Search

Chronic prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a complex condition which causes a significant burden on the diagnosed individuals. Assessment and management are perplexing, often resulting in unsatisfactory outcomes. Existing research has only focused on patients' perspectives of pain experiences, but scant evidence is available to understand the barriers that undermine effective pain management. Using an exploratory approach, this study examined these barriers from practitioners' perspectives. Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted with practitioners across disciplines who have experience in chronic pelvic pain management in males. Practitioners expressed their views and experiences in supporting men with CP/CPPS and what barriers they perceived when providing treatment for patients. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis supported by NVivo software. Five broad and interrelated themes were identified: (1) Where to Start, (2) Insufficient Resources, (3) Prioritisation, (4) Training and Confident Practice and (5) Constraints in Help-Seeking. Practitioners value multimodal management using a biopsychosocial approach; however, practical challenges prevent practitioners from choosing and applying this approach in clinical practice. The findings also identified some unique challenges faced by men with CP/CPPS consistent with previous evidence from patient perspective. Refining terminology, developing specific resources, and increasing psychosocial treatment options are urgently needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) is a complex condition. Despite recommendations for the inclusion of non-pharmacological treatment in the management of CP/CPPS, the focus has predominantly been on the inclusion of physical therapies with minimal discussion of psychological interventions. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to evaluate peer-reviewed studies of psychological interventions for men with CP/CPPS to determine their therapeutic efficacy and quality of intervention. Methods: The review was registered in PROSPERO and based on PRISMA 2020 protocol. The systematic literature search was conducted in six databases. Quantitative studies of psychological intervention for adult men with CP/CPPS that provided outcome measures of pain, quality of life and/or psychological symptoms were reviewed. The Oxford level of evidence and Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies developed by the Effective Public Health Practice were employed. Results: A total of 4,503 studies were reviewed; seven met the inclusion criteria. The included studies were randomised controlled trials, cohort, repeated measures, and case-series studies, with most including combined treatment for CP/CPPS. Cognitive therapy, cognitive behavioural therapy, or paradoxical relaxation training were found to be effective. However, high risks of bias were found in all included studies, limiting the generalisability and reliability of findings. Conclusions: Evidence is preliminary but shows promise for psychological treatment either as a combined or standalone treatment for CP/CPPS. However, there is a need to develop research with a more rigorous methodology to evaluate psychological treatments for men with CP/CPPS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]