Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Effect of Pain Reprocessing Therapy vs Placebo and Usual Care for Patients With Chronic Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Ashar, Yoni K; Gordon, Alan; Schubiner, Howard; Uipi, Christie; Knight, Karen; Anderson, Zachary; Carlisle, Judith; Polisky, Laurie; Geuter, Stephan; Flood, Thomas F; Kragel, Philip A; Dimidjian, Sona; Lumley, Mark A; Wager, Tor D.
Affiliation
  • Ashar YK; Department of Psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York City, New York.
  • Gordon A; Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado, Boulder.
  • Schubiner H; Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado, Boulder.
  • Uipi C; Pain Psychology Center, Los Angeles, California.
  • Knight K; Ascension Providence Hospital, Southfield, Michigan.
  • Anderson Z; Michigan State University College of Human Medicine, East Lansing.
  • Carlisle J; Pain Psychology Center, Los Angeles, California.
  • Polisky L; Panorama Orthopedics and Spine Center, Golden, Colorado.
  • Geuter S; Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado, Boulder.
  • Flood TF; Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado, Boulder.
  • Kragel PA; Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois.
  • Dimidjian S; Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado, Boulder.
  • Lumley MA; Institute of Cognitive Science, University of Colorado, Boulder.
  • Wager TD; Department of Philosophy, Washington University in Saint Louis, Saint Louis, Missouri.
JAMA Psychiatry ; 79(1): 13-23, 2022 01 01.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34586357
ABSTRACT
Importance Chronic back pain (CBP) is a leading cause of disability, and treatment is often ineffective. Approximately 85% of cases are primary CBP, for which peripheral etiology cannot be identified, and maintenance factors include fear, avoidance, and beliefs that pain indicates injury.

Objective:

To test whether a psychological treatment (pain reprocessing therapy [PRT]) aiming to shift patients' beliefs about the causes and threat value of pain provides substantial and durable pain relief from primary CBP and to investigate treatment mechanisms. Design, Setting, and

Participants:

This randomized clinical trial with longitudinal functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and 1-year follow-up assessment was conducted in a university research setting from November 2017 to August 2018, with 1-year follow-up completed by November 2019. Clinical and fMRI data were analyzed from January 2019 to August 2020. The study compared PRT with an open-label placebo treatment and with usual care in a community sample.

Interventions:

Participants randomized to PRT participated in 1 telehealth session with a physician and 8 psychological treatment sessions over 4 weeks. Treatment aimed to help patients reconceptualize their pain as due to nondangerous brain activity rather than peripheral tissue injury, using a combination of cognitive, somatic, and exposure-based techniques. Participants randomized to placebo received an open-label subcutaneous saline injection in the back; participants randomized to usual care continued their routine, ongoing care. Main Outcomes and

Measures:

One-week mean back pain intensity score (0 to 10) at posttreatment, pain beliefs, and fMRI measures of evoked pain and resting connectivity.

Results:

At baseline, 151 adults (54% female; mean [SD] age, 41.1 [15.6] years) reported mean (SD) pain of low to moderate severity (mean [SD] pain intensity, 4.10 [1.26] of 10; mean [SD] disability, 23.34 [10.12] of 100) and mean (SD) pain duration of 10.0 (8.9) years. Large group differences in pain were observed at posttreatment, with a mean (SD) pain score of 1.18 (1.24) in the PRT group, 2.84 (1.64) in the placebo group, and 3.13 (1.45) in the usual care group. Hedges g was -1.14 for PRT vs placebo and -1.74 for PRT vs usual care (P < .001). Of 151 total participants, 33 of 50 participants (66%) randomized to PRT were pain-free or nearly pain-free at posttreatment (reporting a pain intensity score of 0 or 1 of 10), compared with 10 of 51 participants (20%) randomized to placebo and 5 of 50 participants (10%) randomized to usual care. Treatment effects were maintained at 1-year follow-up, with a mean (SD) pain score of 1.51 (1.59) in the PRT group, 2.79 (1.78) in the placebo group, and 3.00 (1.77) in the usual care group. Hedges g was -0.70 for PRT vs placebo (P = .001) and -1.05 for PRT vs usual care (P < .001) at 1-year follow-up. Longitudinal fMRI showed (1) reduced responses to evoked back pain in the anterior midcingulate and the anterior prefrontal cortex for PRT vs placebo; (2) reduced responses in the anterior insula for PRT vs usual care; (3) increased resting connectivity from the anterior prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula to the primary somatosensory cortex for PRT vs both control groups; and (4) increased connectivity from the anterior midcingulate to the precuneus for PRT vs usual care. Conclusions and Relevance Psychological treatment centered on changing patients' beliefs about the causes and threat value of pain may provide substantial and durable pain relief for people with CBP. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03294148.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pain / Back Pain / Pain Management Type of study: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Year: 2022 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Pain / Back Pain / Pain Management Type of study: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Year: 2022 Document type: Article