Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33119705›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2020

Low theoretical fidelity hinders the research on health coaching for opioid reduction: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Natalie A McNerney, Michael J Losensky, Madison M Lash, Kendal R Rozaieski, Daniela Ortiz, Alessandra N Garcia, Zachary D Rethorn

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Natalie A McNerneyPhysical Therapy Division, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8489-9767
Michael J LosenskyPhysical Therapy Division, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Madison M LashPhysical Therapy Division, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Kendal R RozaieskiPhysical Therapy Division, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Daniela OrtizPhysical Therapy Division, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Alessandra N GarciaPhysical Therapy Division, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Zachary D RethornPhysical Therapy Division, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6412-0894
Duke University Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo systematically review the literature in order to evaluate the effects of health coaching on patients' reduction of opioid usage and opioid discontinuation. In addition, this systematic review investigated the effects of health coaching on pain intensity, physical function, and quality of life.

methodsFour electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and PsychINFO) were searched from inception to December 2019. Randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of health coaching interventions in adult patients currently using opioids were included. We considered trials if they included any of the four defined key constructs of health coaching adopted in this review: motivational interviewing, positive psychology, the transtheoretical model, and self-determination theory Independent reviewers screened and selected studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB2) and quality of evidence using Grading, Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). The review is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databased as CRD42019136201. It was not possible to perform a meta-analysis due to heterogeneity between included trials.

resultsEleven studies met our inclusion criteria (n = 4,516 participants). No study assessed all four constructs of health coaching. All eleven studies utilized only one of the constructs, brief motivational interviewing. Thus, we reported our results in terms of motivational interviewing. There is conflicting and very low quality of evidence that brief motivational interviewing may or may not be more effective than education to reduce opioid usage. There is very low quality of evidence that brief motivational interviewing is more effective than educational monthly diaries to reduce opioid use. There is very low to low quality of evidence that brief motivational interviewing is not more effective than no behavioral intervention to reduce opioid use at 6 months follow-up, treatment as usual (TAU) to improve overdose risk behaviors, and TAU to improve physical and psychological health.

conclusionThere is no direct evidence related to the effect of health coaching on opioid reduction. There is limited, low quality evidence to conclude brief motivational interviewing reduces opioid usage in opioid-dependent patients. Future research should focus on the impact of high theoretical health coaching interventions on opioid usage.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidOutcome Assessment, Health CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHealth PromotionHumansAnalgesics, Opioid

Identifiers

PMID33119705
PMCPMC7595321
OpenAlexW3094816054

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.