Psychological interventions for post stroke pain: A systematic review

Chronic pain is prevalent after stroke and has a significant impact on quality of life. Research demonstrates the efficacy of psychological interventions for mixed chronic pain conditions. This review aimed to assess evidence on the effectiveness of psychological interventions for chronic pain in people with stroke. PubMed, PsychINFO, Embase, and CINAHL were searched from inception to 31 January 2021 at all levels of evidence. Psychological interventions assessing chronic pain in adults following stroke as a primary outcome were included. All outcomes related to pain quality were included (e.g., intensity, frequency, duration). Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Reports and Risk of Bias in N-of-1 Trials (RoBiNT) Scale. Three single n case reports were included. A narrative synthesis was performed, indicating that psychological interventions may reduce chronic post-stroke pain; however, overall quality appraisal of the included studies was poor, owing to the low internal validity found in the single-n case report designs. The limited evidence suggests that psychological interventions may have clinical utility in reducing chronic post-stroke pain. However, owing to the paucity and quality of studies found, the results must be treated with caution. More rigorous research is needed.

Relaxation and related therapies for people with multiple sclerosis (MS): A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To establish the effectiveness of relaxation and related therapies in treating Multiple Sclerosis related symptoms and sequelae.

DATA SOURCES

PsycINFO, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global databases were searched.

METHODS

We included studies from database inception until 31 December 2021 involving adult participants diagnosed with multiple sclerosis or disseminated sclerosis, which featured quantitative data regarding the impact of relaxation interventions on multiple sclerosis-related symptoms and sequelae. Studies which examined multi-modal therapies - relaxation delivered in combination with non-relaxation interventions - were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Revised Risk of Bias tool for randomised trials - ROB2, Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions ROBINS-I), and within and between-group effects were calculated (Hedges' g).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. Twenty-three of these were randomised controlled trials, with 1246 total participants. This review reports on this data, with non-randomised study data reported in supplemental material. Post -intervention relaxation was associated with medium to large effect-size improvement for depression, anxiety, stress and fatigue. The effects of relaxation were superior to wait-list or no treatment control conditions; however, comparisons with established psychological or physical therapies were mixed. Individual studies reported sustained effects (≤ 6 months) with relaxation for stress, pain and quality of life. Most studies were rated as having a high/serious risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

There is emerging evidence that relaxation therapies can improve outcomes for persons with multiple sclerosis. Given the high risk of bias found for included studies, stronger conclusions cannot be drawn.