Cited by 101Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and Opioid Use

A comprehensive review of telehealth for pain management: where we are and the way ahead

McGeary, Donald D., McGeary, Cindy A., Gatchel, Robert J.·2012·Pain Practice

Abstract

Pain is generally undertreated in the United States, owing to a number of barriers including geographic distance from specialty treatment providers; functional disability that limits mobility; treatment-related stigma; economic limitations; and educational barriers. Pain undertreatment exacerbates pain chronicity and emotional disruption that can significantly erode a pain patient's quality of life, and there is widespread agreement that pain care must evolve to address this significant problem. The growing field of telehealth (defined for the purposes of this paper as technology that allows for distance interaction between providers and/or patients) offers a novel opportunity to expand pain assessment, consultation, and treatment services beyond the walls of the specialty pain clinic, but there is limited availability of resources describing how to best use this technology to improve access to care. A recent literature review (September 2011) using universally endorsed MeSH search criteria revealed only 32 MEDLINE references focusing on telehealth for pain. This is surprising in light of the very large number of references covering telehealth (14,164 references) and pain (104,564 references), respectively. Of the studies available, there are very few randomized trials of telehealth pain care and only one general overview of e-health and chronic pain, which dedicates just a few paragraphs to telehealth. This manuscript represents one of the first comprehensive reviews of the current state of telehealth and pain management research and practice. The goals are to provide a rationale for the potential benefit of telehealth-based pain management services; describe the various applications of telehealth technology for pain management; orient the reader to cost models for telehealth; present examples of services in place; and offer recommendations for future research based on the current state of knowledge.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2012.00534.x

Cites

36 of 36 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McGeary, D. D., McGeary, C. A., & Gatchel, R. J.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
  • The University of Texas at Arlington (US)
Corresponding author
McGeary, Donald D.
Venue
Pain Practice
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-02-05
Volume
12
Issue
7
Pages
570-577
ISSN
  • 1530-7085 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-2500
OpenAlex
W1592719392
Cited by
101
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
Keywords
telemedicine, pain management, chronic pain, undertreatment of pain, health care access, e-health, quality of life
MeSH terms
Humans, Telemedicine, Pain Clinics, Evidence-Based Medicine, Pain Management

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