0.07; 95 % CI -0.15 to 0.01). Duloxetine and milnacipran had no clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo in improving health-related quality of life (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.15; NNTB 11, 95% CI 8 to 14).There were 794 of 4166 (19%) participants on SNRIs who dropped out due to adverse events compared to 292 of 2863 (10%) of participants on placebo (RD 0.07, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.10; NNTH 14, 95% CI 10 to 25). There was no difference in serious adverse events between either duloxetine, milnacipran or desvenlafaxine and placebo (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.00).There was no difference between desvenlafaxine and placebo in efficacy, tolerability and safety in one small trial.There was no difference between duloxetine and desvenlafaxine in efficacy, tolerability and safety in two trials with active comparators (L-carnitine, pregabalin). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The update did not change the major findings of the previous review. Based on low- to very low-quality evidence, the SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in the frequency of pain relief of 50% or greater, but for patient's global impression to be much or very much improved and in the frequency of pain relief of 30% or greater there was a clinically relevant benefit. The SNRIs duloxetine and milnacipran provided no clinically relevant benefit over placebo in improving health-related quality of life and in reducing fatigue. Duloxetine and milnacipran did not significantly differ from placebo in reducing sleep problems. The dropout rates due to adverse events were higher for duloxetine and milnacipran than for placebo. On average, the potential benefits of duloxetine and milnacipran in fibromyalgia were outweighed by their potential harms. However, a minority of people with fibromyalgia might experience substantial symptom relief without clinically relevant adverse events with duloxetine or milnacipran.We did not find placebo-controlled studies with other SNRIs than desvenlafaxine, duloxetine and milnacipran.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patrick Welsch
- Health Care Center for Pain Medicine and Mental Health, Saarbrücken, Germany
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Choy EH. Current treatments to counter sleep dysfunction as a pathogenic stimulus of fibromyalgia. Pain Manag 2016; 6:339-46. [PMID: 27312978 DOI: 10.2217/pmt-2016-0009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Fibromyalgia is characterized by chronic widespread pain, fatigue and nonrestorative sleep. Polysomnography showed reduced short-wave sleep and abnormal alpha rhythms during nonrapid eye movement sleep in patients with fibromyalgia. However, sleep dysfunction might be pathogenic in fibromyalgia since myalgia and fatigue could be induced in healthy individuals by disrupting sleep. Poor sleep quality was a major risk factor for the subsequent development of chronic widespread pain in healthy pain-free individuals. Sleep disruption leads to impairment of the descending pain inhibition pathways. Aside from good sleep, hygiene, exercise can promote sleep. Among currently available pharmacological treatments, evidence suggests amitriptyline and pregabalin can improve sleep in fibromyalgia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ernest H Choy
- Section of Rheumatology, Institute of Infection & Immunity, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| |
Collapse
|