Observational studyPain medicine (Malden, Mass.)2025
The efficacy of an interdisciplinary pain management program for complex regional pain syndrome compared to low back pain and chronic widespread pain: an observational study.
Observational study in Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond device parameters: psychological predictors of spinal cord stimulation success and their neurobiological mechanisms-a narrative review.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- Tailoring Treatment in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: A Comparative Study of Therapeutic Approaches in Complex Rehabilitation.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle research has assessed the efficacy of interdisciplinary pain management programs (IPMPs) for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), whereas evidence shows that IPMPs are effective for low back pain (LBP) and chronic widespread pain (CWP). This study aimed to determine whether outcomes following an IPMP differ for people with CRPS compared to LBP and CWP. In addition, we determined whether it is possible to predict IPMP outcomes using baseline characteristics.
methodsPeople with CRPS (N = 66) who had completed a 3-week IPMP were compared with age- and gender- matched controls with LBP (N = 66) and CWP (N = 66). Measures of pain intensity, pain interference and psychological factors were extracted for pre- and post-program, and at 1, 6, and 12 months. Latent class analysis identified recovery trajectories for pain intensity and pain interference, and χ2 analyses assessed differences between diagnostic groups in recovery trajectories. Machine learning models were implemented to predict recovery trajectories from baseline scores.
resultsTwo recovery trajectories for each dependent variable (pain interference and for pain intensity) were identified: Good responders and poorer responders. Following IPMPs, 37% of people belonged to a good responder recovery trajectory for pain interference, and 11% belonged to a good responder recovery trajectory for pain intensity. Recovery trajectories were similar across the three diagnostic groups (CRPS, LBP, CWP) for pain interference (χ2 = 1.8, P = .4) and intensity (χ = 0.2, P = .9). Modeling to predict outcomes correctly classified 69% of cases for pain interference and 88% of cases for pain intensity recovery trajectories using baseline scores.
conclusionPeople with CRPS, LBP, and CWP experience similar benefits following an IPMP. This supports the use of IPMPs for people with CRPS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.