ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2025
Light at the end of the tunnel: design, implementation and outcomes of a pelvic pain management programme.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) is a complex, prevalent condition that significantly impacts quality of life, work, relationships, and healthcare resources. Management remains challenging, with variation in practice and no national consensus. Evidence supports a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. Objectives: To describe the design, implementation, and outcomes of a multidisciplinary Pelvic Pain Management Programme (PPMP), reporting results from four programme cycles. Methods: The PPMP was developed using behaviour-change principles and delivered over 12 weekly sessions. Participants completed validated psychometric questionnaires at baseline, programme completion, and 3-month follow-up. Change was analysed using repeated-measures ANOVA and clinical significance assessed using the Minimal Clinically Important Difference or the Reliable Change Index. Main Outcome Measures: Psychometric questionnaires assessed the following outcome measures: pain intensity, pain self-efficacy, kinesiophobia, anxiety, depression, patient activation, health-related quality of life, pain acceptance, and catastrophising. Results: Thirty-three participants completed the programme, with 19 full datasets. A statistically significant improvement was recorded across all measures, except for anxiety. At the 3-month follow-up, 79% of participants reported a clinically significant improvement in several areas. Notably, 82% of participants showed clinically significant improvement in pain self-efficacy, 74% in depression, and 81% in pain catastrophising at programme completion. Conclusions: A PPMP is feasible, acceptable, and associated with significant and sustained improvements across biopsychosocial outcomes. Tailored PMPs may address gaps in CPP care and support long-term recovery. What is New?: This represents the largest published dataset evaluating a PPMP. These results highlight the potential of PPMPs to achieve pain reduction and sustainable improvement in quality of life for individuals with CPP.
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.