• J Clin Med · Jul 2020

    Pain Neuroscience Education Plus Usual Care Is More Effective Than Usual Care Alone to Improve Self-Efficacy Beliefs in People with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Non-Randomized Controlled Trial.

    • Antonio Rondon-Ramos, Javier Martinez-Calderon, Juan Luis Diaz-Cerrillo, Francisco Rivas-Ruiz, Gina Rocio Ariza-Hurtado, Susana Clavero-Cano, and Alejandro Luque-Suarez.
    • Servicio Andaluz de Salud, Distrito de Atención Primaria Costa del Sol, U.G.C. Las Lagunas, 29650 Mijas, Málaga, Spain.
    • J Clin Med. 2020 Jul 11; 9 (7).

    AbstractSelf-efficacy beliefs are associated with less physical impairment and pain intensity in people with chronic pain. Interventions that build self-efficacy beliefs may foster behavioral changes among this population. A non-randomized trial has been carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of pain neuroscience education (PNE) plus usual care in modifying self-efficacy beliefs, pain intensity, pain interference and analgesics consumption in people with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Participants were allocated to an experimental (PNE plus usual care, n = 49) and a control (usual care alone, n = 51) group. The primary outcome was self-efficacy beliefs (Chronic Pain Self-Efficacy Scale), and the secondary outcomes were pain intensity, pain interference (Graded Chronic Pain Scale) and analgesics consumption. The participant's pain knowledge (revised Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire) after PNE intervention was also assessed to analyze its influence on every outcome measure. All the outcome measures were assessed at the baseline and at four-week and four-month follow-ups. PNE plus usual care was more effective than usual care alone to increase self-efficacy beliefs and decrease pain intensity and pain interference at all follow-up points. No differences between groups were found in terms of analgesics consumption. Knowledge of pain neurophysiology did not modify the effects of PNE plus usual care in any of the outcome measures. These results should be taken with caution because of the non-randomized nature of this design, the limited follow-ups and the uncertainty of the presence of clinical changes in self-efficacy for participants. Larger, methodological sound trials are needed.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.