Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud

Anxiety, depressive symptoms and stress have a significant influence on chronic musculoskeletal pain. Behavioral modification techniques have proven to be effective to manage these variables; however, the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for an alternative to face-to-face treatment. We conducted a search of PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL),Web of Science, APA PsychInfo, and Psychological and Behavioural Collections. The aim was to assess the effectiveness of telematic behavioral modification techniques (e-BMT) on psychological variables in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain through a systematic review with meta-analysis. We used a conventional pairwise meta-analysis and a random-effects model. We calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Forty-one randomized controlled trials were included, with a total of 5018 participants. We found a statistically significant small effect size in favor of e-BMT in depressive symptoms (n = 3531; SMD = 􀀀0.35; 95% CI 􀀀0.46, 􀀀0.24) and anxiety (n = 2578; SMD = 􀀀0.32; 95% CI 􀀀0.42, 􀀀0.21) with low to moderate strength of evidence. However, there was no statistically significant effect on stress symptoms with moderate strength of evidence. In conclusion, e-BMT is an effective option for the management of anxiety and depressive symptoms in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. However, it does not seem effective to improve stress symptoms.

Background: We aimed to determine the presence of alexithymia in patients with craniofacial pain (CFP) compared with asymptomatic individuals. Our secondary aims were to assess the relationship of alexithymia with anxiety and depression levels, as well as to assess the presence of facial emotion recognition deficit. Methods: Medline, Scielo and Google Scholar were searched, with the last search performed in 8 September 2021. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% CIs were calculated for relevant outcomes and were pooled in a meta-analysis using the random effects model. In addition, meta-analyses of correlations and a metaregression of alexithymia with depression and anxiety were performed. Results: Regarding alexithymia, assessed through the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS), the results showed significant differences, with higher values in patients compared with asymptomatic individuals, with a large clinical effect (SMD 0.46; 95% CI [0.22–0.71]; heterogeneity-Q 66.86; p < 0.001; inconsistency (I2) = 81%). We found statistically significant correlations with a small clinical effect of alexithymia with anxiety and depression. The meta-regression showed no significant association between the TAS and anxiety or depression. With respect to facial emotion recognition, the results showed statistically significant differences, with greater recognition difficulty in patients compared with asymptomatic individuals, with a large clinical effect (SMD −1.17; 95% CI [−2.01 to −0.33]; heterogeneity-Q 2.97; p = 0.080; I2 = 66%). Conclusions: Patients with CFP showed alexithymia with moderate evidence. There was also moderate evidence indicating that these patients had significant deficits in facial emotion recognition compared with asymptomatic individuals. Furthermore, alexithymia showed statistically significant correlations with anxiety and depression levels.