Outcomes of Interdisciplinary Programs for Reducing Pain and Disability in Individuals With Chronic Pelvic Pain: A Systematic Review

Darryl Young, Tania Gardner, Jillian Cardinali, Emily T. Norris, Anna Mann, Amy Slutzky, Karen J. Klingman
In: Journal of Women's & Pelvic Health Physical Therapy · 2026 · vol. 50(2) , pp. 125–136 · doi:10.1097/jwh.0000000000000367 · W7131213824
article OA: closed CC0
Full text JSON View on OpenAlex View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-28 ⓘ

This systematic review of 21 studies found that interdisciplinary programs for chronic pelvic pain most commonly include physical therapy and psychotherapy, with some studies showing medium to large effects on outcomes.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Background: The treatment of patients with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) is complex. Reviews and clinical practice guidelines recommend an interdisciplinary approach, but the outcomes of such an approach have not been summarized. This study investigated the outcomes of interdisciplinary programs treating CPP. Methods: PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and PsycInfo (ProQuest) were searched for English-language publications presenting original research. Selection criteria are the following: adult individuals with CPP being treated by at least 2 different specialties. Risk of bias was assessed using either the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Qualitative Checklist, or the Joanna Briggs Institute Case Report tool. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen d for studies reporting sufficient data. Results: Data were extracted from 21 studies for review. Two were determined to be of good quality (2 observational studies). The number of health care disciplines included in the interdisciplinary teams ranged from 2 to 7, with physical therapy and psychotherapy the most represented. Forty-nine different outcome measures were used across the 21 studies. This variation precluded meta-analysis, but effect sizes were calculated for 6/21 of the studies (large magnitude: 3 and medium: 3). Discussion: Physical therapy and psychotherapy were the most common disciplines included in interdisciplinary programs managing patients with CPP. A lack of high-quality studies and variation in the outcome measures utilized were highlighted in this review. There is a need for high-quality studies and consensus on the use of outcome measures when investigating the outcomes of interdisciplinary programs treating patients with CPP.
Full text 1,768 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 4 sections · click to expand

Background

The treatment of patients with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) is complex. Reviews and clinical practice guidelines recommend an interdisciplinary approach, but the outcomes of such an approach have not been summarized. This study investigated the outcomes of interdisciplinary programs treating CPP.

Methods

PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and PsycInfo (ProQuest) were searched for English-language publications presenting original research. Selection criteria are the following: adult individuals with CPP being treated by at least 2 different specialties. Risk of bias was assessed using either the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Qualitative Checklist, or the Joanna Briggs Institute Case Report tool. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen d for studies reporting sufficient data.

Results

Data were extracted from 21 studies for review. Two were determined to be of good quality (2 observational studies). The number of health care disciplines included in the interdisciplinary teams ranged from 2 to 7, with physical therapy and psychotherapy the most represented. Forty-nine different outcome measures were used across the 21 studies. This variation precluded meta-analysis, but effect sizes were calculated for 6/21 of the studies (large magnitude: 3 and medium: 3).

Discussion

Physical therapy and psychotherapy were the most common disciplines included in interdisciplinary programs managing patients with CPP. A lack of high-quality studies and variation in the outcome measures utilized were highlighted in this review. There is a need for high-quality studies and consensus on the use of outcome measures when investigating the outcomes of interdisciplinary programs treating patients with CPP.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

chronic_pelvic_pain

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (37)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-07-28T06:55:22.213180+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK