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.

Objective. The main objective of this trial was to assess whether action observation (AO) training and motor imagery (MI) produced changes in the cervical joint position sense (CJPS) both at the end of the intervention and 10 min postintervention compared with a placebo intervention in patients with nonspecific chronic neck pain (NSCNP). Methods. A single-blind placebo clinical trial was designed. A total of 30 patients with NSCNP were randomly assigned to the AO group, MI group or placebo observation (PO) group. CJPS in flexion, extension and rotation movements in both planes were the main variables. Results. The results obtained in the vertical plane showed that the AO group obtained greater impr ovements than the PO group in the CJPS in terms of cervical extension movement both at the end of the intervention and 10 min postintervention (p = .001, d = 1.81 and p = .004, d = 1.74, respectively), and also in cervical flexion movement, although only at 10 min after the intervention (p = .035, d = 0.72). In addition, the AO group obtained greater improvements than the MI group in the CJPS only at the end of the intervention in cervical extension movement (p = .041, d = 1.17). Regarding the left rotation cervical movement, both the MI and AO groups were superior to the PO group in both planes at the end of the intervention (p < .05, d > 0.80). Conclusions. Although both AO and MI could be a useful strategy for CJPS improvement, the AO group showed the strongest results. The therapeutic potential of the application of mental practice in a clinical context in the early stages of rehabilitation of NSCNP should be considered.