Cited by 102Pain Management and TreatmentMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Mechanisms and Treatments

Psychological therapies for the management of chronic neuropathic pain in adults

Open access
Eccleston, Christopher, Hearn, Leslie, Williams, Amanda C de C·2015·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Neuropathic pain is thought to arise from damage to the somatosensory nervous system. Its prevalence is increasing in line with many chronic disorders such as diabetes. All treatments have limited effectiveness. Given the evidence regarding psychological treatment for distress and disability in people with various chronic pain conditions, we were interested to investigate whether psychological treatments have any effects for those with chronic neuropathic pain. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of psychological treatments on pain experience, disability, mood, and health-care use in adults with chronic neuropathic pain. SEARCH METHODS: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in any language in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, from database inception to March 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: Full publications of RCTs on psychological interventions for neuropathic pain. Trials had to have lasted at least three months, had at least 20 participants in each arm at the end of treatment, and compared a psychological intervention with any active or inactive intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: Two small studies (enrolling a total of 105 participants) met the inclusion criteria. One was a standard cognitive behavioural treatment (CBT) programme for 61 people with pain from spinal cord injury, followed up for three months, and compared with a waiting list. The other was weekly group psychotherapy for 44 people with burning mouth syndrome, compared with a daily placebo tablet. The overall risk of bias was high in both trials.The CBT study assessed participants for pain, disability, mood, and quality of life, with improvement in treatment and control groups. However, there was no more improvement in the treatment group than in the control for any outcome, either post-treatment or at follow-up. The group psychotherapy study only assessed pain, classifying participants by pain severity. There is a lack of evidence on the efficacy and safety of psychological interventions for people with neuropathic pain. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence of the efficacy and safety of psychological interventions for chronic neuropathic pain. The two available studies show no benefit of treatment over either waiting list or placebo control groups.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd011259.pub2

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 78 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Edelson 1989 {published data only} Edelson J, Fitzpatrick JL. A comparison of cognitive-behavioral and hypnotic treatments of chronic pain. Journal of Clinical Psychology 1989;45(2):316-23.
  2. Hasenbring 1999 {published data only} Hasenbring M, Ulrich HW, Hartmann M, Soyka D. The efficacy of a risk factor-based cognitive behavioral intervention and electromyographic biofeedback in patients with acute sciatic pain. Spine 1999;24(23):2525-35.
  3. Williams ACdeC. Pain -the patient's viewpoint. The Psychologist 2011;24(6):426-7.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eccleston, C., Hearn, L., & Williams, A. C. D. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Bath (GB)
  • Churchill Hospital (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-10-29
Issue
10
Pages
CD011259-CD011259
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W1853576970
Cited by
102
References
78
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 2
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (13/89/29)
  • National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
Keywords
chronic neuropathic pain, psychological intervention, cognitive behavioral therapy, group therapy, spinal cord injury pain, burning mouth syndrome, pain-related disability, mood, quality of life, health care utilization, treatment efficacy
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neuralgia, Psychotherapy, Group, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Chronic Pain

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review