Hants Williams1, Paula Tanabe2. 1. School of Nursing, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA. Electronic address: hantsawilliams@gmail.com. 2. School of Nursing, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA; School of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a life-threatening condition that affects more than seven million people worldwide. The most common complication experienced by persons living with SCD is pain. Evidence supports the use of nonpharmacologic therapies in managing psychological and social complications of pain in persons with SCD, but there is little consensus if these approaches can also be applied for the treatment of pain in SCD. OBJECTIVES: To describe and synthesize the use of nonpharmacological therapies for reducing pain of any type and origin in persons with SCD. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase. Databases were searched using the following terms: sickle cell, pain, and nonpharmacological therapies. Interventions were graded for methodological quality and categorized as 1) peer-support group therapies, 2) educational/psychological therapies, and 3) skill-based therapies. RESULTS: Twenty-eight nonpharmacological interventions for persons with SCD were examined. Of these studies, a wide variety of nonpharmacological interventions were tested. Twelve studies yielded significant improvements in pain, three studies reported no positive effect or differences between experimental and control conditions on pain or a pain-related outcome, and one study reported a negative or detrimental intervention effect. CONCLUSION: Approximately half of the studies reviewed demonstrated success in alleviating pain, suggesting that patients are able to use nonpharmacological interventions to reduce pain with some degree of success. Questions still remain regarding the efficacy and generalizability of these interventions for persons with SCD.
CONTEXT: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a life-threatening condition that affects more than seven million people worldwide. The most common complication experienced by persons living with SCD is pain. Evidence supports the use of nonpharmacologic therapies in managing psychological and social complications of pain in persons with SCD, but there is little consensus if these approaches can also be applied for the treatment of pain in SCD. OBJECTIVES: To describe and synthesize the use of nonpharmacological therapies for reducing pain of any type and origin in persons with SCD. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase. Databases were searched using the following terms: sickle cell, pain, and nonpharmacological therapies. Interventions were graded for methodological quality and categorized as 1) peer-support group therapies, 2) educational/psychological therapies, and 3) skill-based therapies. RESULTS: Twenty-eight nonpharmacological interventions for persons with SCD were examined. Of these studies, a wide variety of nonpharmacological interventions were tested. Twelve studies yielded significant improvements in pain, three studies reported no positive effect or differences between experimental and control conditions on pain or a pain-related outcome, and one study reported a negative or detrimental intervention effect. CONCLUSION: Approximately half of the studies reviewed demonstrated success in alleviating pain, suggesting that patients are able to use nonpharmacological interventions to reduce pain with some degree of success. Questions still remain regarding the efficacy and generalizability of these interventions for persons with SCD.
Authors: Hussain R Yusuf; Hani K Atrash; Scott D Grosse; Christopher S Parker; Althea M Grant Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Wally R Smith; Viktor E Bovbjerg; Lynne T Penberthy; Donna K McClish; James L Levenson; John D Roberts; Karen Gil; Susan D Roseff; Imoigele P Aisiku Journal: J Natl Med Assoc Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 1.798
Authors: Christopher L Edwards; Mischca T Scales; Charles Loughlin; Gary G Bennett; Shani Harris-Peterson; Laura M De Castro; Elaine Whitworth; Mary Abrams; Miriam Feliu; Stephanie Johnson; Mary Wood; Ojinga Harrison; Alvin Killough Journal: Int J Behav Med Date: 2005
Authors: Erica M S Sibinga; Deborah L Shindell; James F Casella; Anne K Duggan; Modena H Wilson Journal: J Altern Complement Med Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 2.579
Authors: Kevin J O'Leary; Margaret M Chapman; Shandu Foster; Lyndsey O'Hara; Bruce L Henschen; Kenzie A Cameron Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2019-03-20 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Sarah R Martin; Payal Shah; Christopher Denton; Lonnie K Zeltzer; Saranya Veluswamy; Michael C K Khoo; Thomas D Coates Journal: Complement Ther Med Date: 2020-02-15 Impact factor: 2.446
Authors: Sherif M Badawy; Kaleab Z Abebe; Charlotte A Reichman; Grace Checo; Megan E Hamm; Jennifer Stinson; Chitra Lalloo; Patrick Carroll; Santosh L Saraf; Victor R Gordeuk; Payal Desai; Nirmish Shah; Darla Liles; Cassandra Trimnell; Charles R Jonassaint Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2021-05-14
Authors: Joyce T Da Silva; Janelle E Letzen; Jennifer A Haythornthwaite; Patrick H Finan; Claudia M Campbell; David A Seminowicz Journal: Pain Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 7.926
Authors: Tiago da Silva Lopes; Wellington Dos Santos Silva; Sânzia B Ribeiro; Camila A Figueiredo; Fernanda Q Campbell; Gildasio de Cerqueira Daltro; Antônio Valenzuela; Pedro Montoya; Rita de C S Lucena; Abrahão F Baptista Journal: Front Hum Neurosci Date: 2017-12-20 Impact factor: 3.169
Authors: Samuel N Rodgers-Melnick; Lucas Lin; Kristina Gam; Evanilda Souza de Santana Carvalho; Coretta Jenerette; Douglas Y Rowland; Jane A Little; Jeffery A Dusek; Nitya Bakshi; Lakshmanan Krishnamurti Journal: J Pain Res Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 3.133