Treatment Expectations-You Get What You Expect-and Depression Plays a Role.

Positive treatment expectations demonstrably shape treatment outcomes regarding pain and disability in patients with chronic low back pain. However, knowledge about positive and negative treatment expectations as putative predictors of interindividual variability in treatment outcomes is sparse, and the role of other psychological variables of interest, especially of depression as a known predictor of long-term disability, is lacking. We present results of the first prospective study considering expectations in concert with depression in a sample of 200 patients with chronic low back pain undergoing an inpatient interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy. We analyzed the characteristics of pain and disability, treatment expectation, and depression assessed at the beginning (T0), at the end of (T1), and at 3-month follow-up (T2) of interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy. Treatment expectations did emerge as a significant predictor of changes in pain intensity and disability, respectively, showing that positive expectations were associated with better treatment outcomes. Mediation analyses revealed a partially mediating effect of treatment expectations on the relation between depression and pain outcomes. PERSPECTIVE: These results expand knowledge regarding the role of treatment expectations in individual treatment outcome trajectories in chronic pain patients, paving the way for much-needed efforts toward optimizing patient expectations and personalized approaches in clinical settings.

Body Image in Athletes and Nonathletes With Low Back Pain: Avoidance-Endurance-Related Subgroups and Sports Status Play a Role.

CONTEXT: Low back pain (LBP) is a serious health problem, both in the general population as well as in athletes. Research has shown that psychosocial aspects, such as dysfunctional pain responses, play a significant role in the chronification of LBP. Recent research supports the relevance of the multidisciplinary concept of body image in the interpretation of LBP. OBJECTIVE: To examine the differences in 2 psychosocial aspects, body image and pain responses, between athletes and nonathletes with LBP. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design. SETTING: The questionnaires were distributed in the course of LBP treatment. PARTICIPANTS: Data from 163 athletes (mean age = 28.69 [9.6] y) and 75 nonathletes (mean age = 39.34 [12.63] y) were collected. INTERVENTIONS: Data were collected by questionnaires assessing body image, pain behavior, training activity, and LBP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: To examine group differences between athletes and nonathletes regarding body image and pain behavior, the authors performed 2-way analyses of variance with Bonferroni post hoc tests. RESULTS: The results showed (1) a significant main effect regarding pain responses and body image, showing that participants with eustress endurance or adaptive pain behavior revealed a more positive body image in both groups compared with participants with distress endurance or fear-avoidance behavior, and (2) a significant main effect for the factor group in the body image dimension of physical efficacy, indicating a more positive body image for athletes. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that considering multiple risk factors for LBP, such as body image and dysfunctional pain behavior, as well as subgrouping, might be valuable for research and for broadening therapy options.

Body image is more negative in patients with chronic low back pain than in patients with subacute low back pain and healthy controls.

Background and aims Body image as an increasing research field has been integrated into pain research within the last years. However, research on cognitive-affective dimensions of body image dependent on different pain groups like acute/subacute and chronic pain patients, and healthy controls is still lacking. Therefore, this study aims to explore three dimensions of body image, namely self-acceptance, physical efficacy, and health in patients with low back pain and healthy controls. The present study is the first to distinguish between patients with low back pain in different stages of pain with regard to the concept of body image. In a second step we investigated the differences in exercise frequency between the three groups. Methods Seventy seven patients (53.2% female) suffering from low back pain and 57 healthy controls (42.1% female) filled in a battery of questionnaires in terms of body image, pain parameters and exercise frequency. Results Main results indicate first that patients suffering from chronic low back pain revealed a more negative body image in all three body image-dimensions than healthy controls. Second, patients suffering from subacute pain revealed a more negative body image of physical efficacy compared to the healthy controls. Conclusions Our results suggest that body image is relevant for the treatment of low back pain, because patients suffering from low back pain revealed a more negative body image than healthy controls. Implications To investigate the cognitive-affective dimensions of body image in different patient groups suffering from low back pain seems to be an important aspect for future research to improve therapy options and prevention of low back pain. Future research should also focus on improvements or on positive aspects of body image in patients with low back pain.

Exercise motivation and nonspecific back pain: A comparison of patients and nonpatients.

OBJECTIVE: Motivation is a key variable to consider during exercise or exercise therapy of individuals with back pain. Based on organismic integration theory, this study aims to improve the understanding of exercise motivation in patients and nonpatients by evaluating the relationships between typical motivational profiles and personal characteristics, therapy parameters and pain related variables. METHOD: One hundred nine women and 145 men with back pain (mean age 33.3 years; 31.9% currently under the care of a physician) involved in some kind of exercise for current nonspecific back pain voluntarily participated in this study. An adapted version of the Behavioral Regulation in Sport Questionnaire was used to measure exercise motivation. Furthermore, data on pain, disability status, level of sport activity, body concept, and the type of treatment or exercise were gathered. RESULTS: Autonomous forms of regulation were most prevalent among subjects. Of 4 motivational profiles found, 2 showed a positive pattern (29.1% highly motivated individuals, 21.7% autonomously convinced individuals), and 2 showed a more negative pattern (19.7% controlled convinced individuals, 29.5% less motivated individuals). Relationships between profiles and age, body concept, involvement in sport competition, and type of exercise were found. CONCLUSIONS: The different motivational profiles respectively reveal specific practical relevance. In particular, the controlled convinced pattern is supposed to be more maladaptive than all other profiles. The insights provided by this study supports the development of motivation-oriented treatments based on the assessment of individuals' motivational profiles. (PsycINFO Database Record