Stefan Elbers

102 Chapter 4 Table 5. GRADE Evidence Table for Follow-up Results. Question : What is the long-term effectiveness of self-management interventions for patients with chronic pain compared to a control condition? Quality assessment № of patients Effect Quality № of studies Study design Risk of bias Inconsis- tency Indirect- ness Impreci- sion Other considerations Self- Management Intervention Control Relative (95% CI) Absolute (95% CI) Physical function (follow up: range 6 months to 13 months; assessed with: questionnaires) 12 Randomised trials Not serious a Not serious b,c Serious d,e Not serious f None 1093 1064 - SMD 0.07 SD lower (0.16 lower to 0.02 higher) ⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE Self-efficacy (follow up: range 6 months to 13 months; assessed with: questionnaires) 6 Randomised trials Not serious a Not serious b,c Serious d,e Not serious f None 682 583 - SMD 0.13 SD lower (0.25 lower to 0.02 lower) ⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE Pain (follow up: range 6 months to 13 months; assessed with: questionnaires) 10 Randomised trials Not serious a Not serious b,c Serious d Not serious f None 987 869 - SMD 0.04 SD lower (0.17 lower to 0.09 higher) ⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE Physical activity (follow up: range 8 months to 12 months; assessed with: questionnaires) 3 Randomised trials Not serious a Not serious b,c Serious d,e Serious g None 154 156 - SMD 0.15 SD higher (0.07 lower to 0.38 higher) ⨁⨁◯◯ LOW Notes: CI, confidence interval; SMD, standardized mean difference. A Less than 25% of participants from high risk of bias studies. B Substantial overlap in confidence intervals. C I 2 is less than 60%. D Substantial differences in interventions. E Substantial differences in outcome measures. F Total sample size is more than optimal information size (alpha = 0.05, beta = 0.2, ES = 0.2 SD). G Total sample size is less than optimal information size (alpha = 0.05; Beta = 0.2; ES = 0.2 SD).