17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Massage for Pain: An Evidence Map

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives: Massage therapy has been proposed for painful conditions, but it can be difficult to understand the breadth and depth of evidence, as various painful conditions may respond differently to massage. The authors conducted an evidence mapping process and generated an “evidence map” to visually depict the distribution of evidence available for massage and various pain indications to identify gaps in evidence and to inform future research priorities.

          Design: The authors searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for systematic reviews reporting pain outcomes for massage therapy. The authors assessed the quality of each review using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) criteria. The authors used a bubble plot to depict the number of included articles, pain indication, effect of massage for pain, and strength of findings for each included systematic review.

          Results: The authors identified 49 systematic reviews, of which 32 were considered high quality. Types of pain frequently included in systematic reviews were cancer pain, low back pain, and neck pain. High quality reviews concluded that there was low strength of evidence of potential benefits of massage for labor, shoulder, neck, low back, cancer, arthritis, postoperative, delayed onset muscle soreness, and musculoskeletal pain. Reported attributes of massage interventions include style of massage, provider, co-interventions, duration, and comparators, with 14 high-quality reviews reporting all these attributes in their review.

          Conclusion: Prior reviews have conclusions of low strength of evidence because few primary studies of large samples with rigorous methods had been conducted, leaving evidence gaps about specific massage type for specific pain. Primary studies often do not provide adequate details of massage therapy provided, limiting the extent to which reviews are able to draw conclusions about characteristics such as provider type.

          Related collections

          Most cited references62

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Nonpharmacologic Therapies for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review for an American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline

          A 2007 American College of Physicians guideline addressed nonpharmacologic treatment options for low back pain. New evidence is now available.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Treatment of chronic non-cancer pain.

            Chronic pain is a pervasive problem that affects the patient, their significant others, and society in many ways. The past decade has seen advances in our understanding of the mechanisms underlying pain and in the availability of technically advanced diagnostic procedures; however, the most notable therapeutic changes have not been the development of novel evidenced-based methods, but rather changing trends in applications and practices within the available clinical armamentarium. We provide a general overview of empirical evidence for the most commonly used interventions in the management of chronic non-cancer pain, including pharmacological, interventional, physical, psychological, rehabilitative, and alternative modalities. Overall, currently available treatments provide modest improvements in pain and minimum improvements in physical and emotional functioning. The quality of evidence is mediocre and has not improved substantially during the past decade. There is a crucial need for assessment of combination treatments, identification of indicators of treatment response, and assessment of the benefit of matching of treatments to patient characteristics. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              What is an evidence map? A systematic review of published evidence maps and their definitions, methods, and products

              Background The need for systematic methods for reviewing evidence is continuously increasing. Evidence mapping is one emerging method. There are no authoritative recommendations for what constitutes an evidence map or what methods should be used, and anecdotal evidence suggests heterogeneity in both. Our objectives are to identify published evidence maps and to compare and contrast the presented definitions of evidence mapping, the domains used to classify data in evidence maps, and the form the evidence map takes. Methods We conducted a systematic review of publications that presented results with a process termed “evidence mapping” or included a figure called an “evidence map.” We identified publications from searches of ten databases through 8/21/2015, reference mining, and consulting topic experts. We abstracted the research question, the unit of analysis, the search methods and search period covered, and the country of origin. Data were narratively synthesized. Results Thirty-nine publications met inclusion criteria. Published evidence maps varied in their definition and the form of the evidence map. Of the 31 definitions provided, 67 % described the purpose as identification of gaps and 58 % referenced a stakeholder engagement process or user-friendly product. All evidence maps explicitly used a systematic approach to evidence synthesis. Twenty-six publications referred to a figure or table explicitly called an “evidence map,” eight referred to an online database as the evidence map, and five stated they used a mapping methodology but did not present a visual depiction of the evidence. Conclusions The principal conclusion of our evaluation of studies that call themselves “evidence maps” is that the implied definition of what constitutes an evidence map is a systematic search of a broad field to identify gaps in knowledge and/or future research needs that presents results in a user-friendly format, often a visual figure or graph, or a searchable database. Foundational work is needed to better standardize the methods and products of an evidence map so that researchers and policymakers will know what to expect of this new type of evidence review. Systematic review registration Although an a priori protocol was developed, no registration was completed; this review did not fit the PROSPERO format. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0204-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Altern Complement Med
                J Altern Complement Med
                acm
                Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine
                Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers (140 Huguenot Street, 3rd FloorNew Rochelle, NY 10801USA )
                1075-5535
                1557-7708
                01 May 2019
                09 May 2019
                09 May 2019
                : 25
                : 5
                : 475-502
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA.
                [ 2 ]Fielding School of Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA.
                [ 3 ]UCLA Health, Los Angeles, CA.
                [ 4 ]Southern California Evidence-Based Practice Center, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.
                Author notes
                [*]Address correspondence to: Isomi Miake-Lye, PhD, West Los Angeles Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 11301 Wilshire Boulevard, Building 206, Los Angeles, CA 90073 isomi.miake-lye@ 123456va.gov
                Article
                10.1089/acm.2018.0282
                10.1089/acm.2018.0282
                6533778
                30892910
                6d78eca1-35f1-4581-858b-71367225ab89
                © Isomi M. Miake-Lye, et al. 2019; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.

                This Open Access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and the source are cited.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 3, References: 125, Pages: 28
                Categories
                Reviews

                massage,pain,evidence map
                massage, pain, evidence map

                Comments

                Comment on this article