One systematic review including 29 studies on group psychotherapy «Alldredge C, Burlingame G, Rosendahl J. Group psyc...»1 measured the effectiveness of any group psychotherapy intervention vs no intervention/passive control. They found a small effect on pain intensity in the first assessment of pain after the intervention.
However, the evidence was limited by imprecision and high risk of bias. The clinical meaningfulness of the study results is difficult to interpret due to incomplete reporting of the results. The intervention type may affect the impact of the intervention as well as the type of pain (e.g. fibromyalgia vs neuropathic pain).
| Reference | Study type | Population | Intervention and comparison | Outcomes | Risk of bias |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RCT=randomized controlled trial; SR=systematic review; MA=meta-analysis Additional comments for included studies |
|||||
| «Alldredge C, Burlingame G, Rosendahl J. Group psyc...»1 | SR/MA | Patients with chronic pain | Group psychotherapy vs no intervention/passive control group | Pain intensity at first post assessment | High |
| Reference | Comments |
|---|---|
| «Alldredge C, Burlingame G, Rosendahl J. Group psyc...»1 | High risk of bias in most studies. Studies included several different therapy types with CBT being the most common therapy type. |
Results
| Reference | Number of studies and number of patients (I/C) | Follow-up time | Mean (sd) I | Mean (sd) C | Standardized mean difference (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Level of evidence: low The quality of evidence was limited by study limitations, imprecision. There was also some inconsistency in the effect sizes but not enough to require further downgrade. I=intervention; C=comparison; CI=confidence interval |
|||||
| «Alldredge C, Burlingame G, Rosendahl J. Group psyc...»1 | 21 RCTs (2512 patients) | 3-12 months | - | - | 0.26 (0.11to 0.41) |