Relaxation Training in School Classes Does Not Reduce Headache Complaints

Passchier, Jan; Bree, Marianne Bernadette van den; Emmen, Harry; Osterhaus, S. O. L.; Orlebeke, J.F.; Verhage, F.

doi:10.1111/j.1526-4610.1990.hed3010660.x

Cited by 31 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(8 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar outcomes after treatment have also been found for occlusal appliance therapy in a study on adults with TMD (8). Reductions in the frequency of pain following relaxation treatment have been reported in previous studies of adolescents suffering from recurrent headaches (23,27). Furthermore, differences between the treatment groups were found to be high in that the effect sizes for reduction of pain symptoms were 9±10% (28), thus indicating a high clinical relevance.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Treatment of temporomandibular disorders among adolescents: a comparison between occlusal appliance, relaxation training, and brief information

Wahlund

List

Larsson

2003

Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a randomized trial the effects of occlusal appliance and relaxation therapy, each combined with brief information, were compared with brief information only, in adolescents with temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain. One-hundred-and-twenty-two adolescents (93 F and 29 M aged 12-18 years) were randomly assigned to one of the following 3 groups: brief information + occlusal appliance (BI + OA), brief information + relaxation therapy (BI + RT), or brief information (BI). Included were subjects reporting pain once a week or more often, in addition to receiving a diagnosis of TMD according to the Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC/TMD). They were evaluated before and after treatment and at a 6-month follow-up by means of self-reports and clinical assessment. The result revealed a significantly higher reduction in frequency of pain, in pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]), and in a composite pain index (intensity x frequency) for patients treated with BI + OA compared with those treated with BI alone. In the BI + OA group, 60% of the patients attained a clinically significant improvement (at least 50% or more) on the pain index, a significantly higher proportion compared to that obtained in the other 2 treatment groups. Analgesic consumption was also significantly more reduced in the BI + OA group compared to the BI group. However, no significant differences were found between the treatment groups in jaw opening or in muscle and TMJ tenderness scores. Occlusal appliance was found to be superior to both relaxation therapy and brief information regarding pain reduction and can therefore be recommended when treating adolescents with TMD pain.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Treatment of temporomandibular disorders among adolescents: a comparison between occlusal appliance, relaxation training, and brief information

Wahlund

List

Larsson

2003

Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Five studies that were previously included, were excluded from this review since treatment was delivered remotely (Connelly 2006; Hicks 2006; Palermo 2009; Stinson 2010; Trautmann 2010). Therefore, a total of 37 RCTs are included (39 papers) (Abram 2007; Alfven 2007; Barakat 2010; Barry 1997; Bussone 1998; Duarte 2006; Fichtel 2001; Gil 1997; Griffiths 1996; Grob 2013; Gulewitsch 2013; Hechler 2014; Humphreys 2000; Kashikar-Zuck 2005; Kashikar-Zuck 2012; Kroener-Herwig 2002; Labbe 1984; Labbe 1995; Larsson 1987a; Larsson 1987b; Larsson 1990; Larsson 1996; Levy 2010; McGrath 1988; McGrath 1992; Osterhaus 1997; Passchier 1990; Powers 2013; Richter 1986; Robins 2005; Sanders 1994; Sartory 1998; Scharff 2002; van der Veek 2013; van Tilburg 2009; Vlieger 2007; Wicksell 2009). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The interventions were categorised into three broad groups. The first is best described as behavioural, typically relaxation-based, with or without biofeedback, and including autogenic or hypnotherapeutic content (Bussone 1998; Fichtel 2001; Labbe 1984; Labbe 1995; Larsson 1987a; Larsson 1987b; Larsson 1990; Larsson 1996; McGrath 1988; McGrath 1992; Passchier 1990; Vlieger 2007). The second is best described as cognitive behavioural therapy, including cognitive coping, coping skills training, and parent behavioural strategies (Abram 2007; Alfven 2007; Barakat 2010; Barry 1997; Duarte 2006; Gil 1997; Griffiths 1996; Grob 2013; Gulewitsch 2013; Humphreys 2000; Kashikar-Zuck 2005; Kashikar-Zuck 2012; Kroener-Herwig 2002; Levy 2010; McGrath 1992; Osterhaus 1997; Powers 2013; Richter 1986; Robins 2005; Sanders 1994; Sartory 1998; Scharff 2002; van der Veek 2013; van Tilburg 2009; Wicksell 2009).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological therapies for the management of chronic and recurrent pain in children and adolescents

Eccleston

Palermo

Williams

et al. 2014

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

325

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This is an update of the original Cochrane review first published in Issue 1, 2003, and previously updated in 2009 and 2012. Chronic pain affects many children, who report severe pain, disability, and distressed mood. Psychological therapies are emerging as effective interventions to treat children with chronic or recurrent pain. This update focuses specifically on psychological therapies delivered face-to-face, adds new randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and additional data from previously included trials. Objectives There were three objectives to this review. First, to determine the effectiveness on clinical outcomes of pain severity, disability, depression, and anxiety of psychological therapy delivered face-to-face for chronic and recurrent pain in children and adolescents compared with active treatment, waiting-list, or standard medical care. Second, to evaluate the impact of psychological therapies on depression and anxiety, which were previously combined as ‘mood’. Third, we assessed the risk of bias of the included studies and the quality of outcomes using the GRADE criteria. Search methods Searches were undertaken of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO. We searched for further RCTs in the references of all identified studies, meta-analyses, and reviews. Trial registry databases were also searched. The date of most recent search was January 2014. Selection criteria RCTs with at least 10 participants in each arm post-treatment comparing psychological therapies with active treatment, standard medical care, or waiting-list control for children or adolescents with episodic, recurrent or persistent pain were eligible for inclusion. Only trials conducted in person (face-to-face) were considered. Studies that delivered treatment remotely were excluded from this update. Data collection and analysis All included studies were analysed and the quality of outcomes were assessed. All treatments were combined into one class, psychological treatments. Pain conditions were split into headache and non-headache. Both conditions were assessed on four outcomes: pain, disability, depression, and anxiety. Data were extracted at two time points; post-treatment (immediately or the earliest data available following end of treatment) and at follow-up (between three and 12 months post-treatment). Main results Seven papers were identified in the updated search. Of these papers, five presented new trials and two presented follow-up data for previously included trials. Five studies that were previously included in this review were excluded as therapy was delivered remotely. The review thus included a total of 37 studies. The total number of participants completing treatments was 2111. Twenty studies addressed treatments for headache (including migraine); nine for abdominal pain; two for mixed pain conditions including headache pain, two for fibromyalgia, two for recurrent abdominal pain or irritable bowel syndrome, and two for pain associated with sickle cell disease. Analyses revealed psychological therapi...

show abstract

“…However, five studies were later excluded because they did not meet the minimum criteria of 10 participants in each arm, therefore, leaving 29 studies. The third, which searched databases from 2008 to March 2012 yielded 851 abstracts, of which 25 papers were read in full, and eight further RCTs were included in the review, giving a total of 37 RCTs (Abram 2007; Alfven 2007; Barakat 2010; Barry 1997; Bussone 1998; Connelly 2006; Duarte 2006; Fichtel 2001; Gil 1997; Griffiths 1996; Hicks 2006; Humphreys 2000; Kashikar-Zuck 2005; Kashikar-Zuck 2012; Kroener-Herwig 2002; Labbe 1984; Labbe 1995; Larsson 1987a; Larsson 1987b; Larsson 1990; Larsson 1996; Levy 2010; Palermo 2009; McGrath 1988; McGrath 1992; Osterhaus 1997; Passchier 1990; Richter 1986;Robins 2005; Sanders 1994; Sartory 1998; Scharff 2002; Stinson 2010; Trautmann 2010; van Tilburg 2009; Vlieger 2007; Wicksell 2009). Nine further studies did not meet the inclusion criteria and were excluded (Fentress 1986; Kroener-Herwig 1998; Larsson 1986; Olness 1987;Sanders 1989; Trautmann 2008; Vlieger 2012; Weydert 2006; Youssef 2009).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The interventions were categorised into two broad groups. The first is best described as behavioural, typically relaxation based, with or without biofeedback, and including autogenic or hypnotherapeutic content (Bussone 1998; Fichtel 2001; Labbe 1984; Labbe 1995; Larsson 1987a; Larsson 1987b; Larsson 1990; Larsson 1996; McGrath 1988; McGrath 1992; Passchier 1990; Vlieger 2007). The second is best described as cognitive behavioural therapy, including cognitive coping, coping skills training, and parent operant strategies (Abram 2007; Alfven 2007; Barakat 2010; Barry 1997; Connelly 2006; Duarte 2006; Gil 1997; Griffiths 1996; Hicks 2006; Humphreys 2000; Kashikar-Zuck 2005; Kashikar-Zuck 2012; Kroener-Herwig 2002; Levy 2010; McGrath 1992; Osterhaus 1997; Palermo 2009; Richter 1986; Robins 2005; Sanders 1994; Sartory 1998; Scharff 2002; Stinson 2010; Trautmann 2010; van Tilburg 2009; Wicksell 2009).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological therapies for the management of chronic and recurrent pain in children and adolescents

Eccleston

Palermo

Williams

et al. 2012

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Chronic pain affects many children, who report severe pain, distressed mood, and disability. Psychological therapies are emerging as effective interventions to treat children with chronic or recurrent pain. This update adds recently published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to the review published in 2009. Objectives To assess the effectiveness of psychological therapies, principally cognitive behavioural therapy and behavioural therapy, for reducing pain, disability, and improving mood in children and adolescents with recurrent, episodic, or persistent pain. We also assessed the risk of bias and methodological quality of the included studies. Search methods Searches were undertaken of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycLIT. We searched for RCTs in references of all identified studies, meta-analyses and reviews. Date of most recent search: March 2012. Selection criteria RCTs with at least 10 participants in each arm post-treatment comparing psychological therapies with active treatment were eligible for inclusion (waiting list or standard medical care) for children or adolescents with episodic, recurrent or persistent pain. Data collection and analysis All included studies were analysed and the quality of the studies recorded. All treatments were combined into one class: psychological treatments; headache and non-headache outcomes were separately analysed on three outcomes: pain, disability, and mood. Data were extracted at two time points; post-treatment (immediately or the earliest data available following end of treatment) and at follow-up (at least three months after the post-treatment assessment point, but not more than 12 months). Main results Eight studies were added in this update of the review, giving a total of 37 studies. The total number of participants completing treatments was 1938. Twenty-one studies addressed treatments for headache (including migraine); seven for abdominal pain; four included mixed pain conditions including headache pain, two for fibromyalgia, two for pain associated with sickle cell disease, and one for juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Analyses revealed five significant effects. Pain was found to improve for headache and non-headache groups at post-treatment, and for the headache group at follow-up. Mood significantly improved for the headache group at follow-up, although, this should be interpreted with caution as there were only two small studies entered into the analysis. Finally, disability significantly improved in the non-headache group at post-treatment. There were no other significant effects. Authors’ conclusions Psychological treatments are effective in reducing pain intensity for children and adolescents (<18 years) with headache and benefits from therapy appear to be maintained. Psychological treatments also improve pain and disability for children with non-headache pain. There is limited evidence available to estimate the effects of psychological therapies on mood for children and adolescents with headache and non-headache pain. There is also limite...

show abstract

Relaxation Training in School Classes Does Not Reduce Headache Complaints

Cited by 31 publications

References 7 publications

Treatment of temporomandibular disorders among adolescents: a comparison between occlusal appliance, relaxation training, and brief information

Treatment of temporomandibular disorders among adolescents: a comparison between occlusal appliance, relaxation training, and brief information

Psychological therapies for the management of chronic and recurrent pain in children and adolescents

Psychological therapies for the management of chronic and recurrent pain in children and adolescents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About