“…Another review of psychological treatment of headaches concluded that higher treatment dose leads to better pain scores posttreatment. 38 The studies included in this review delivered biofeedback in a clinic, which is time-consuming for the patient and hampers the widespread delivery of treatment, despite its positive results in treating headache. This finding has led to the emergence of less time-consuming approaches, such as prudent limited office treatment and Internet-based delivery.…”
CONTEXT: Migraine is a common problem in children and adolescents, but few satisfactory prophylactic treatments exist.
OBJECTIVE:Our goal was to investigate the pooled evidence for the effectiveness of using biofeedback to reduce childhood migraine.DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was conducted across the databases Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PsychINFO.STUDY SELECTION: Prospective, randomized controlled trials of biofeedback for migraine among children and adolescents were located in the search.DATA EXTRACTION: Data on reduction of mean attack frequency and a series of secondary outcomes, including adverse events, were extracted. Risk of bias was also assessed.RESULTS: Forest plots were created by using a fixed effects model, and mean differences were reported. Five studies with a total of 137 participants met the inclusion criteria. Biofeedback reduced migraine frequency (mean difference, -1.97 [95% confidence interval (CI), -2.72 to -1.21]; P < .00001), attack duration (mean difference, -3.94 [95% CI, -5.57 to -2.31]; P < .00001), and headache intensity (mean difference, -1.77 [95% CI, -2.42 to -1.11]; P < .00001) compared with a waiting-list control. Biofeedback demonstrated no adjuvant effect when combined with other behavioral treatment; neither did it have significant advantages over active treatment. Only 40% of bias judgments were deemed as "low" risk.
LIMITATIONS:Methodologic issues hampered the meta-analyses. Only a few studies were possible to include, and they suffered from incomplete reporting of data and risk of bias.CONCLUSIONS: Biofeedback seems to be an effective intervention for pediatric migraine, but in light of the limitations, further investigation is needed to increase our confidence in the estimate.
“…Another review of psychological treatment of headaches concluded that higher treatment dose leads to better pain scores posttreatment. 38 The studies included in this review delivered biofeedback in a clinic, which is time-consuming for the patient and hampers the widespread delivery of treatment, despite its positive results in treating headache. This finding has led to the emergence of less time-consuming approaches, such as prudent limited office treatment and Internet-based delivery.…”
CONTEXT: Migraine is a common problem in children and adolescents, but few satisfactory prophylactic treatments exist.
OBJECTIVE:Our goal was to investigate the pooled evidence for the effectiveness of using biofeedback to reduce childhood migraine.DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was conducted across the databases Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PsychINFO.STUDY SELECTION: Prospective, randomized controlled trials of biofeedback for migraine among children and adolescents were located in the search.DATA EXTRACTION: Data on reduction of mean attack frequency and a series of secondary outcomes, including adverse events, were extracted. Risk of bias was also assessed.RESULTS: Forest plots were created by using a fixed effects model, and mean differences were reported. Five studies with a total of 137 participants met the inclusion criteria. Biofeedback reduced migraine frequency (mean difference, -1.97 [95% confidence interval (CI), -2.72 to -1.21]; P < .00001), attack duration (mean difference, -3.94 [95% CI, -5.57 to -2.31]; P < .00001), and headache intensity (mean difference, -1.77 [95% CI, -2.42 to -1.11]; P < .00001) compared with a waiting-list control. Biofeedback demonstrated no adjuvant effect when combined with other behavioral treatment; neither did it have significant advantages over active treatment. Only 40% of bias judgments were deemed as "low" risk.
LIMITATIONS:Methodologic issues hampered the meta-analyses. Only a few studies were possible to include, and they suffered from incomplete reporting of data and risk of bias.CONCLUSIONS: Biofeedback seems to be an effective intervention for pediatric migraine, but in light of the limitations, further investigation is needed to increase our confidence in the estimate.
“…Previous reviews highlight the effectiveness of psychological therapies for the treatment of chronic pain in youth, 14,15 but no reviews have examined the benefits of IIPT, despite the growing need for and interest in this particular form of treatment. In addition, although we know the components of IIPT programs for youth with chronic pain are diverse, no previous studies have systematically examined the programs and described the treatments.…”
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Pediatric debilitating chronic pain is a severe health problem, often requiring complex interventions such as intensive interdisciplinary pain treatment (IIPT). Research is lacking regarding the effectiveness of IIPT for children. The objective was to systematically review studies evaluating the effects of IIPT.
“…The changes that occur in chronic pain to the entire central nervous system and brain do not differentiate in any way between, for instance, the individual with diagnosed osteoarthritis or the individual with joint pain but no X-ray findings, nor between the individual with celiac disease and another with irritable bowel syndrome. 48 Although much research and clinical effort have focused on adults of working age with chronic pain, CBT has been applied to help children 18,49 and older adults, 50 and to those with pain at the end of life. [51][52][53][54] We suspect that clinicians and researchers will continue to apply the general principles of CBT to a wide range of pain-related disorders.…”
Section: Likely Developments and Challengesmentioning
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.