Mindfulness-based stress reduction for treating chronic headache: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Anheyer Dennis1,Leach Matthew J23,Klose Petra1,Dobos Gustav1,Cramer Holger13

Affiliation:

1. Department of Internal and Integrative Medicine, Kliniken Essen-Mitte, Faculty of Medicine, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany

2. Department of Rural Health, Division of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

3. Australian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine (ARCCIM), Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Abstract

Background Mindfulness-based stress reduction/cognitive therapy are frequently used for pain-related conditions, but their effects on headache remain uncertain. This review aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of mindfulness-based stress reduction/cognitive therapy in reducing the symptoms of chronic headache. Data sources and study selection MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, CENTRAL, and PsychINFO were searched to 16 June 2017. Randomized controlled trials comparing mindfulness-based stress reduction/cognitive therapy with usual care or active comparators for migraine and/or tension-type headache, which assessed headache frequency, duration or intensity as a primary outcome, were eligible for inclusion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Tool. Results Five randomized controlled trials (two on tension-type headache; one on migraine; two with mixed samples) with a total of 185 participants were included. Compared to usual care, mindfulness-based stress reduction/cognitive therapy did not improve headache frequency (three randomized controlled trials; standardized mean difference = 0.00; 95% confidence interval = −0.33,0.32) or headache duration (three randomized controlled trials; standardized mean difference = −0.08; 95% confidence interval = −1.03,0.87). Similarly, no significant difference between groups was found for pain intensity (five randomized controlled trials; standardized mean difference = −0.78; 95% confidence interval = −1.72,0.16). Conclusions Due to the low number, small scale and often high or unclear risk of bias of included randomized controlled trials, the results are imprecise; this may be consistent with either an important or negligible effect. Therefore, more rigorous trials with larger sample sizes are needed.

Funder

Karl und Veronica Carstens-Stiftung

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Neurology (clinical),General Medicine

Cited by 53 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3