Interventions for Depressive Symptoms in People Living with Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review of Meta-Analyses.

OBJECTIVE: This review investigated the effectiveness of clinical interventions on depressive symptoms in people with all types of chronic pain. METHODS: We searched seven electronic databases and reference lists on September 15, 2020, and included English-language, systematic reviews and meta-analyses of trials that examined the effects of clinical interventions on depressive outcomes in chronic pain. Two independent reviewers screened, extracted, and assessed the risk of bias. PROSPERO registration: CRD42019131871. RESULTS: Eighty-three reviews were selected and included 182 meta-analyses. Data were summarized visually and narratively using standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals as the primary outcome of interest. A large proportion of meta-analyses investigated fibromyalgia or mixed chronic pain, and psychological interventions were most commonly evaluated. Acceptance and commitment therapy for general chronic pain, and fluoxetine and web-based psychotherapy for fibromyalgia showed the most robust effects and can be prioritized for implementation in clinical practice. Exercise for arthritis, pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain, self-regulatory psychotherapy for axial pain, and music therapy for general chronic pain showed large, significant effects, but estimates were derived from low- or critically low-quality reviews. CONCLUSIONS: No single intervention type demonstrated substantial superiority across multiple pain populations. Other dimensions beyond efficacy, such as accessibility, safety, cost, patient preference, and efficacy for non-depressive outcomes should also be weighed when considering treatment options. Further effectiveness research is required for common pain types such as arthritis and axial pain, and common interventions such as opioids, anti-inflammatories and acupuncture.

Cross-cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Persian Version of the Satisfaction and Recovery Index (SRI): Structural Validity, Construct Validity, Internal Consistency, and Test-retest Reliability.

Background: The Satisfaction and Recovery Index (SRI) is a generic importance-weighted health satisfaction tool to measure the process and state of recovery following musculoskeletal injuries. The objectives of this study are (1) to translate and cross-culturally adapt the SRI to Persian and (2) evaluate its psychometric properties. Methods: The forward-backward translation technique was used for translation, and two rounds of cognitive interviews were conducted to assess cultural appropriateness. Participants (n=100, mean age=32.5, 82%male) had acute (i.e., <30 days) musculoskeletal injuries of any etiology. Structural validity, construct validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability were evaluated. Results: Participants identified issues in 3/6 areas of a coding system during the cognitive interviews: comprehension/clarity, relevance, and inadequate response definition. These issues informed subsequent changes to arrive at the final version of the SRI-P. The SRI-P had adequate construct validity (P<0.001), the confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated a two-factor structure, the internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's α=0.83), and it was deemed reliable (ICC2, 1=0.72). Conclusion: The psychometric evaluation revealed that the SRI-P has adequate construct validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability. Unlike the original English version, the SRI-P has a two-factor structure, which appears to be related to cultural differences in interpreting some of the items. The clinical importance of this study is that the SRI (which captures the state of recovery and how important the various items of the tool are to each patient and how satisfied they are with their recovery) can now be available to surgeons and therapists in the orthopedic and rehabilitation realms in Persian populations.