Retour
Article pour les cliniciens

Les interventions psychologiques pour gérer les symptômes de douleur thoracique non spécifique chez les patients présentant une anatomie coronarienne normale.



  • Kisely SR
  • Campbell LA
  • Yelland MJ
  • Paydar A
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jun 30;2015(6):CD004101. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004101.pub5. (Review)
PMID: 26123045
Lire le résumé Lire résumé des données probantes Lire le texte intégral
Disciplines
  • Intérêt spécial - Douleur - Médecin
    Relevance - 6/7
    Intérêt médiatique  - 6/7
  • Médecine familiale (MF)/Médecine générale (MG)
    Relevance - 5/7
    Intérêt médiatique  - 5/7
  • Médecine interne générale - Soins primaires
    Relevance - 5/7
    Intérêt médiatique  - 5/7
  • Psychiatrie
    Relevance - 4/7
    Intérêt médiatique  - 4/7

Résumé (en anglais)

BACKGROUND: Recurrent chest pain in the absence of coronary artery disease is a common problem which sometimes leads to excess use of medical care. Although many studies have examined the causes of pain in these patients, few clinical trials have evaluated treatment. This is an update of a Cochrane review originally published in 2005 and last updated in 2010. The studies reviewed in this paper provide an insight into the effectiveness of psychological interventions for this group of patients.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of psychological interventions for chest pain, quality of life and psychological parameters in people with non-specific chest pain.

SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL, Issue 4 of 12, 2014 and DARE Issue 2 of 4, 2014), MEDLINE (OVID, 1966 to April week 4 2014), EMBASE (OVID, 1980 to week 18 2014), CINAHL (EBSCO, 1982 to April 2014), PsycINFO (OVID, 1887 to April week 5 2014) and BIOSIS Previews (Web of Knowledge, 1969 to 2 May 2014). We also searched citation lists and contacted study authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with standardised outcome methodology that tested any form of psychotherapy for chest pain with normal anatomy. Diagnoses included non-specific chest pain (NSCP), atypical chest pain, syndrome X or chest pain with normal coronary anatomy (as either inpatients or outpatients).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed quality of studies. We contacted trial authors for further information about the included RCTs.

MAIN RESULTS: We included two new papers, one of which was an update of a previously included study. Therefore, a total of 17 RCTs with 1006 randomised participants met the inclusion criteria, with the one new study contributing an additional 113 participants. There was a significant reduction in reports of chest pain in the first three months following the intervention: random-effects relative risk = 0.70 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.92). This was maintained from three to nine months afterwards: relative risk 0.59 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.76). There was also a significant increase in the number of chest pain-free days up to three months following the intervention: mean difference (MD) 3.00 (95% CI 0.23 to 5.77). This was associated with reduced chest pain frequency (random-effects MD -2.26, 95% CI -4.41 to -0.12) but there was no evidence of effect of treatment on chest pain frequency from three to twelve months (random-effects MD -0.81, 95% CI -2.35 to 0.74). There was no effect on severity (random-effects MD -4.64 (95% CI -12.18 to 2.89) up to three months after the intervention. Due to the nature of the main interventions of interest, it was impossible to blind the therapists as to whether the participant was in the intervention or control arm. In addition, in three studies the blinding of participants was expressly forbidden by the local ethics committee because of issues in obtaining fully informed consent . For this reason, all studies had a high risk of performance bias. In addition, three studies were thought to have a high risk of outcome bias. In general, there was a low risk of bias in the other domains. However, there was high heterogeneity and caution is required in interpreting these results. The wide variability in secondary outcome measures made it difficult to integrate findings from studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This Cochrane review suggests a modest to moderate benefit for psychological interventions, particularly those using a cognitive-behavioural framework, which was largely restricted to the first three months after the intervention. Hypnotherapy is also a possible alternative. However, these conclusions are limited by high heterogeneity in many of the results and low numbers of participants in individual studies. The evidence for other brief interventions was less clear. Further RCTs of psychological interventions for NSCP with follow-up periods of at least 12 months are needed.


Commentaires cliniques (en anglais)

Psychiatry

Since the nature and presentation of cardiac and non-cardiac chest pain differs in men and women, the analysis should have been stratified according to gender.

Psychiatry

Aspecific chest pain is not really a diagnosis. These patients could have several problems: panic disorder, hypochondria, or somatoform disorders.

Psychiatry

The findings are expected though the evidence is not that solid in view that blinding is not practical.

Voulez-vous savoir ce que lisent les professionnels? Inscrivez-vous pour accéder gratuitement à tous les contenus professionnels.

S'inscrire