Cochrane · systematic review · CD013531
Interventions for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Sinopoulou, V, Gordon, M, Akobeng, AK, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2021 · Cochrane Library
GutAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
56
current version
GRADE rated
26
No studies
30
Included studies
NR
No studies 30 · 53.6%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 24 · 42.9%Low 2 · 3.6%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Low FODMAP diet compared to sham diet for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with inflammatory bowel disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors Low FODMAP diet vs sham diet | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain frequency IBD (measured in days of pain on the IBS‐SSS questionnaire) Low FODMAP diet vs sham diet | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 52 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pain frequency IBD (measured in days with moderate or severe pain on the GSRS questionnaire) Low FODMAP diet vs sham diet | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 52 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pain frequency CD (measured in days of pain on the IBS‐SSS questionnaire) Low FODMAP diet vs sham diet | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 26 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pain intensity IBD (0‐10cm visual analogue scale) Low FODMAP diet vs sham diet | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 82 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pain intensity IBD (0‐3 point GSRS scale) Low FODMAP diet vs sham diet | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 26 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pain intensity CD (0‐10cm visual analogue scale) Low FODMAP diet vs sham diet | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 52 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Withdrawal due to adverse events Low FODMAP diet vs sham diet | RR 1.85 [0.18, 19.19] | 1 study · 52 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Medicine‐separated moxibustion combined with acupuncture compared with wheat bran‐separated moxibustion combined with shallow acupuncture for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with Crohn's disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors Medicine‐separated moxibustion combined with acupuncture vs wheat bran‐separated moxibustion combined with shallow acupuncture | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Abdominal pain frequency or change in frequency Medicine‐separated moxibustion combined with acupuncture vs wheat bran‐separated moxibustion combined with shallow acupuncture | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Abdominal pain intensity or change in intensity Medicine‐separated moxibustion combined with acupuncture vs wheat bran‐separated moxibustion combined with shallow acupuncture | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Withdrawals due to adverse events Medicine‐separated moxibustion combined with acupuncture vs wheat bran‐separated moxibustion combined with shallow acupuncture | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 102 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Mindfulness with cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) compared with no treatment (both groups received standard medical therapy) for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's Disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with inflammatory bowel disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors Mindfulness with cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) vs no treatment (both groups received standard medical therapy) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain frequency and intensity (measured as part of the 0‐500 point IBS‐SSS questionnaire) Mindfulness with cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) vs no treatment (both groups received standard medical therapy) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 66 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Withdrawal due to adverse events Mindfulness with cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) vs no treatment (both groups received standard medical therapy) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 66 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
soft non‐manipulative osteopathic treatment compared to no intervention for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with Crohn's disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors soft non‐manipulative osteopathic treatment vs no intervention | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Abdominal pain frequency or change in frequency soft non‐manipulative osteopathic treatment vs no intervention | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain intensity (0‐10cm visual analogue scale) soft non‐manipulative osteopathic treatment vs no intervention | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Withdrawals due to adverse events soft non‐manipulative osteopathic treatment vs no intervention | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Directed stress management (it is unclear whether these interventions replaced standard treatment or were added to standard treatment) versus standard treatment for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with Crohn's disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors Directed stress management (it is unclear whether these interventions replaced standard treatment or were added to standard treatment) vs standard treatment | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain frequency or change in pain frequency Directed stress management (it is unclear whether these interventions replaced standard treatment or were added to standard treatment) vs standard treatment | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain intensity (author‐derived formula based on a 1‐3 point scale) Directed stress management (it is unclear whether these interventions replaced standard treatment or were added to standard treatment) vs standard treatment | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Withdrawals due to adverse events Directed stress management (it is unclear whether these interventions replaced standard treatment or were added to standard treatment) vs standard treatment | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Self‐directed stress management (it is unclear whether these interventions replaced standard treatment or were added to standard treatment) versus standard treatment for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with Crohn's disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors Self‐directed stress management (it is unclear whether these interventions replaced standard treatment or were added to standard treatment) vs standard treatment | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain frequency or change in pain frequency Self‐directed stress management (it is unclear whether these interventions replaced standard treatment or were added to standard treatment) vs standard treatment | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain intensity (author‐derived formula based on a 1‐3 point scale) Self‐directed stress management (it is unclear whether these interventions replaced standard treatment or were added to standard treatment) vs standard treatment | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Withdrawals due to adverse events Self‐directed stress management (it is unclear whether these interventions replaced standard treatment or were added to standard treatment) vs standard treatment | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Enteric‐release glyceryl trinitrate compared to placebo for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with Crohn's disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors Enteric‐release glyceryl trinitrate vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Abdominal pain frequency or change in frequency Enteric‐release glyceryl trinitrate vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Abdominal pain intensity or change in intensity Enteric‐release glyceryl trinitrate vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Withdrawal due to adverse events Enteric‐release glyceryl trinitrate vs placebo | RR 3.18 [0.94, 10.76] | 1 study · 70 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
100 mg olorinab 3 times/day compared to 25 mg olorinab 3 times/day for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with Crohn's disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors 100 mg olorinab 3 times/day vs 25 mg olorinab 3 times/day | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain frequency or change in pain frequency 100 mg olorinab 3 times/day vs 25 mg olorinab 3 times/day | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain intensity (30% reduction in weekly AAPS) 100 mg olorinab 3 times/day vs 25 mg olorinab 3 times/day | RR 0.66 [0.38, 1.15] | 1 study · 14 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Withdrawal due to adverse events 100 mg olorinab 3 times/day vs 25 mg olorinab 3 times/day | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 14 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Relaxation training compared to waitlist for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with inflammatory bowel disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors Relaxation training vs waitlist | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain frequency or change in pain frequency Relaxation training vs waitlist | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain intensity (0‐10cm visual analogue scale) Relaxation training vs waitlist | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 56 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Withdrawals due to adverse effects Relaxation training vs waitlist | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Web‐based education compared to standard book‐based education for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with inflammatory bowel disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors Web‐based education vs standard book‐based education | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Abdominal pain frequency or change in frequency Web‐based education vs standard book‐based education | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain intensity (0‐10cm visual analogue scale) Web‐based education vs standard book‐based education | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Withdrawals due to adverse events Web‐based education vs standard book‐based education | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Yoga intervention compared to no treatment (both groups received standard medical therapy) for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with inflammatory bowel disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors Yoga intervention vs no treatment (both groups received standard medical therapy) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Abdominal pain frequency or change in frequency Yoga intervention vs no treatment (both groups received standard medical therapy) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Abdominal pain intensity or change in intensity Yoga intervention vs no treatment (both groups received standard medical therapy) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Withdrawal due to adverse events Yoga intervention vs no treatment (both groups received standard medical therapy) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 100 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Transcranial direct current stimulation compared to sham stimulation for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with inflammatory bowel disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors Transcranial direct current stimulation vs sham stimulation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Abdominal pain frequency or change in frequency Transcranial direct current stimulation vs sham stimulation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain intensity (0‐10cm visual analogue scale) Transcranial direct current stimulation vs sham stimulation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 20 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Withdrawal due to adverse events Transcranial direct current stimulation vs sham stimulation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 20 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |
Kefir ( Lactobacillus bacteria) compared to no intervention for the management of abdominal pain in Crohn's disease and inflammatory bowel disease
Population: people with inflammatory bowel disease
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment success as defined by the authors Kefir ( Lactobacillus bacteria) vs no intervention | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Abdominal pain frequency or change in frequency Kefir ( Lactobacillus bacteria) vs no intervention | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain intensity IBD (4‐point rating scale from 0 to 3) Â Kefir ( Lactobacillus bacteria) vs no intervention | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 48 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pain intensity CD (4‐point rating scale from 0 to 3) Kefir ( Lactobacillus bacteria) vs no intervention | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 20 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Withdrawals due to adverse events Kefir ( Lactobacillus bacteria) vs no intervention | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 20 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |