Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35301593›Full record

ReviewSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2022

[Innovative interventions in pain physiotherapy : Advancing care for people with chronic pain].

Axel Georg Meender Schäfer

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 98% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Axel Georg Meender SchäferFakultät Soziale Arbeit und Gesundheit, Hochschule für angewandte Wissenschaft und Kunst, Goschentor 1, 31134, Hildesheim, Deutschland. axel.schaefer@hawk.de.
University of Applied Sciences and Arts Hildesheim/Holzminden/Göttingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic pain, with a prevalence of at least 17%, is a costly health problem associated with a high burden of disease. Musculoskeletal chronic pain is particulary common, which in many cases is treated with physiotherapy.

aimThe aim of this paper is to provide an overview of innovative, promising physiotherapy interventions in pain management, to present their effectiveness and to discuss their implementation in healthcare.

methodsA narrative review was conducted. The Cochrane, Medline (via PubMed) and PEDro databases were searched using the search terms chronic pain, physiotherapy, prevention, pain education, behavioural intervention, eHealth, and systematic review as well as chronic pain, guideline and relevant synonyms.

resultsOne guideline review, two guidelines and ten systematic reviews were included. Chronic pain prevention, digital health apps, lifestyle interventions and behavioural approaches were identified as promising and effective interventions for people with chronic pain, showing the potential to meaningfully complement pain physiotherapy and improve quality of care.

conclusionsDespite the predominantly positive results from systematic reviews, implementation in everyday care is difficult due to conditions of care and the contemporary education system for physiotherapists in Germany. Health services research can play an important role in accelerating the transfer of innovations into practice.

Indexed as

Chronic PainPain ManagementPhysical Therapy ModalitiesGermanyHumansLife StyleMobile ApplicationsPractice Guidelines as TopicSystematic Reviews as TopicCognitive-behavioural therapyEducationeHealthLifestyle interventionReview

Identifiers

PMID35301593
OpenAlexW4220920568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.