QuestionThis review compares mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) to cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) in its ability to improve physical functioning and reduce pain intensity and distress in patients with chronic pain (CP), when evaluated against control conditions.Study selection and analysisOvid MEDLINE, EmbaseClassic+Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomised controlled trials. The primary outcome measure was physical functioning. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity and depression symptoms. We used random and fixed effects (RE and FE) network meta-analyses (NMA) to compare MBSR, CBT and control interventions on the standardised mean difference scale.FindingsTwenty-one studies were included: 13 CBT vs control (n=1095), 7 MBSR vs control (n=545) and 1 MBSR vs CBT vs control (n=341). Of the 21 articles, 12 were determined to be of fair or good quality. Findings from RE NMA for change in physical functioning, pain intensity and depression revealed clinically important advantages relative to control for MBSR and CBT, but no evidence of an important difference between MBSR and CBT was found.ConclusionsThis review suggests that MBSR offers another potentially helpful intervention for CP management. Additional research using consistent measures is required to guide decisions about providing CBT or MBSR.
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BC) survivors frequently report changes in cognition after chemotherapy. Mindfulness may benefit survivors by mitigating cancer-related cognitive impairment. As part of a larger study investigating the effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) for BC survivors living with neuropathic pain, the authors assessed whether MBSR would have an effect on cognitive outcomes. METHODS: Participants were randomized to an MBSR intervention group (n = 30) or a waitlist control group (n = 30). Cognitive assessments were administered at 3 time points: at baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 months post-MBSR in the intervention group and at equivalent time intervals for the control group. Multilevel models were used to assess whether MBSR significantly improved task performance at each time point. RESULTS: MBSR participants showed a significantly greater reduction in prospective and retrospective memory failures at 2 weeks postintervention. No effects of MBSR were noted for objective assessments. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that MBSR training reduces subjective (but not objective) memory-related impairments in BC survivors who receive treatment with chemotherapy. This study provides insight into a noninvasive intervention to ameliorate memory difficulties in BC survivors.
Introduction:
Chronic pain (CP) is a common driver of emergency department (ED) visits despite the ED not being the ideal setting for CP because of increased risk of adverse events and high costs.
Purpose:
The purpose of this study is to understand factors contributing to CP-related ED visits, patients' care experiences, and patients' perspectives on alternatives to the ED.
Methods:
We used a mixed-methods design combining semi-structured interviews and questionnaires with 12 patients with CP who had 12 or more ED visits over 1 year. We analyzed test scores using descriptive statistics and interviews using applied thematic analysis.
Results:
Four themes emerged. Factors contributing to ED visits included the following: fear (e.g., pain and its impact); inability to cope with pain; family suggestions to go to the ED; and access to other services and resources. Patients had validating and invalidating experiences in the ED: needs were met or not met; and feeling acknowledged or unacknowledged. Patients' experiences with their family physician included feeling supported or unsupported. Alternatives to the ED included working with an interdisciplinary team, developing personalized care plans, and increased community-based resources.
Conclusions:
Patients with CP and frequent ED use present with complex pain and care experiences, requiring careful attention to management strategies and the patient–provider relationship.
Objective
Chronic neuropathic pain (CNP) is a common condition cancer survivors experience. Mindfulness training may be one approach to address the psychosocial factors associated with CNP. The purpose of this study was to understand patients’ experiences in an 8-week online mindfulness-based program (MBP), including techniques and skills learned and applied, barriers to practice, and research experiences.
Methods
Nineteen participants who were part of a randomized controlled trial consented to participate in a telephone interview or submit written responses via email post-course. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using the principles of Applied Thematic Analysis (ATA).
Results
Predominant themes identified in participant interviews included (1) common humanity, (2) convenience, (3) teacher resonance, (4) perceived relaxation and calm, (5) pain and stress management, (6) half-day session, and (7) mindful breathing. Participants also identified helpful strategies learned and implemented from the course, as well as barriers to practice, and key components of their experiences in a randomized controlled trial, including a sense of disconnection post-course and needing continued ongoing sessions, and the importance of the facilitators’ skills in creating a comfortable and supportive space.
Conclusions
An online group-based MBP may offer a more accessible resource and form of psychosocial intervention and support for cancer survivors living with CNP. Furthermore, the need and consideration for implementing ongoing group maintenance sessions to minimize participants’ feelings of disconnect and abandonment post-course and post-study are warranted in future MBP development.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.