Comparison of a Single-Session Pain Management Skills Intervention With a Single-Session Health Education Intervention and 8 Sessions of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Adults With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Catastrophization
/ psychology
Chronic Pain
/ psychology
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
/ methods
Empowerment
Female
Humans
Intention to Treat Analysis
Low Back Pain
/ psychology
Male
Middle Aged
Pain Management
/ methods
Pain Measurement
/ psychology
Patient Education as Topic
/ methods
Treatment Outcome
Journal
JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 08 2021
02 08 2021
Historique:
entrez:
16
8
2021
pubmed:
17
8
2021
medline:
6
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Chronic low back pain (CLBP), the most prevalent chronic pain condition, imparts substantial disability and discomfort. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) reduces the effect of CLBP, but access is limited. To determine whether a single class in evidence-based pain management skills (empowered relief) is noninferior to 8-session CBT and superior to health education at 3 months after treatment for improving pain catastrophizing, pain intensity, pain interference, and other secondary outcomes. This 3-arm randomized clinical trial collected data from May 24, 2017, to March 3, 2020. Participants included individuals in the community with self-reported CLBP for 6 months or more and an average pain intensity of at least 4 (range, 0-10, with 10 indicating worst pain imaginable). Data were analyzed using intention-to-treat and per-protocol approaches. Participants were randomized to (1) empowered relief, (2) health education (matched to empowered relief for duration and format), or (3) 8-session CBT. Self-reported data were collected at baseline, before treatment, and at posttreatment months 1, 2, and 3. Group differences in Pain Catastrophizing Scale scores and secondary outcomes at month 3 after treatment. Pain intensity and pain interference were priority secondary outcomes. A total of 263 participants were included in the analysis (131 women [49.8%], 130 men [49.4%], and 2 other [0.8%]; mean [SD] age, 47.9 [13.8] years) and were randomized into 3 groups: empowered relief (n = 87), CBT (n = 88), and health education (n = 88). Empowered relief was noninferior to CBT for pain catastrophizing scores at 3 months (difference from CBT, 1.39 [97.5% CI, -∞ to 4.24]). Empowered relief and CBT were superior to health education for pain catastrophizing scores (empowered relief difference from health education, -5.90 [95% CI, -8.78 to -3.01; P < .001]; CBT difference from health education, -7.29 [95% CI, -10.20 to -4.38; P < .001]). Pain catastrophizing score reductions for empowered relief and CBT at 3 months after treatment were clinically meaningful (empowered relief, -9.12 [95% CI, -11.6 to -6.67; P < .001]; CBT, -10.94 [95% CI, -13.6 to -8.32; P < .001]; health education, -4.60 [95% CI, -7.18 to -2.01; P = .001]). Between-group comparisons for pain catastrophizing at months 1 to 3 were adjusted for baseline pain catastrophizing scores and used intention-to-treat analysis. Empowered relief was noninferior to CBT for pain intensity and pain interference (priority secondary outcomes), sleep disturbance, pain bothersomeness, pain behavior, depression, and anxiety. Empowered relief was inferior to CBT for physical function. Among adults with CLBP, a single-session pain management class resulted in clinically significant improvements in pain catastrophizing, pain intensity, pain interference, and other secondary outcomes that were noninferior to 8-session CBT at 3 months. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03167086.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34398206
pii: 2783047
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.13401
pmc: PMC8369357
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03167086']
Types de publication
Equivalence Trial
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e2113401Subventions
Organisme : NIDA NIH HHS
ID : K23 DA047473
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Références
Pain. 2013 Nov;154(11):2262-2265
pubmed: 23748115
Pain. 2011 Dec;152(12):2710-2720
pubmed: 21920668
J Pers Assess. 1996 Dec;67(3):588-97
pubmed: 8991972
Pain. 2006 Feb;120(3):297-306
pubmed: 16427738
Pain. 2016 Sep;157(9):1970-1978
pubmed: 27168362
J Pain. 2014 Jun;15(6):569-85
pubmed: 24787228
Pain. 2019 Dec;160(12):2841-2847
pubmed: 31408052
J Occup Rehabil. 2017 Sep;27(3):405-412
pubmed: 27770242
Pain. 2001 Nov;94(2):149-158
pubmed: 11690728
Lancet. 2018 Jun 9;391(10137):2368-2383
pubmed: 29573872
Am J Epidemiol. 2002 Dec 1;156(11):1028-34
pubmed: 12446259
Behav Res Ther. 2003 Oct;41(10):1163-82
pubmed: 12971938
J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81
pubmed: 18929686
J Behav Med. 2000 Aug;23(4):351-65
pubmed: 10984864
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2013;2013:140467
pubmed: 23662111
Clin J Pain. 2014 Mar;30(3):183-90
pubmed: 23552561
J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59 Suppl 20:22-33;quiz 34-57
pubmed: 9881538
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Nov 14;11:CD007407
pubmed: 23152245
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014 Feb 1;39(3):263-73
pubmed: 24253796
Pain. 2016 Nov;157(11):2434-2444
pubmed: 27257859
PLoS One. 2020 Mar 3;15(3):e0229228
pubmed: 32126108
Trials. 2014 Jun 07;15:211
pubmed: 24906419
eNeuro. 2014 Dec 30;1(1):e20.14
pubmed: 25893216
J Consult Clin Psychol. 2003 Feb;71(1):81-91
pubmed: 12602428
Arch Intern Med. 2009 Feb 9;169(3):251-8
pubmed: 19204216
JAMA. 2016 Mar 22-29;315(12):1240-9
pubmed: 27002445
Eur J Pain. 2007 Feb;11(2):153-63
pubmed: 16446108
Pain. 2005 Feb;113(3):310-315
pubmed: 15661438
J Pain. 2017 Sep;18(9):1139-1149
pubmed: 28528981
Pain. 2000 Sep;87(3):325-334
pubmed: 10963912
Clin Trials. 2012 Dec;9(6):767-76
pubmed: 23169874
J Pain. 2013 Dec;14(12):1573-84
pubmed: 24135432
Pain. 2002 Apr;96(3):319-324
pubmed: 11973004
Pain. 1983 Sep;17(1):33-44
pubmed: 6226916
J Behav Med. 1997 Dec;20(6):589-605
pubmed: 9429990