Cited by 73Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and TreatmentPain Mechanisms and Treatments

Cognitive and behavioral interventions for the management of chronic neuropathic pain in adults – A systematic review

van de Wetering, Elisabeth J., Lemmens, Karin M.M., Nieboer, Anna P., Huijsman, Robbert·2010·European Journal of Pain

Abstract

Background: Chronic neuropathic pain is often associated with conditions such as depression and anxiety and strongly affects daily functioning and overall quality of life. It is argued, therefore, that psychosocial interventions should be added to traditional biomedical interventions. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of cognitive and behavioral interventions for the management of chronic neuropathic pain. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for all types of studies. Studies were selected by predefined inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was assessed with the Health Technology Assessment‐Disease Management instrument. Furthermore, an explorative meta‐analysis of four selected studies was performed. Results: Fourteen studies were assessed: three randomized controlled trials, three controlled before–after studies, seven uncontrolled before–after studies and one time series analysis. The findings of the meta‐analysis were not consistent with a significant effect on pain intensity. Only one study had good methodological quality; it showed some significant effects of the interventions, but only in female participants. Other studies of limited methodological quality did report positive effects on pain and quality of life. Conclusions: This is the first systematic review that has evaluated the effectiveness of cognitive and behavioral techniques for the management of chronic neuropathic pain. Given the limited methodological quality, no informative conclusions can be drawn with respect to the study objective. However, this review does provide insight into the difficulties of this specific area, the need for a clear and widely accepted definition of neuropathic pain and the need for standardized multidimensional measurement instruments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejpain.2009.11.010

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 36 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van de Wetering, E. J., Lemmens, K. M. M., Nieboer, A. P., & Huijsman, R.
Affiliations
Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
Venue
European Journal of Pain
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-08
Volume
14
Issue
7
Pages
670-681
ISSN
  • 1090-3801 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2149
OpenAlex
W2169813949
Cited by
73
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 3
FWCI
0.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
Keywords
chronic neuropathic pain, cognitive intervention, behavioral interventions, psychosocial interventions, pain management, quality of life, pain intensity, depression, anxiety, methodological quality, measurement instruments
MeSH terms
Adult, Behavior Therapy, Chronic Disease, Humans, Neuralgia, Treatment Outcome

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