Can we improve cognitive-behavioral therapy for chronic back pain treatment engagement and adherence? A controlled trial of tailored versus standard therapy

Defining and operationalizing personalized psychological treatment - a systematic literature review

This systematic literature review aimed to propose a definition of personalized psychological treatment and to suggest how the definition can be operationalized. PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to 11 December 2023 for studies in which a definition of personalized psychological treatment was included or a systematic operationalization of personalized psychological treatment was described. Based on a narrative synthesis of the collected definitions, summary categories were developed that informed the proposed definition. Operationalizations were described according to what aspect of treatment, how and when treatment was personalized. The extent to which the operationalizations deviated from the proposed definition was assessed. Thirty-four studies with definitions and 200 with operationalizations were included. The following definition was proposed: personalized psychological treatment aims to optimize treatment outcome for the individual patient by tailoring treatment to unique or specific needs, preferences or other characteristics and includes a systematic adaptation of treatment or a differentiation between treatment strategies. Based on the operationalizations, timing of personalization, specification of the systematic approach and treatment elements that could be personalized were added to the proposed definition. Evidence-based personalization of psychological treatments can be enhanced by clear operationalization based on a comprehensive definition of personalization.

The effects of telehealth-delivered mindfulness meditation, cognitive therapy, and behavioral activation for chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a significant problem affecting millions of people worldwide. Three widely implemented psychological techniques used for CLBP management are cognitive therapy (CT), mindfulness meditation (MM), and behavioral activation (BA). This study aimed to evaluate the relative immediate (pre- to post-treatment) and longer term (pre-treatment to 3- and 6-month follow-ups) effects of group, videoconference-delivered CT, BA, and MM for CLBP.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of a three-arm, randomized clinical trial comparing the effects of three active treatments-CT, BA, and MM-with no inert control condition. Participants were N = 302 adults with CLBP, who were randomized to condition. The primary outcome was pain interference, and other secondary outcomes were also examined. The primary study end-point was post-treatment. Intent-to-treat analyses were undertaken for each time point, with the means of the changes in outcomes compared among the three groups using an analysis of variance (ANOVA). Effect sizes and confidence intervals are also reported.

RESULTS

Medium-to-large effect size reductions in pain interference were found within BA, CT, and MM (ds from - .71 to - 1.00), with gains maintained at both follow-up time points. Effect sizes were generally small to medium for secondary outcomes for all three conditions (ds from - .20 to - .71). No significant between-group differences in means or changes in outcomes were found at any time point, except for change in sleep disturbance from pre- to post-treatment, improving more in BA than MM (d =  - .49).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this trial, one of the largest telehealth trials of psychological treatments to date, critically determined that group, videoconference-delivered CT, BA, and MM are effective for CLBP and can be implemented in clinical practice to improve treatment access. The pattern of results demonstrated similar improvements across treatments and outcome domains, with effect sizes consistent with those observed in prior research testing in-person delivered and multi-modal psychological pain treatments. Thus, internet treatment delivery represents a tool to scale up access to evidence-based chronic pain treatments and to overcome widespread disparities in healthcare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03687762.

Factors Associated With Interest in Engaging in Psychological Interventions for Pain Management

OBJECTIVE

Engagement in evidence-based psychological interventions for pain management is low. Identifying characteristics associated with interest in interventions can inform approaches to increase uptake and engagement. The purpose of this study was to examine factors associated with interest in psychological interventions among persons with chronic noncancer pain receiving prescription opioids.

METHODS

Participants with chronic noncancer pain and a new 30 to 90 day opioid prescription were recruited from 2 health systems. Participants (N=845) completed measures regarding pain, opioid use, psychiatric symptoms, emotional support, and interest in psychological interventions for pain management.

RESULTS

There were 245 (29.0%) participants who reported a high interest in psychological interventions for pain management. In bivariate analyses, variables associated with interest included younger age, female sex, greater pain severity, greater pain interference, greater number of pain sites, lower emotional support, depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder ( P <0.05). In a multivariate model, greater pain severity (odds ratio [OR]=1.17; CI: 1.04-1.32), depression (OR=2.10; CI: 1.39-3.16), post-traumatic stress disorder (OR=1.85; CI: 1.19-2.95), and lower emotional support (OR=0.69; CI: 0.5-0.97) remained statistically significant.

DISCUSSION

The rate of interest in psychological interventions for pain management was low, which may indicate that patients initiating opioid treatment of chronic noncancer pain have low interest in psychological interventions. Greater pain severity and psychiatric distress were related to interest, and patients with these characteristics may especially benefit from psychological interventions. Providers may want to refer to psychological interventions before or when opioids are initiated. Additional work is needed to determine whether this would reduce long-term opioid use.

Interventions to Improve Long-Term Adherence to Physical Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of physical rehabilitation interventions, supplemented with one or more adherence-enhancing components, on outcomes among adults with hip or knee osteoarthritis or chronic lower back pain.

DESIGN

Primary literature search from inception of each database to July 27, 2021, guided by relevant search terms and keywords to search titles and abstracts. All articles meeting eligibility criteria were included for data abstraction.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, and Embase.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomized and nonrandomized trials evaluating adherence-focused intervention components conducted in addition to an index usual care or usual care-like physical rehabilitation program among adults with hip or knee osteoarthritis or chronic low back pain. Eligible studies included a comparator group of the same index physical rehabilitation intervention without the adjunctive adherence components. Included studies measured outcomes at least 3 months after the rehabilitation course.

RESULTS

Of the 10 studies meeting inclusion criteria, 6 interventions were delivered concurrent to an index rehabilitation program and 4 were delivered sequentially. Of the 3 studies that reported a positive effect on long-term adherence, only 1 was a low risk of bias study. There is very limited evidence of a beneficial treatment effect of adjunct adherence interventions on long-term physical function, self-efficacy, or adverse events.

CONCLUSION

We found inadequate evidence evaluating adherence-enhancing interventions for the specific promotion of long-term adherence to home rehabilitation programs. Future studies should consider testing interventions specifically built to target behavioral maintenance of home rehabilitation programs.

Qualitative Insights Regarding the Use of Tai Chi for Pain Management Among Adults With HIV

Background

Approximately one-half of all adults with HIV experience chronic pain. Needed are nonpharmacological approaches to improve pain management in this population.

Methods

For this study, we conducted in-depth qualitative interviews (n = 20) with thirteen adults with HIV and 7 HIV care providers regarding their perceptions of Tai Chi for chronic pain management. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, double-coded, and analyzed using applied thematic analysis.

Results

HIV patients had limited prior exposure to Tai Chi and had not previously considered this practice for pain management. However, after viewing a brief video demonstration of Tai Chi, patients recognized potential benefits, including relaxation, stress reduction, and pain lessening. Patients were surprised by the gentle nature of Tai Chi and expressed enthusiasm to learn more about Tai Chi. HIV healthcare providers similarly had limited knowledge of Tai Chi for pain management. HIV care providers shared several helpful insights on the potential implementation of Tai Chi with this population.

Conclusions

Adults with HIV and healthcare providers were optimistic that Tai Chi would reduce stress and ease chronic pain. These data suggest that Tai Chi would be of interest to HIV patients and care providers as a novel pain management strategy.

Effect of Pain Coping Skills Training on Pain and Pain Medication Use for Women With Breast Cancer

CONTEXT

Pain is distressing for women with breast cancer. Pain medication may not provide full relief and can have negative side-effects. Cognitive-behavioral pain intervention protocols reduce pain severity and improve self-efficacy for pain management. These interventions' impact on pain medication use is less clear. Intervention length and coping skills use might play a role in pain outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

Secondary analysis to examine differences in pain severity, pain medication use, pain self-efficacy, and coping skill use after five- and one-session cognitive-behavioral pain intervention protocols. Pain self-efficacy and coping skills use were assessed as mediators of intervention effects on pain and pain medication use.

METHODS

Women (N = 327) with stage I-III breast cancer were enrolled in a randomized trial comparing individually-delivered, five- and one-session pain coping skills training (PCST). Pain severity, pain medication use, pain self-efficacy, and coping skills use were assessed preintervention and five to eight weeks later (postintervention).

RESULTS

Pain and pain medication use significantly decreased, while pain self-efficacy increased pre-post for women randomized to both conditions (P's <.05). Five-session PCST participants demonstrated less pain (P =.03) and pain medication use (P =.04), and more pain self-efficacy (P =.02) and coping skills use (P =.04) at postintervention compared to one-session PCST participants. Pain self-efficacy mediated the relationship of intervention condition with pain and pain medication use.

CONCLUSION

Both conditions led to improvements in pain, pain medication use, pain self-efficacy, and coping skills use, and 5-session PCST showed the greatest benefits. Brief cognitive-behavioral pain intervention improve pain outcomes, and pain self-efficacy may play a role in these effects.

Perceived barriers, facilitators and usefulness of a psychoeducational intervention for individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain and depression in primary care

Background and aims

Self-management interventions have the potential to improve patient' pain condition as they involve tasks aimed at managing symptoms and reducing interference with activities, mood and relationships due to pain. However, research on factors that facilitate or hinder pain self-management has overlooked patients with both chronic musculoskeletal pain and depression in primary care settings, also leaving unattended patient views on the usefulness of such programs. Thus, the main aim of this study was to gather meaningful information to help promoting adequate self-management. Specifically, it attempts to identify patients' perceptions of barriers and facilitators of group-based psychoeducational intervention and to explore its perceived usefulness in promoting self-management.

Method

This qualitative study explored perceived barriers and facilitators of a psychoeducational intervention for the management of chronic musculoskeletal pain and depression previously tested in a Randomized Control Trial. We conducted focus groups and individual interviews with fifteen adult patients with both chronic musculoskeletal pain and depression recruited from primary care centres in Tarragona province (Catalonia, Spain). A content thematic analysis was carried out to examine the data. This study followed the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) guidelines.

Results

Findings revealed that perceived barriers included lack of motivation, time constraints, pain, depression, ineffectiveness of pain-relief strategies and activity avoidance. Facilitators were having a supportive family/friends, the positive effects of self-management, high motivation, being a proactive patient. Peer support and identification, the positive effect of sessions, and free expression were highlighted as key elements of the psychoeducational intervention.

Conclusion

The psychoeducational intervention was perceived as useful in promoting self-management practices. Barriers and facilitators in using self-management strategies were related, mainly, to internal personal characteristics of the patients being similar among different cultural backgrounds and distinct chronic conditions.

Implications

These findings can help to guide clinicians in the development and implementation of more effective pain self-management interventions for patients with chronic pain and depression by attending to their needs and preferences.

Patient-Centered Pain Care Using Artificial Intelligence and Mobile Health Tools: A Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial

Importance

Cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain (CBT-CP) is a safe and effective alternative to opioid analgesics. Because CBT-CP requires multiple sessions and therapists are scarce, many patients have limited access or fail to complete treatment.

Objectives

To determine if a CBT-CP program that personalizes patient treatment using reinforcement learning, a field of artificial intelligence (AI), and interactive voice response (IVR) calls is noninferior to standard telephone CBT-CP and saves therapist time.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a randomized noninferiority, comparative effectiveness trial including 278 patients with chronic back pain from the Department of Veterans Affairs health system (recruitment and data collection from July 11, 2017-April 9, 2020). More patients were randomized to the AI-CBT-CP group than to the control (1.4:1) to maximize the system's ability to learn from patient interactions.

Interventions

All patients received 10 weeks of CBT-CP. For the AI-CBT-CP group, patient feedback via daily IVR calls was used by the AI engine to make weekly recommendations for either a 45-minute or 15-minute therapist-delivered telephone session or an individualized IVR-delivered therapist message. Patients in the comparison group were offered 10 therapist-delivered telephone CBT-CP sessions (45 minutes/session).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ; range 0-24), measured at 3 months (primary end point) and 6 months. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity and pain interference. Consensus guidelines were used to identify clinically meaningful improvements for responder analyses (eg, a 30% improvement in RMDQ scores and pain intensity). Data analyses were performed from April 2021 to May 2022.

Results

The study population included 278 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.9 [12.2] years; 248 [89.2%] men; 225 [81.8%] White individuals). The 3-month mean RMDQ score difference between AI-CBT-CP and standard CBT-CP was -0.72 points (95% CI, -2.06 to 0.62) and the 6-month difference was -1.24 (95% CI, -2.48 to 0); noninferiority criterion were met at both the 3- and 6-month end points (P < .001 for both). A greater proportion of patients receiving AI-CBT-CP had clinically meaningful improvements at 6 months as indicated by RMDQ (37% vs 19%; P = .01) and pain intensity scores (29% vs 17%; P = .03). There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes. Pain therapy using AI-CBT-CP required less than half of the therapist time as standard CBT-CP.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this randomized comparative effectiveness trial indicated that AI-CBT-CP was noninferior to therapist-delivered telephone CBT-CP and required substantially less therapist time. Interventions like AI-CBT-CP could allow many more patients to be served effectively by CBT-CP programs using the same number of therapists.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02464449.

Do I really have to do my homework? The role of homework compliance in cognitive behavioral therapy for irritable bowel syndrome

Treatment guidelines identify cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) as a treatment of choice for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). As a learning-based treatment, homework assignments are regarded as important for optimizing outcomes for CBT-treated patients. However, their actual benefit for IBS is unknown. This study examined whether homework completion corresponds with immediate and sustained treatment response in IBS patients enrolled in CBT treatment. Subjects were 358 IBS patients receiving clinic-based CBT (10 session), home-based CBT (4 session), or a 4 session, non-specific IBS education comparator as part of a large NIH trial. Homework completion was rated by clinician at each session. IBS symptom improvement was measured with the Clinician Global Improvement Scale at treatment week 5, post-treatment (week 12), and at follow-ups (weeks 22, 34, 46, 62). Homework completion rates over the 10-week acute phase corresponded with greater IBS symptom improvement and patient satisfaction at post-treatment. Early treatment homework completion did not predict early treatment response. Contrary to expectations, homework compliance rates were not greater among in-clinic session patients than home-based patients. Data lend empirical support to the clinical value of homework in teaching patients how to self-manage painful GI symptoms refractory to conventional medical and dietary therapies.

If you personalize it, will they use it?: Self-reported and observed use of a tailored, internet-based pain self-management program

Little is known about how individuals with chronic pain use tailored internet-based interventions. This study is the first to compare self-reported skill module use to observed module access and to examine each of these in relationship to tailored recommendations to access specific content. Participants (N = 58) enrolled in a 10-week trial of the Pain EASE program, a tailored internet-based intervention that includes 10 pain self-management skill modules. Participants completed a "Self-Assessment," which was used to provide a "Personalized Plan" that encouraged accessing specific modules. Participants self-reported module use during weekly data collection telephone calls. Program log data were extracted to capture "observed" module use during the trial period. Findings indicated significantly greater self-reported use of the Pain EASE modules compared to observed access with log data. Further, log data revealed that participants accessed less than half of the modules recommended to them via tailoring.

Online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) interventions for chronic pain: A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

We systematically reviewed all literature concerning online Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) interventions for chronic pain to evaluate their (1) ACT content, (2) design characteristics, (3) design rationales, and (4) adherence.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search was performed on July 9th, 2020 in; PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Search terms related to: Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, chronic pain, and eHealth. Extracted data concerned ACT content, design characteristics, adherence, and design rationales.

RESULTS

20 articles, in which 14 interventions were described, met all inclusion criteria. Adherence and design rationales were described to a limited extent in the included studies. In total, the majority provided an overview of the included ACT processes. In 10 articles it was described that the intervention was delivered via a dedicated website (n = 10), which was sometimes combined with an app (n = 3). Guidance was included in most studies (n = 19). Studies including RCT's (n = 8) reported online ACT interventions to be effective.

CONCLUSION

Online ACT interventions for chronic pain have been shown to be effective and have generally been constructed in line with ACT theory. However, the majority of studies does not provide information about the choices to optimize the fit between task, technology, and user. Considerations behind the choices for intervention features as well as design rationales could help to optimize future online ACT interventions. Additionally, consistent attention should be paid to measurement and operationalization of adherence, since this is a crucial link between content, design and effectiveness.

Personalized versus standard cognitive behavioral therapy for fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms or cancer-related fatigue in cancer survivors: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial (MATCH-study)

Background

Fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms, and cancer-related fatigue are prevalent symptoms among cancer survivors, adversely affecting patients’ quality of life and daily functioning. Effect sizes of interventions targeting these symptoms are mostly small to medium. Personalizing treatment is assumed to improve efficacy. However, thus far the empirical support for this approach is lacking. The aim of this study is to investigate if systematically personalized cognitive behavioral therapy is more efficacious than standard cognitive behavioral therapy in cancer survivors with moderate to severe fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms, and/or cancer-related fatigue.

Methods

The study is designed as a non-blinded, multicenter randomized controlled trial with two treatment arms (ratio 1:1): (a) systematically personalized cognitive behavioral therapy and (b) standard cognitive behavioral therapy. In the standard treatment arm, patients receive an evidence-based diagnosis-specific treatment protocol for fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms, or cancer-related fatigue. In the second arm, treatment is personalized on four dimensions: (a) the allocation of treatment modules based on ecological momentary assessments, (b) treatment delivery, (c) patients’ needs regarding the symptom for which they want to receive treatment, and (d) treatment duration. In total, 190 cancer survivors who experience one or more of the targeted symptoms and ended their medical treatment with curative intent at least 6 months to a maximum of 5 years ago will be included. Primary outcome is limitations in daily functioning. Secondary outcomes are level of fear of cancer recurrence, depressive symptoms, fatigue severity, quality of life, goal attainment, therapist time, and drop-out rates. Participants are assessed at baseline (T0), and after 6 months (T1) and 12 months (T2).

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of personalized cognitive behavioral therapy to standard cognitive behavioral therapy in cancer survivors. The study has several innovative characteristics, among which is the personalization of interventions on several dimensions. If proven effective, the results of this study provide a first step in developing an evidence-based framework for personalizing therapies in a systematic and replicable way.

Trial registration

The Dutch Trial Register (NTR) NL7481 (NTR7723). Registered on 24 January 2019.

Predictors of engagement in an internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy program for veterans with chronic low back pain

Internet-based interventions for chronic pain have demonstrated efficacy and may address access barriers to care. Participant characteristics have been shown to affect engagement with these programs; however, limited information is available about the relationship between participant characteristics and engagement with internet-based programs for self-management of chronic pain. The current study examined relationships between demographic and clinical characteristics and engagement with the Pain EASE program, a self-directed, internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy intervention for veterans with chronic low back pain (cLBP). Veterans with cLBP were enrolled in a 10 week trial of the Pain EASE program. Engagement measures included the number of logins, access to coping skill modules, and completed study staff-initiated weekly check-in calls. Regression analyses were conducted to identify significant predictors of engagement from hypothesized predictors (e.g., race/ethnicity, age, depressive symptom severity, and pain interference). Participants (N = 58) were 93% male, 60.3% identified as White, and had a mean age of 54.5 years. Participants logged into the program a median of 3.5 times, accessed a median of 2 skill modules, and attended a median of 6 check-in calls. Quantile regression revealed that, at the 50th percentile, non-White-identified participants accessed fewer modules than White-identified participants (p = .019). Increased age was associated with increased module use (p = .001). No clinical characteristics were significantly associated with engagement measures. White-identified race/ethnicity and increased age were associated with greater engagement with the Pain EASE program. Results highlight the importance of defining and increasing engagement in internet-delivered pain care.

Pain-related beliefs, cognitive processes, and electroencephalography band power as predictors and mediators of the effects of psychological chronic pain interventions

ABSTRACT

The current study used data from a clinical trial to identify variables that are associated with and/or mediate the beneficial effects of 4 psychological chronic pain treatments: one teaching patients self-hypnosis to reduce pain intensity (HYP), one teaching self-hypnosis to change thoughts about pain (hypnotic cognitive therapy [HYP-CT]), one teaching cognitive restructuring skills to change thoughts about pain (cognitive therapy [CT]), and one providing education about pain (ED; included as an active control condition). Of 17 possible mechanism variables examined, and with alpha not corrected for multiple comparisons, significant between-group differences were observed for 3. Two of these (changes in beliefs about control over pain and number of days of skill practice) were supported as mediators of the beneficial effects of HYP, CT, or HYP-CT, relative to ED. Six mechanism variables evidenced significant pretreatment to post-treatment changes in the sample as a whole, without showing significant between-group differences. Pretreatment to post-treatment changes in all 6 were associated with improvements in pain interference, pain intensity, or both. In addition, participant ratings of therapeutic alliance at post-treatment were associated significantly with improvements in both pain intensity and pain interference in the sample as a whole. Thus, of the 17 possible mediators examined, there were relatively few that served as mediators for the beneficial effects of specific treatments; a larger number of variables predicted treatment outcome overall. The extent to which these variables are treatment mediators (ie, are responsible for, rather than merely associated with, treatment-related improvements) will require further research.

Cognitive therapy, mindfulness-based stress reduction, and behavior therapy for the treatment of chronic pain: randomized controlled trial

ABSTRACT

Trials of cognitive therapy (CT), mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), and behavior therapy (BT) suggest that all 3 treatments produce reductions in pain and improvements in physical function, mood, and sleep disturbance in people with chronic pain conditions. Fewer studies have compared the relative efficacies of these treatments. In this randomized controlled study, we compared CT, MBSR, BT, and treatment as usual (TAU) in a sample of people with chronic low back pain (N = 521). Eight individual sessions were administered with weekly assessments of outcomes. Consistent with the prior work, we found that CT, MBSR, and BT produced similar pretreatment to posttreatment effects on all outcomes and revealed similar levels of maintenance of treatment gains at 6-month follow-up. All 3 active treatments produced greater improvements than TAU. Weekly assessments allowed us to assess rates of change; ie, how quickly a given treatment produced significant differences, compared with TAU, on a given outcome. The 3 treatments differed significantly from TAU on average by session 6, and this rate of treatment effect was consistent across all treatments. Results suggest the possibility that the specific techniques included in CT, MBSR, and BT may be less important for producing benefits than people participating in any techniques rooted in these evidence-based psychosocial treatments for chronic pain.

Altered mesocorticolimbic functional connectivity in chronic low back pain patients at rest and following sad mood induction

Depressive symptoms are common among individuals with chronic pain. Previous work suggests that chronic pain patients have difficulty regulating emotional responses, which is a risk factor for the development of major depressive disorder (MDD). Function of the mesocorticolimbic system, a neural network associated with reward processing, contributes to emotion regulation. This network's dysfunction has been described in chronic pain and MDD research and potentially underlies the relationship among emotion dysregulation, chronic pain, and MDD development. Given that mood induction paradigms have been used to measure emotion regulation, the present study examined intrinsic mesocorticolimbic functional connectivity (FC) after induced sad mood in individuals with and without chronic low back pain (cLBP). Thirty-three MDD-free individuals (17 cLBP) underwent resting-state scanning before and after sad memory-evoked mood induction. A Group [cLBP, healthy control (HC)] x Mood (Neutral, Sadness) repeated measures ANCOVA was conducted on seed-based FC data using a mesolimbic a priori region of interest. Interaction effects were identified in the orbital frontal cortex and inferior frontal gyrus [F_(2,29) = 21.07, p_FDR < .05. h_p² = .5]. Whereas cLBP showed significantly greater FC between these two regions and the mesolimbic seed under neutral mood, FC among these regions increased in HC and decreased in cLBP under sad mood. Exploratory graph theory analyses further describe between-group differences in mesocorticolimbic network properties. Findings support previous literature describing mesocorticolimbic dysfunction in cLBP and demonstrate aberrant function in emotion regulation. Mesocorticolimbic dysfunction during emotion regulation might contribute to the development of certain depressive phenotypes in chronic pain patients.

A Pilot Study of a Chronic Pain Self-Management Program Delivered by Community Health Workers to Underserved African American Older Adults

OBJECTIVE

African American older adults living in disadvantaged communities are disproportionately burdened by disabling pain. To address their needs, we tested the feasibility and potential effects of a cognitive-behavioral chronic pain self-management program delivered by community health workers.

DESIGN

A single-group, pre-post evaluation of the STEPS-2 (Seniors using Technology to Engage in Pain Self-management) intervention, in which participants learned pain-management skills through web-based videos. They were also given wearable activity trackers to facilitate incremental increases in walking. In weekly telephone calls, community health workers helped participants apply skills and set goals.

SUBJECTS/SETTING

Thirty-one adults in Detroit, Michigan (97% African American, 97% female, mean 68.7 years), with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

METHODS

Participants completed telephone surveys at baseline and eight weeks. We measured changes in PROMIS pain interference and pain intensity, as well as Patient Global Impression of Change in pain and functioning. Feasibility indicators included participant engagement and satisfaction, and fidelity to session protocols by community health workers.

RESULTS

Participants on average completed 6.6/7 sessions, and 100% agreed or strongly agreed that they improved their understanding of pain management. Average community health worker fidelity score was 1.79 (0 to 2 scale). Pain interference decreased from baseline to post-program (T-score 61.6 to 57.3, P=.000), as did pain intensity (0 to 10 scale, 6.3 to 5.1, P=.004). Approximately 90% of participants reported that pain and function were at least "a little better" since baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

An intervention combining mobile health tools with support from community health workers holds promise for improving pain outcomes among underserved older adults.

Pain catastrophizing as a treatment process variable in cognitive behavioural therapy for adults with chronic pain

BACKGROUND

Interdisciplinary cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for chronic pain is effective at improving function, mood and pain interference among individuals with disabling chronic pain. Traditionally, CBT assumes that cognitive change is an active therapeutic ingredient in the determination of treatment outcome. Pain catastrophizing, a cognitive response style that views the experience of pain as uncontrollable, permanent and destructive, has been identified as an important maladaptive cognition which contributes to difficulties with the management of chronic pain. Consequently, pain catastrophizing is commonly targeted in CBT for chronic pain.

OBJECTIVES

To examine change trajectories in pain catastrophizing during treatment and assess the relevance of these trajectories to outcomes at posttreatment.

METHODS

Participants included individuals with chronic pain (N = 463) who completed a 3-week program of interdisciplinary CBT. Pain catastrophizing was assessed weekly over the 3 weeks of treatment and latent growth curve modelling was used to identify trajectories of change.

RESULTS

Findings indicated the presence of two classes of linear change, one with a significant negative slope in pain catastrophizing (i.e. improved class) and the other with a non-significant slope (i.e. unchanged class). Next, latent growth mixture modelling examined treatment outcome in relation to class membership. These results indicated that individuals in the 'improved' PCS class had significantly greater improvement in pain interference and mood, as well as physical and mental quality of life compared to the 'unchanged' class.

CONCLUSIONS

Implications for our findings, in relation to the CBT model, are discussed.

A randomized controlled trial of cognitive behavioral therapy compared with diabetes education for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain

A randomized controlled trial compared cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and diabetes education (ED) as an adjunctive treatment for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP). We examined change from baseline to 12- and 36-week follow-up in overall pain intensity (NRS), neuropathic pain intensity/quality, pain interference, and mental health functioning, among others. Although CBT participants demonstrated improvement in pain intensity NRS, there were no between-condition differences at either follow-up. CBT reduced neuropathic pain intensity at 12-weeks more than ED. At 36-weeks, CBT was superior to ED for improving pain interference and mental health functioning. Results provide evidence of benefit of CBT for DPNP.

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00830011

Effects of hypnosis, cognitive therapy, hypnotic cognitive therapy, and pain education in adults with chronic pain: a randomized clinical trial

Chronic pain is a significant health problem worldwide with limited pharmacological treatment options. This study evaluated the relative efficacy of 4 treatment sessions each of 4 nonpharmacological treatments: (1) hypnotic cognitive therapy (using hypnosis to alter the meaning of pain); (2) standard cognitive therapy; (3) hypnosis focused on pain reduction, and (4) pain education. One hundred seventy-three individuals with chronic pain were randomly assigned to receive 4 sessions of 1 of the 4 treatments. Primary (pain intensity) and secondary outcome measures were administered by assessors unaware of treatment allocation at pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. Treatment effects were evaluated using analysis of variance, a generalized estimating equation approach, or a Fisher exact test, depending on the outcome domain examined. All 4 treatments were associated with medium to large effect size improvements in pain intensity that maintained up to 12 months posttreatment. Pretreatment to posttreatment improvements were observed across the 4 treatment conditions on the secondary outcomes of pain interference and depressive symptoms, with some return towards pretreatment levels at 12-month follow-up. No significant between-group differences emerged in omnibus analyses, and few statistically significant between-group differences emerged in the planned pairwise analyses, although the 2 significant effects that did emerge favored hypnotic cognitive therapy. Future research is needed to determine whether the significant differences that emerged are reliable.

Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs vs Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Arthritis Pain: A Randomized Withdrawal Trial

IMPORTANCE

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly prescribed for knee osteoarthritis. However, they are associated with uncertain long-term clinical benefit and significant toxic effects.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether discontinuing NSAIDs and engaging in a telephone-based cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) program is noninferior to continuing NSAIDs for patients with knee osteoarthritis.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The Stopping NSAIDs for Arthritis Pain multicenter randomized withdrawal trial was conducted for 364 patients taking NSAIDs for knee osteoarthritis pain on most days of the week for at least 3 months between September 1, 2013, and September 30, 2018. Analysis was performed on an intent-to-treat basis.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants discontinued their current NSAID and took 15 mg per day of meloxicam daily during a 2-week run-in period. Those who remained eligible were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive meloxicam or placebo for 4 weeks (blinded phase 1). Participants receiving meloxicam then continued this medication for 10 weeks, while those receiving placebo participated in a 10-week CBT program (unblinded phase 2).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score at 4 weeks with the noninferiority margin set at 1. Secondary outcomes included the area under the curve of the pain score after 4 weeks as well as the WOMAC pain score, area under the curve of the pain score, WOMAC disability score, and global impression of change after treatment at 14 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 180 participants (161 men; mean [SD] age, 58. 2 [11.8] years) were randomized to receive placebo followed by CBT, and a total of 184 participants (154 men; mean [SD] age, 58.5 [10.0] years) were randomized to receive meloxicam. After adjustment for baseline pain and study site, the estimated mean difference in WOMAC pain score between the placebo and meloxicam groups after 4 weeks was 1.4 (95% CI, 0.8-2.0; noninferiority test P = .92). At week 14, the adjusted mean difference in WOMAC pain score between the placebo (followed by CBT) and meloxicam groups was 0.8 (95% CI, 0.2-1.4; noninferiority P = .28). There was no statistically significant difference in the global impression of change (mean difference in scores, -0.2; 95% CI, -0.4 to 0.1; P = .15) or lower extremity disability (mean difference in scores, 0.9; 95% CI, -1.4 to 3.2; P = .45) between the 2 groups after 14 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with knee osteoarthritis, placebo and CBT (after placebo) are inferior to meloxicam. However, the WOMAC pain score differences between the 2 groups were small, and there were no statistically significant differences in participants' global impression of change or function after 14 weeks.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01799213.

Psychological therapies for the management of chronic pain (excluding headache) in adults

BACKGROUND

Chronic non-cancer pain, a disabling and distressing condition, is common in adults. It is a global public health problem and economic burden on health and social care systems and on people with chronic pain. Psychological treatments aim to reduce pain, disability and distress. This review updates and extends its previous version, published in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical efficacy and safety of psychological interventions for chronic pain in adults (age > 18 years) compared with active controls, or waiting list/treatment as usual (TAU).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological therapies by searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO to 16 April 2020. We also examined reference lists and trial registries, and searched for studies citing retrieved trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of psychological treatments compared with active control or TAU of face-to-face therapies for adults with chronic pain. We excluded studies of headache or malignant disease, and those with fewer than 20 participants in any arm at treatment end.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or more authors rated risk of bias, extracted data, and judged quality of evidence (GRADE). We compared cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), behavioural therapy (BT), and acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) with active control or TAU at treatment end, and at six month to 12 month follow-up. We did not analyse the few trials of other psychological treatments. We assessed treatment effectiveness for pain intensity, disability, and distress. We extracted data on adverse events (AEs) associated with treatment.

MAIN RESULTS

We added 41 studies (6255 participants) to 34 of the previous review's 42 studies, and now have 75 studies in total (9401 participants at treatment end). Most participants had fibromyalgia, chronic low back pain, rheumatoid arthritis, or mixed chronic pain. Most risk of bias domains were at high or unclear risk of bias, with selective reporting and treatment expectations mostly at unclear risk of bias. AEs were inadequately recorded and/or reported across studies. CBT The largest evidence base was for CBT (59 studies). CBT versus active control showed very small benefit at treatment end for pain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to -0.01; 3235 participants; 23 studies; moderate-quality evidence), disability (SMD -0.12, 95% CI -0.20 to -0.04; 2543 participants; 19 studies; moderate-quality evidence), and distress (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.00; 3297 participants; 24 studies; moderate-quality evidence). We found small benefits for CBT over TAU at treatment end for pain (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.33 to -0.10; 2572 participants; 29 studies; moderate-quality evidence), disability (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.19; 2524 participants; 28 studies; low-quality evidence), and distress (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.24; 2559 participants; 27 studies; moderate-quality evidence). Effects were largely maintained at follow-up for CBT versus TAU, but not for CBT versus active control. Evidence quality for CBT outcomes ranged from moderate to low. We rated evidence for AEs as very low quality for both comparisons. BT We analysed eight studies (647 participants). We found no evidence of difference between BT and active control at treatment end (pain SMD -0.67, 95% CI -2.54 to 1.20, very low-quality evidence; disability SMD -0.65, 95% CI -1.85 to 0.54, very low-quality evidence; or distress SMD -0.73, 95% CI -1.47 to 0.01, very low-quality evidence). At follow-up, effects were similar. We found no evidence of difference between BT and TAU (pain SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.17, low-quality evidence; disability SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.19, moderate-quality evidence; distress SMD 0.22, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.54, low-quality evidence) at treatment end. At follow-up, we found one to three studies with no evidence of difference between BT and TAU. We rated evidence for all BT versus active control outcomes as very low quality; for BT versus TAU. Evidence quality ranged from moderate to very low. We rated evidence for AEs as very low quality for BT versus active control. No studies of BT versus TAU reported AEs. ACT We analysed five studies (443 participants). There was no evidence of difference between ACT and active control for pain (SMD -0.54, 95% CI -1.20 to 0.11, very low-quality evidence), disability (SMD -1.51, 95% CI -3.05 to 0.03, very low-quality evidence) or distress (SMD -0.61, 95% CI -1.30 to 0.07, very low-quality evidence) at treatment end. At follow-up, there was no evidence of effect for pain or distress (both very low-quality evidence), but two studies showed a large benefit for reducing disability (SMD -2.56, 95% CI -4.22 to -0.89, very low-quality evidence). Two studies compared ACT to TAU at treatment end. Results should be interpreted with caution. We found large benefits of ACT for pain (SMD -0.83, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.09, very low-quality evidence), but none for disability (SMD -1.39, 95% CI -3.20 to 0.41, very low-quality evidence), or distress (SMD -1.16, 95% CI -2.51 to 0.20, very low-quality evidence). Lack of data precluded analysis at follow-up. We rated evidence quality for AEs to be very low. We encourage caution when interpreting very low-quality evidence because the estimates are uncertain and could be easily overturned.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found sufficient evidence across a large evidence base (59 studies, over 5000 participants) that CBT has small or very small beneficial effects for reducing pain, disability, and distress in chronic pain, but we found insufficient evidence to assess AEs. Quality of evidence for CBT was mostly moderate, except for disability, which we rated as low quality. Further trials may provide more precise estimates of treatment effects, but to inform improvements, research should explore sources of variation in treatment effects. Evidence from trials of BT and ACT was of moderate to very low quality, so we are very uncertain about benefits or lack of benefits of these treatments for adults with chronic pain; other treatments were not analysed. These conclusions are similar to our 2012 review, apart from the separate analysis of ACT.

Pilot study of a basic individualized cognitive behavioral therapy program for chronic pain in Japan

Background

Chronic pain is a major health problem, and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is its recommended treatment; however, efforts to develop CBT programs for chronic pain and assess their feasibility are remarkably delayed in Asia. Therefore, we conducted this pilot study to develop a basic individualized CBT for chronic pain (CBT-CP) and assessed its feasibility for use in Japan.

Methods

Our study was an open-labeled before–after trial without a control group conducted cooperatively in five Japanese tertiary care hospitals. Of 24 outpatients, 15, age 20–80, who experienced chronic pain for at least three months were eligible. They underwent an eight-session CBT-CP consisting of relaxation via a breathing method and progressive muscle relaxation, behavioral modification via activity pacing, and cognitive modification via cognitive reconstruction. The EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire five level (EQ5D-5 L) assessment as the primary outcome and quality of life (QOL), pain severity, disability, catastrophizing, self-efficacy, and depressive symptoms as secondary outcomes were measured using self-administered questionnaires at baseline, post-treatment, and 3-month follow-up. Intention-to-treat analyses were conducted.

Results

Effect size for EQ5D-5 L score was medium from baseline to post-treatment (Hedge’s g = − 0.72, 90% confidence interval = − 1.38 to − 0.05) and up to the 3-month follow-up (g = − 0.60, CI = − 1.22 to 0.02). Effect sizes for mental and role/social QOL, disability, catastrophizing, self-efficacy, and depressive symptoms were medium to large, although those for pain severity and physical QOL were small. The dropout rate was acceptably low at 14%. No severe adverse events occurred.

Conclusion

The findings suggest that CBT-CP warrants a randomized controlled trial in Japan.

Trial registration

University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR), UMIN000020880. Registered on 04 February 2016.

Internet-Based Pain Self-Management for Veterans: Feasibility and Preliminary Efficacy of the Pain EASE Program

OBJECTIVE

To develop and test the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a cognitive behavioral therapy-based, internet-delivered self-management program for chronic low back pain (cLBP) in veterans.

METHODS

Phase I included program development, involving expert panel and participant feedback. Phase II was a single-arm feasibility and preliminary efficacy study of the Pain e-health for Activity, Skills, and Education (Pain EASE) program. Feasibility (ie, website use, treatment credibility, satisfaction) was measured using descriptive methods. Mixed models were used to assess mean within-subject changes from baseline to 10 weeks post-baseline in pain interference (primary outcome, West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory, scale of 0 to 6), pain intensity, mood, fatigue, sleep, and depression.

RESULTS

Phase I participants (n = 15) suggested modifications including style changes, content reduction, additional "Test Your Knowledge" quizzes, and cognitive behavioral therapy skill practice monitoring form revisions for enhanced usability. In Phase II, participants (n = 58) were mostly male (93%) and White (60%), and had an average age of 55 years (standard deviation [SD] = 12) and moderate pain (mean score 5.9/10); 41 (71%) completed the post-baseline assessment. Participants (N = 58) logged on 6.1 (SD = 8.6) times over 10 weeks, and 85% reported being very or moderately satisfied with Pain EASE. Pain interference improved from a mean of 3.8 at baseline to 3.3 at 10 weeks (difference 0.5 [95% confidence interval 0.1 to 0.9], P = 0.008). Within-subject improvement also occurred for some secondary outcomes, including mood and depression symptoms.

DISCUSSION

Veterans with cLBP may benefit from technology-delivered interventions, which may also reduce pain interference. Overall, veterans found that Pain EASE, an internet-based self-management program, is feasible and satisfactory for cLBP.

Multi-disciplinary interventions for chronic pain involving education: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

There have been growing recommendations to include education in multi-disciplinary interventions targeting chronic pain management. However, effects of this strategy on short- and long-term self-management of chronic pain, remain largely unexplored.

OBJECTIVES

1. To provide an updated overview of studies that report on the impact of patient education in multi-disciplinary interventions, on self-management of chronic pain; 2. To explore associations between education and chronic pain self-management techniques; and 3. To identify the format and duration of suitable chronic pain interventions targeted at patient self-management.

METHODS

Design: Narrative systematic literature review of randomised or controlled study designs. Data Sources: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO. Participants: Adult patients with chronic pain of any aetiology participating in multi-disciplinary programs that included education. Main outcome measures: Assessments of level of pain, function, quality of life, self-efficacy, self-management, and any other relevant assessments. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: PRISMA guidelines, Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and TIDieR model.

RESULTS

Database searching identified 485 potential papers. After removal of duplicates, and irrelevant articles by title and abstract, 120 full-text articles were reviewed and 27 studies were included in this systematic review. Studies were predominantly from the United States (n = 8; 29.6%). Over one hundred outcome measures were identified across all studies, with significant variation also observed in terms of how chronic pain duration was defined, and how education was delivered to participants. Overall, positive benefits of education were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Education, as part of multi-disciplinary programs, is likely to improve self-management and self-efficacy in people with chronic pain of any aetiology. Heterogeneity in terms of: chronic pain duration; educational resources; healthcare professionals; and outcome measures, were identified as limitations. Further research, in the form of Randomised Controlled Trials addressing these limitations, is recommended.

The effects of behavioural counselling on the determinants of health behaviour change in adults with chronic musculoskeletal conditions making lifestyle changes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials was carried out to examine the effect of behavioural counselling on determinants of behaviour change in adults with chronic, painful musculoskeletal conditions.

METHODS

Seven databases were searched up to January 2019. Two reviewers independently screened title/abstracts and full texts. Eligible trials included those including participants over 18 years of age with a chronic, painful musculoskeletal condition, a measurement of at least one behavioural determinant and lifestyle behaviour, and where behavioural counselling was the distinguishing intervention. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analyses were conducted, using standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) when at least two trials examined the same outcome. The quality of the evidence was evaluated using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

Fourteen unique trials, reported in 16 publications, were included. Low-quality evidence showed that behavioural counselling has a small effect on increasing self-reported physical activity (standardized mean difference 0.26; 95% CI 0.00, 0.53). Very-low-quality evidence showed that behavioural counselling has a moderate effect on self-efficacy related to physical activity (standardized mean difference 0.69; 95% CI 0.19, 1.18). Low-quality evidence suggested that behavioural counselling has no effect on symptoms of depression and anxiety.

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural counselling may help to increase self-reported physical activity levels in adults with chronic painful musculoskeletal conditions. Self-efficacy may be a behavioural determinant in an underlying causal pathway explaining positive lifestyle change.

Predictors of Participation in a Nonpharmacological Intervention for Chronic Back Pain

Objective

Cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain (CBT-CP) has been identified as an evidence-based adjunct or alternative to opioid pain care. However, little is known about which patients participate in CBT-CP. This study examined predictors of enrollment in a noninferiority trial of in-person vs technology-based CBT-CP for patients with chronic back pain.

Setting

A single Veterans Health Affairs (VHA) medical center.

Subjects

Veterans with chronic back pain.

Design and Methods

For eligible participants (N = 290), individual factors (demographics, distance from a VHA medical center, pain intensity, receipt of opioid prescription, and recruitment method) collected at trial screening were examined to identify predictors of enrollment (i.e., signed consent form). Of those who enrolled, duration of participation in the treatment portion of the study was examined.

Results

Among eligible patients, 54% declined enrollment due to lack of interest. Regression analyses revealed that patients not in receipt of an opioid were more likely to enroll. The probability of being in the trial long enough to receive a "dose" of treatment (3 visits or more) was 0.76 (0.04).

Conclusions

Overall, enrollment rates were low. However, most patients who enrolled in the study (102 of 134 signed consent) were retained and received a treatment dose. Patients not receiving opioids were more likely to enroll, suggesting that patients who are prescribed opioids, an important group for treatment outreach, are likely underengaged. Identifying predictors of enrollment in CBT-CP may help increase recruitment efficiency and assist in targeting patients who may benefit but are not currently interested in treatment.

Enhancing Motivation for Change in the Management of Chronic Painful Conditions: a Review of Recent Literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to evaluate and summarize recent empirical research investigating motivational factors for management of chronic pain and headache disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research on motivation for non-pharmacological treatment of chronic pain and headache disorders has identified factors that influence initiation of and adherence to treatment. To address common factors that inhibit initiation of treatment (i.e., cost, time commitment), several electronic treatments have been developed. Self-efficacy is the most commonly studied psychosocial influence on treatment adherence, with evidence that it is positively correlated with adherence. Other studies have sought to improve adherence to treatment using motivational interviewing interventions. There is currently limited research on how to enhance motivation for initial adherence to non-pharmacological treatment for chronic pain and headache disorders. Instead of enhancing motivation, researchers have looked to reduce barriers to treatment with electronic health treatments; however, many of these studies have focused on intervention feasibility, rather than efficacy or effectiveness. Numerous studies have identified a relationship between self-efficacy and treatment adherence. Although motivational interviewing interventions have been shown to improve adherence to treatment, there is little evidence that they improve treatment outcomes. Recommendations for further investigation include improving interventions to enhance accessibility and adherence to treatment with the goal of improving outcomes, as well as identifying ways to improve treatment initiation and adherence in patients who are currently engaged in long-term opioid therapy.

Exploring the potential role of mesocorticolimbic circuitry in motivation for and adherence to chronic pain self-management interventions

Adherence to pain self-management strategies is associated with favorable psychobehavioral outcomes among individuals with chronic pain. Substantive adherence to treatments teaching these adaptive skills often proves challenging, resulting in poor individual and societal outcomes. Evidence demonstrates motivation for behavior change as a key predictor of treatment adherence. Despite behavioral techniques that target motivation, however, nonadherence persists as a barrier to positive clinical outcomes in chronic pain. Understanding the neurobiological mechanisms underlying treatment motivation might highlight novel avenues for augmentative therapies. The purpose of this review is to present theory and evidence that the mesocorticolimbic system (i.e., brain circuitry associated with reward processing and motivation) contributes to treatment motivation among chronic pain patients, ultimately influencing adherence. We review evidence for motivation as a key adherence determinant, detail neuroimaging findings relating mesocorticolimbic circuitry and motivation, and discuss data supporting mesocorticolimbic dysfunction among chronic pain patients. We propose a neurobehavioral model for adherence to pain self-management interventions, listing testable hypotheses. Finally, we discuss potential research and intervention implications from the proposed model.

Internet-delivered aftercare following multimodal rehabilitation program for chronic pain: a qualitative feasibility study

Purpose

Methods for delivering aftercare to help chronic pain patients to continue practice self-management skills after rehabilitation are needed. Internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT) has the potential to partly fill this gap given its accessibility and emphasis on self-care. Methods for engaging and motivating patients to persist throughout the full length of treatment are needed. The aim of this study was to describe how chronic pain patients work in an ICBT program, through their descriptions of what is important when they initiate behavior change in aftercare and their descriptions of what is important for ongoing practice of self-management skills in aftercare.

Patients and methods

Following a multimodal rehabilitation program, 29 chronic pain patients participated in a 20-week-long Internet-delivered aftercare program (ACP) based on acceptance-based cognitive behavioral therapy. Latent content analysis was made on 138 chapters of diary-like texts written by participants in aftercare.

Results

Attitudes regarding pain and body changed during ACP, as did attitudes toward self and the future for some participants. How participants practiced self-management skills was influenced by how they expressed motivation behind treatment goals. Whether they practiced acceptance strategies influenced their continuous self-management practice. Defusion techniques seemed to be helpful in the process of goal setting. Mindfulness strategies seemed to be helpful when setbacks occurred.

Conclusion

Self-motivating goals are described as important both to initiate and in the ongoing practice of self-management skills. Experiencing a helpful effect of acceptance strategies seems to encourage participants to handle obstacles in new ways and to persist throughout treatment. Research on whether tailored therapist guidance might be helpful in stating self-motivating goals and contribute to ongoing practice of self-management skills is needed.

Facet joint injections for people with persistent non-specific low back pain (Facet Injection Study): a feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2009 guidelines for persistent low back pain (LBP) do not recommend the injection of therapeutic substances into the back as a treatment for LBP because of the absence of evidence for their effectiveness. This feasibility study aimed to provide a stable platform that could be used to evaluate a randomised controlled trial (RCT) on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of intra-articular facet joint injections (FJIs) when added to normal care.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the feasibility of running a RCT to test the hypothesis that, for people with suspected facet joint back pain, adding the option of intra-articular FJIs (local anaesthetic and corticosteroids) to best usual non-invasive care is clinically effective and cost-effective.

DESIGN

The trial was a mixed design. The RCT pilot protocol development involved literature reviews and a consensus conference followed by a randomised pilot study with an embedded mixed-methods process evaluation.

SETTING

Five NHS acute trusts in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were patients aged ≥ 18 years with moderately troublesome LBP present (> 6 months), who had failed previous conservative treatment and who had suspected facet joint pain. The study aimed to recruit 150 participants (approximately 30 per site). Participants were randomised sequentially by a remote service to FJIs combined with 'best usual care' (BUC) or BUC alone.

INTERVENTIONS

All participants were to receive six sessions of a bespoke BUC rehabilitation package. Those randomised into the intervention arm were, in addition, given FJIs with local anaesthetic and steroids (at up to six injection sites). Randomisation occurred at the end of the first BUC session.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Process and clinical outcomes. Clinical outcomes included a measurement of level of pain on a scale from 0 to 10, which was collected daily and then weekly via text messaging (or through a written diary). Questionnaire follow-up was at 3 months.

RESULTS

Fifty-two stakeholders attended the consensus meeting. Agreement informed several statistical questions and three design considerations: diagnosis, the process of FJI and the BUC package and informing the design for the randomised pilot study. Recruitment started on 26 June 2015 and was terminated by the funder (as a result of poor recruitment) on 11 December 2015. In total, 26 participants were randomised. Process data illuminate some of the reasons for recruitment problems but also show that trial processes after enrolment ran smoothly. No between-group analysis was carried out. All pain-related outcomes show the expected improvement between baseline and follow-up. The mean total cost of the overall treatment package (injection £419.22 and BUC £264.00) was estimated at £683.22 per participant. This is similar to a NHS tariff cost for a course of FJIs of £686.84.

LIMITATIONS

Poor recruitment was a limiting factor.

CONCLUSIONS

This feasibility study achieved consensus on the main challenges in a trial of FJIs for people with persistent non-specific low back pain.

FUTURE WORK

Further work is needed to test recruitment from alternative clinical situations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT 2014-000682-50 and Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN93184143.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 30. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Discontinuing a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) in patients with knee osteoarthritis: Design and protocol of a placebo-controlled, noninferiority, randomized withdrawal trial

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common cause of knee pain in older adults. Despite the limited data supporting their use, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) are among the most commonly prescribed medications for knee OA. The use of NSAIDs for knee pain warrants careful examination because of toxicity associated with this class of medications.

METHODS

We describe the design of a placebo-controlled, noninferiority, randomized withdrawal trial to examine discontinuation of an NSAID in patients with painful knee OA. Participants will be veterans enrolled in the VA Healthcare System with knee OA pain despite NSAID use and/or relatively higher risk of NSAID toxicity. After a two-week run-in period where eligible subjects will replace their current NSAID with the study NSAID (meloxicam), those remaining eligible (target N=544) will be randomized to receive four weeks of either placebo or continued meloxicam. The primary outcome is knee pain (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain subscale, range 0-20) at four weeks post-randomization. The primary hypothesis is that placebo will be noninferior to (that is, not much worse than) meloxicam within a noninferiority margin of 1. Secondary outcomes include lower extremity disability, global impression of change, adherence to study medication and use of co-therapies.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first clinical trial to date examining the effects of withdrawing an NSAID for OA knee pain. If successful, this trial will provide evidence against the continued use of NSAIDs in patients with OA knee pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01799213. Registered February 22, 2013.

Mindfulness Meditation for Chronic Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain patients increasingly seek treatment through mindfulness meditation.

PURPOSE

This study aims to synthesize evidence on efficacy and safety of mindfulness meditation interventions for the treatment of chronic pain in adults.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic review on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with meta-analyses using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random-effects models. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Outcomes included pain, depression, quality of life, and analgesic use.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight RCTs met inclusion criteria; seven reported on safety. We found low-quality evidence that mindfulness meditation is associated with a small decrease in pain compared with all types of controls in 30 RCTs. Statistically significant effects were also found for depression symptoms and quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

While mindfulness meditation improves pain and depression symptoms and quality of life, additional well-designed, rigorous, and large-scale RCTs are needed to decisively provide estimates of the efficacy of mindfulness meditation for chronic pain.

Mindfulness-based stress reduction and cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic low back pain: similar effects on mindfulness, catastrophizing, self-efficacy, and acceptance in a randomized controlled trial

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is believed to improve chronic pain problems by decreasing patient catastrophizing and increasing patient self-efficacy for managing pain. Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) is believed to benefit patients with chronic pain by increasing mindfulness and pain acceptance. However, little is known about how these therapeutic mechanism variables relate to each other or whether they are differentially impacted by MBSR vs CBT. In a randomized controlled trial comparing MBSR, CBT, and usual care (UC) for adults aged 20 to 70 years with chronic low back pain (N = 342), we examined (1) baseline relationships among measures of catastrophizing, self-efficacy, acceptance, and mindfulness and (2) changes on these measures in the 3 treatment groups. At baseline, catastrophizing was associated negatively with self-efficacy, acceptance, and 3 aspects of mindfulness (nonreactivity, nonjudging, and acting with awareness; all P values <0.01). Acceptance was associated positively with self-efficacy (P < 0.01) and mindfulness (P values <0.05) measures. Catastrophizing decreased slightly more posttreatment with MBSR than with CBT or UC (omnibus P = 0.002). Both treatments were effective compared with UC in decreasing catastrophizing at 52 weeks (omnibus P = 0.001). In both the entire randomized sample and the subsample of participants who attended ≥6 of the 8 MBSR or CBT sessions, differences between MBSR and CBT at up to 52 weeks were few, small in size, and of questionable clinical meaningfulness. The results indicate overlap across measures of catastrophizing, self-efficacy, acceptance, and mindfulness and similar effects of MBSR and CBT on these measures among individuals with chronic low back pain.

Developing a typology of patient-generated behavioral goals for cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain (CBT-CP): classification and predicting outcomes

Patient-generated treatment goals describe what patients value, yet the content of these goals, and the relationship among goal types, goal accomplishment, and treatment outcomes has received little examination. We used inductive sorting to categorize patient-generated goals made by 147 adults receiving cognitive-behavioral therapy for chronic pain. The resulting goal categories were: Physical Activity (29.0%), Functional Status (24.6%), Wellness (16.3%), Recreational Activities (11.3%), House/Yard Work (9.7%), Socializing (7.1%), and Work/School (2.0%). Next, we examined associations between number of goals by category, goal accomplishment, and clinically meaningful improvements in pain-related interference, pain intensity and depressive symptoms. Improvement in all outcome domains was related to goal accomplishment. Additionally, depressive symptoms were related to number of Physical Activity, House/Yard Work, Recreational Activities, and Wellness goals, whereas improved pain-intensity was significantly related to House/Yard Work. Classifying patient-generated goals facilitates investigation of the relationships among goal type, goal accomplishment and treatment outcomes.

Interactive Voice Response-Based Self-management for Chronic Back Pain: The COPES Noninferiority Randomized Trial

IMPORTANCE

Recommendations for chronic pain treatment emphasize multimodal approaches, including nonpharmacologic interventions to enhance self-management. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is an evidence-based treatment that facilitates management of chronic pain and improves outcomes, but access barriers persist. Cognitive behavioral therapy delivery assisted by health technology can obviate the need for in-person visits, but the effectiveness of this alternative to standard therapy is unknown. The Cooperative Pain Education and Self-management (COPES) trial was a randomized, noninferiority trial comparing IVR-CBT to in-person CBT for patients with chronic back pain.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of interactive voice response-based CBT (IVR-CBT) relative to in-person CBT for chronic back pain.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We conducted a noninferiority randomized trial in 1 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system. A total of 125 patients with chronic back pain were equally allocated to IVR-CBT (n = 62) or in-person CBT (n = 63).

INTERVENTIONS

Patients treated with IVR-CBT received a self-help manual and weekly prerecorded therapist feedback based on their IVR-reported activity, coping skill practice, and pain outcomes. In-person CBT included weekly, individual CBT sessions with a therapist. Participants in both conditions received IVR monitoring of pain, sleep, activity levels, and pain coping skill practice during treatment.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was change from baseline to 3 months in unblinded patient report of average pain intensity measured by the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Secondary outcomes included changes in pain-related interference, physical and emotional functioning, sleep quality, and quality of life at 3, 6, and 9 months. We also examined treatment retention.

RESULTS

Of the 125 patients (97 men, 28 women; mean [SD] age, 57.9 [11.6] years), the adjusted average reduction in NRS with IVR-CBT (-0.77) was similar to in-person CBT (-0.84), with the 95% CI for the difference between groups (-0.67 to 0.80) falling below the prespecified noninferiority margin of 1 indicating IVR-CBT is noninferior. Fifty-four patients randomized to IVR-CBT and 50 randomized to in-person CBT were included in the analysis of the primary outcome. Statistically significant improvements in physical functioning, sleep quality, and physical quality of life at 3 months relative to baseline occurred in both treatments, with no advantage for either treatment. Treatment dropout was lower in IVR-CBT with patients completing on average 2.3 (95% CI, 1.0-3.6) more sessions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

IVR-CBT is a low-burden alternative that can increase access to CBT for chronic pain and shows promise as a nonpharmacologic treatment option for chronic pain, with outcomes that are not inferior to in-person CBT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01025752.

Barriers and facilitators to use of non-pharmacological treatments in chronic pain

BACKGROUND

Consensus guidelines recommend multi-modal chronic pain treatment with increased uptake of non-pharmacological pain treatment modalities (NPMs). We aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators to uptake of evidence-based NPMs from the perspectives of patients, nurses and primary care providers (PCPs).

METHODS

We convened eight separate groups and engaged each in a Nominal Group Technique (NGT) in which participants: (1) created an individual list of barriers (and, in a subsequent round, facilitators) to uptake of NPMs; (2) compiled a group list from the individual lists; and (3) anonymously voted on the top three most important barriers and facilitators. In a separate process, research staff reviewed each group's responses and categorized them based on staff consensus.

RESULTS

Overall, 26 patients (14 women) with chronic pain participated; their mean age was 55. Overall, 14 nurses and 12 PCPs participated. Seven healthcare professionals were men and 19 were women; the mean age was 45. We categorized barriers and facilitators as related to access, patient-provider interaction, treatment beliefs and support. Top-ranked patient-reported barriers included high cost, transportation problems and low motivation, while top-ranked facilitators included availability of a wider array of NPMs and a team-based approach that included follow-up. Top-ranked provider-reported barriers included inability to promote NPMs once opioid therapy was started and patient skepticism about efficacy of NPMs, while top-ranked facilitators included promotion of a facility-wide treatment philosophy and increased patient knowledge about risks and benefits of NPMs.

CONCLUSIONS

In a multi-stakeholder qualitative study using NGT, we found a diverse array of potentially modifiable barriers and facilitators to NPM uptake that may serve as important targets for program development.

Opioid Treatment of Migraine: Risk Factors and Behavioral Issues

Migraine can impact every aspect of a person's functioning. Psychological comorbidities, cognitive constructs, and behavioral responses to pain greatly impact the perception of migraine pain, treatment efficacy and outcome, and overall quality of life and functioning. Current considerations for migraine treatment emphasize the utility of the biopsychosocial model in understanding and treating migraine, noting both the importance of addressing psychological factors such as cognitive beliefs as well as psychiatric comorbidities. The guidelines for migraine treatment implicate opioid therapy as a second or third tier treatment. Guidelines and recommendations for the safe use of opioid medications among patients with chronic pain emphasize the importance of screening prior to prescribing opioid medications. Chronic opioid therapy has been shown to further levels of disability, decrease quality of life, and correlate to psychiatric comorbidities, concerns that are already present in migraine patients. While opioid treatment provides an alternative for persons with contraindications for alternative migraine treatments, it is critical that opioids be used sparingly and exclusively in conjunction with comprehensive assessment and integration of psychological treatment.

Taking ACTION to reduce pain: ACTION study rationale, design and protocol of a randomized trial of a proactive telephone-based coaching intervention for chronic musculoskeletal pain among African Americans

Background

Rates of chronic pain are rising sharply in the United States and worldwide. Presently, there is evidence of racial disparities in pain treatment and treatment outcomes in the United States but few interventions designed to address these disparities. There is growing consensus that chronic musculoskeletal pain is best addressed by a biopsychosocial approach that acknowledges the role of psychological and environmental factors, some of which differ by race.

Methods/Design

The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial is to test the effectiveness of a non-pharmacological, self-regulatory intervention, administered proactively by telephone, at improving pain outcomes and increasing walking among African American patients with hip, back and knee pain. Participants assigned to the intervention will receive a telephone counselor delivered pedometer-mediated walking intervention that incorporates action planning and motivational interviewing. The intervention will consist of 6 telephone counseling sessions over an 8–10 week period. Participants randomly assigned to Usual Care will receive an informational brochure and a pedometer. The primary outcome is chronic pain-related physical functioning, assessed at 6 months, by the revised Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire, a measure recommended by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT). We will also examine whether the intervention improves other IMMPACT-recommended domains (pain intensity, emotional functioning, and ratings of overall improvement). Secondary objectives include examining whether the intervention reduces health care service utilization and use of opioid analgesics and whether key contributors to racial/ethnic disparities targeted by the intervention mediate improvement in chronic pain outcomes Measures will be assessed by mail and phone surveys at baseline, three months, and six months. Data analysis of primary aims will follow intent-to-treat methodology.

Discussion

We will tailor our intervention to address key contributors to racial pain disparities and examine the effects of the intervention on important pain treatment outcomes for African Americans with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01983228. Registered 6 November 2013.

Preliminary Evaluation of a Modified STarT Back Screening Tool Across Different Musculoskeletal Pain Conditions

BACKGROUND

The STarT Back Screening Tool is a validated multidimensional screening measure and risk stratification tool for people with low back pain.

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to compare relationships between a modified STarT Back Screening Tool (mSBT) and clinical and psychological measures in people with low back, neck, shoulder, and knee pain. The hypothesis was that the relationships between mSBT scores and clinical and psychological measure scores would be similar across the included musculoskeletal pain conditions.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional, secondary analysis was done in this study.

METHODS

Participants with low back (n=118), neck (n=92), shoulder (n=106), or knee (n=111) pain were recruited, and an mSBT was developed for use across the pain conditions. Separate hierarchical linear regression models were developed, with clinical (health status, pain intensity, and disability) and psychological (kinesiophobia, catastrophizing, fear avoidance, anxiety, depressive symptoms, and self-efficacy) measures as dependent variables. Demographic and pain region variables were entered in the first step, mSBT scores were entered in the second step, and pain region × mSBT interactions were entered in the last step.

RESULTS

In the final models, no interactions were identified, suggesting that dependent measure scores did not differ by pain region. The strongest contributor for all dependent variables was mSBT scores (β=|0.32|-|0.68|); higher mSBT scores were associated with poorer health status and self-efficacy and with higher levels of pain intensity, disability, kinesiophobia, catastrophizing, fear avoidance, anxiety, and depressive symptoms.

LIMITATIONS

Generalizability was restricted to physical therapy outpatients with the included pain conditions. The mSBT used in this study is not ready for clinical implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study support the feasibility of using a single measure for concise risk assessment across different musculoskeletal pain conditions. Further longitudinal studies are needed to better direct the clinical use of an mSBT in people with low back, neck, shoulder, and knee pain.

An Empirical Examination of the Role of Common Factors of Therapy During a Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy Intervention for Headache Pain

OBJECTIVE

It is often assumed that psychosocial pain treatments work because of specific active components of the intervention. The degree to which common factors may contribute to improved pain outcomes is not well researched. The purpose of this study was to examine patient-related and therapist-related common factors during a Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) for headache pain trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was a secondary analysis of a parallel group, unblinded, randomized controlled trial in which MBCT was compared with a control. A series of linear regression models and 1 bootstrap mediation model were conducted with the sample of participants that completed MBCT (N=21).

RESULTS

In-session participant engagement was positively associated with treatment dose indicators of session attendance (P=0.038) and at-home meditation practice (P=0.027). Therapist adherence and quality were both significant predictors of posttreatment client satisfaction (P=0.038 and 0.034, respectively). Therapist appropriateness was not significantly associated with any of the variables of interest (P>0.05). Baseline pain intensity was positively associated with pretreatment expectations and motivations (P=0.049) and working alliance (P=0.048), and working alliance significantly predicted posttreatment patient satisfaction (P<0.001). Higher pretreatment expectations and motivation significantly predicted greater improvement in pretreatment to posttreatment change in pain interference (P=0.016); however, this relation was fully mediated by baseline pain intensity (P<0.05).

DISCUSSION

Common factors play an important role in improving pain outcomes and patient satisfaction during a MBCT for headache pain intervention. Stimulating positive pretreatment expectations and patient motivation, as well as building strong rapport is an important component of treatment success.

Cognitive Coping Style and the Effectiveness of Distraction or Sensation-Focused Instructions in Chronic Pain Patients

AIM

This study set out to investigate whether cognitive coping strategies that match participants' preferred coping style effectively reduce pain intensity and situational anxiety in a population of people with chronic pain.

METHOD

Chronic pain patients (N = 43) completed questionnaires on coping style, pain intensity, self-efficacy, and situational/trait anxiety. Participants were classified as Monitors (n = 16) or Blunters (n = 19) based on their Miller Behavioural Style Scale score. Participants were then provided with an audiotaped intervention in which they were instructed to focus on pain sensations or to engage in a distraction task and then to rate the pain intensity and their anxiety during and after the attentional focus and distraction conditions. The two interventions were each completed by all participants, having been presented in counterbalanced order.

RESULTS

Findings revealed that Monitors' level of anxiety decreased following a congruent (i.e., sensation-focused) intervention. No effects were obtained in terms of perceived pain. For blunters, however, their perceived levels of anxiety and pain did not attenuate following a congruent, distraction-focused intervention.

CONCLUSION

Among persons experiencing chronic pain, tailoring coping strategies to match an individual's preferred coping style--in particular, those with a high level of monitoring--may enhance the benefit of psychological approaches to management of anxiety.

Patient-Centered Pain Care Using Artificial Intelligence and Mobile Health Tools: Protocol for a Randomized Study Funded by the US Department of Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Program

BACKGROUND

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is one of the most effective treatments for chronic low back pain. However, only half of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) patients have access to trained CBT therapists, and program expansion is costly. CBT typically consists of 10 weekly hour-long sessions. However, some patients improve after the first few sessions while others need more extensive contact.

OBJECTIVE

We are applying principles from "reinforcement learning" (a field of artificial intelligence or AI) to develop an evidence-based, personalized CBT pain management service that automatically adapts to each patient's unique and changing needs (AI-CBT). AI-CBT uses feedback from patients about their progress in pain-related functioning measured daily via pedometer step counts to automatically personalize the intensity and type of patient support. The specific aims of the study are to (1) demonstrate that AI-CBT has pain-related outcomes equivalent to standard telephone CBT, (2) document that AI-CBT achieves these outcomes with more efficient use of clinician resources, and (3) demonstrate the intervention's impact on proximal outcomes associated with treatment response, including program engagement, pain management skill acquisition, and patients' likelihood of dropout.

METHODS

In total, 320 patients with chronic low back pain will be recruited from 2 VA healthcare systems and randomized to a standard 10 sessions of telephone CBT versus AI-CBT. All patients will begin with weekly hour-long telephone counseling, but for patients in the AI-CBT group, those who demonstrate a significant treatment response will be stepped down through less resource-intensive alternatives including: (1) 15-minute contacts with a therapist, and (2) CBT clinician feedback provided via interactive voice response calls (IVR). The AI engine will learn what works best in terms of patients' personally tailored treatment plans based on daily feedback via IVR about their pedometer-measured step counts, CBT skill practice, and physical functioning. Outcomes will be measured at 3 and 6 months post recruitment and will include pain-related interference, treatment satisfaction, and treatment dropout. Our primary hypothesis is that AI-CBT will result in pain-related functional outcomes that are at least as good as the standard approach, and that by scaling back the intensity of contact that is not associated with additional gains in pain control, the AI-CBT approach will be significantly less costly in terms of therapy time.

RESULTS

The trial is currently in the start-up phase. Patient enrollment will begin in the fall of 2016 and results of the trial will be available in the winter of 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

This study will evaluate an intervention that increases patients' access to effective CBT pain management services while allowing health systems to maximize program expansion given constrained resources.

Cooperative pain education and self-management (COPES): study design and protocol of a randomized non-inferiority trial of an interactive voice response-based self-management intervention for chronic low back pain

Background

The Institute of Medicine report “Relieving Pain in America” recommends the promotion of patient self-management of pain for all people with pain. Given the high prevalence of chronic pain in the US, new strategies are needed to enhance access to cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and other evidence-based treatments designed to facilitate self-management of chronic pain conditions. Although CBT is efficacious, many patients have limited or no access to CBT. Technology-assisted delivery of CBT may improve access while maintaining efficacy.

Methods/Design

We describe a randomized non-inferiority trial of interactive voice response (IVR)-based CBT for patients with chronic low back pain. This intervention uses daily IVR monitoring and weekly pre-recorded therapist feedback, based on patient-reported information, to provide treatment for patients at home. A total of 230 patients with chronic low back pain are being identified from a single statewide health system serving US military veterans. Participants are randomized to receive either ten weeks of in-person CBT or IVR-based CBT. The primary outcome is pain intensity as measured by the Numeric Rating Scale immediately post-treatment. Secondary outcomes include pain-related interference, emotional functioning, and quality of life measured immediately post treatment, and 6 and 9 months post recruitment. Exploratory objectives of the study are to examine: (1) potential mediators of impact on clinical outcomes (treatment retention, self-reported skill practice ratings, IVR call adherence, and treatment satisfaction); and (2) moderators of treatment engagement, adherence to therapist recommendations for pain coping skill practice, and effects on clinical outcomes.

Discussion

This non-inferiority trial may identify an alternative to resource intensive in-person CBT that allows many more patients to receive care while also increasing retention of those enrolled in the program.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01025752. Registered 3 December 2009.