4.4 Article

Efficacy of an out-patient pain management programme for people with joint hypermobility syndrome

期刊

CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY
卷 33, 期 11, 页码 1665-1669

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s10067-014-2539-9

关键词

Chronic pain; Cognitive behavioural therapy; Joint hypermobility syndrome; Pain management programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Joint hypermobility syndrome (JHS) is common in patients presenting to rheumatologists and can cause a range of symptoms leading to physical and psychological distress. Chronic musculoskeletal pain in patients with JHS often responds poorly to analgesics, and a pain management approach may be helpful. Since patients with JHS often have beliefs and experiences different to those of other chronic pain patients, they could fare better in JHS-specific programmes. Here, we report on the outcomes of patients in a JHS cognitive behavioural pain management programme. Patients fulfilling the Brighton criteria for JHS, who had suffered pain for at least 3 months, were assessed by a psychologist and physiotherapist for suitability for this programme. Those accepted took part in a programme of 8 days spread over 6 weeks, delivered by a multidisciplinary team and incorporating a cognitive behavioural approach. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 1- and 5-month post-programme using validated outcome measures. Outcome measures at baseline and 1-month were available for 87 patients (96 % female, mean age 35 years). There were significant improvements in self-efficacy, pain catastrophising, depression, anxiety, frustration, impact of pain and average pain intensity (all P < 0.001). Although by 5 months all these outcomes had regressed towards pre-programme levels there remained significant improvements compared to baseline in all except average pain intensity. This open study shows that patients with JHS experienced significant benefits after attending a JHS-specific pain management programme, which were still evident 5 months later. Longer-term controlled studies are required.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据