Comparative Effectiveness of Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Pain and Quality of Life in Women with Endometriosis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background: Endometriosis is a chronic gynecological disorder characterized by pain and impaired quality of life (QoL). While pharmacological and surgical options exist, their limitations necessitate complementary strategies. The comparative effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions remains uncertain. Objective: This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to evaluate and rank the efficacy of non-pharmacological therapies for pain and QoL in women with endometriosis. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and CNKI from inception to August 31, 2025. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared structured non-pharmacological interventions—acupuncture (ACU), exercise (EXE), nutritional supplementation (NUT), physical therapy (PHY), or psychological interventions (PSY)—against conventional care (CON). Primary outcomes were pain (overall, pelvic, dysmenorrhea) and QoL; the secondary outcome was anxiety. Results: Thirty-three RCTs involving 2323 women were included. For overall pain, PHY (SMD = −1.44), ACU (SMD = −1.27), and PSY (SMD = −1.22) were significantly superior to CON, with PHY ranking highest (SUCRA = 74.4%). ACU was most effective for pelvic pain (SMD = −4.53; SUCRA = 99.1%), while PHY was optimal for dysmenorrhea (SMD = −1.30; SUCRA = 82.3%). Both ACU (SMD = 4.09) and PHY (SMD = 4.18) significantly improved QoL compared to CON. No statistically significant differences were observed among interventions for anxiety. Conclusion: Non-pharmacological interventions, particularly PHY and ACU, provide significant benefits for pain and QoL in endometriosis, with subtype-specific advantages. These findings support their integration into multimodal management pathways.