BMC Gastroenterology (Feb 2024)

Effect of cognitive-behavior therapy for children with functional abdominal pain: a meta-analysis

  • Xiaolan Huang,
  • Nan Jia,
  • Yan Zhang,
  • Yanyan Hao,
  • Fei Xiao,
  • Chunrong Sun,
  • Xiaodai Cui,
  • Fei Wang

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-024-03120-2
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 12

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Cognitive-Behavior Therapy (CBT) is the validated non-pharmacological treatment for chronic pain in pediatric patients. While some suggested CBT were comparable to the usual care in reducing children’s functional abdominal pain. This meta-analysis was designed to systematically review the literature for RCTs that investigated the efficacy of CBT in children with functional abdominal pain (FAP). Methods PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library were searched for papers published up to October 2022. Studies applying different CBT delivery methods (in-person, web-based, phone-based) were included in this meta-analysis to evaluate the comprehensive effectiveness of CBT compared with usual care. Weighted and standardized mean difference with the 95% confidence intervals were used for the synthesis of the results. Primary outcome was the decrease of functional disability inventory (FDI) and the secondary outcomes were the decrease of severity in pain intensity, depression, anxiety, gastrointestinal symptoms, and improvement in physical quality of life (QoL). Results A total of 10 RCTs with 1187 children were included in the final analysis. The results showed that CBT resulted in better effect in reducing functional disability inventory (SMD=-2.282, 95%CI: -4.537 to -0.027, P = 0.047), pain intensity (SMD=-0.594, 95%CI: -1.147 to -0.040, P = 0.036), and improving QoL (SMD = 14.097, 95%CI: 0.901 to 27.292, P = 0.036) compared with the control groups. Comparable effects were observed in the severity of depression (SMD=-0.493, 95%CI: -1.594 to 0.608, P = 0.380), anxiety (SMD=-0.062, 95%CI: -0.640 to 0.517, P = 0.835), and gastrointestinal symptoms (SMD=-1.096 95%CI: -2.243 to 0.050, P = 0.061) between CBT and usual treatment. Conclusions We observed the differences in post-treatment FAP and pain intensity for children receiving CBT compared with children receiving treatment as usual. CBT in the setting of FAP demonstrates promising developments and highlights the need for future research.

Keywords