English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  In children with chronic pain, interdisciplinary outpatient and intensive inpatient treatment has been shown to improve pain intensity and disability. However, there are few systematic comparisons of outcomes of the two treatments. The present naturalistic study aimed to compare the clinical presentation and achieved changes at return in three outcome domains (pain intensity, disability, school absence) between a) outpatients vs. inpatients and b) patients who declined intensive inpatient treatment and completed outpatient treatment instead (decliners) vs. those who completed inpatient treatment (completers).    Methods  The study compared treatment outcomes between n = 992 outpatients vs. n = 320 inpatients (Analysis A) who were treated at a tertiary treatment centre and returned for a return visit within a one-year interval. In Analysis B, treatment outcomes were compared between n = 67 decliners vs. n = 309 completers of inpatient treatment. The three outcome domains were compared by calculating standardized change scores and clinically significant changes.    Results  In analysis A, outpatients and inpatients reported comparably low levels of pain intensity (NRS 0–10; mean = 4,  SD  = 2.7) and disability (Paediatric Pain Disability Index (PPDI: 12–60; mean = 24;  SD  = 10) at the return visit. Compared to outpatients, more inpatients achieved clinically significant changes in pain intensity (52% vs. 45%) and disability (46% vs. 31%). There were also significantly greater changes in disability in the inpatient group (change score  outpatients  = 1.0; change score  inpatients  = 1.4;  F  (1,1138)  = 12.6,  p =  .011). School absence was substantially reduced, with approximately 80% in each group attending school regularly. Analysis B showed that even though inpatient decliners achieved improvements in the outcome domains, they reported greater disability at the return visit (PPDI mean  decliners  = 27, SD = 9.9; PPDI mean  completers  = 24, SD = 10) because they had achieved fewer changes in disability (change score  decliners  = 0.9; change score  completers  = 1.4; F (1.334)  = 5.7,  p =  .017). In addition, less decliners than completers achieved clinically significant changes in disability (25% vs. 47%).    Conclusions  Inpatient and outpatient treatments are able to elicit substantial changes in pain intensity, disability and school absence. The results highlight the necessity of intensive inpatient pain treatment for highly affected children, as children who declined inpatient treatment and were treated as outpatients did less well.

Chronic pain treatment in children and adolescents: less is good, more is sometimes better