Chronic Pain and Pain Management in Older Adults: Protocol and Pilot Results.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain occurs in 30% of older adults. This prevalence rate is expected to increase, given the growth in the older adult population and the associated growth of chronic conditions contributing to pain. No population-based studies have provided detailed, longitudinal information on the experience of chronic pain in older adults; the pharmacological and nonpharmacological strategies that older adults use to manage their chronic pain; and the effect of chronic pain on patient-reported outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This article aims to describe the protocol for a population-based, longitudinal study focused on understanding the experience of chronic pain in older adults. The objectives are to determine the prevalence and characteristics of chronic pain; identify the pharmacological and nonpharmacological pain treatments used; evaluate for longitudinal differences in biopsychosocial factors; and examine how pain types and pain trajectories affect important patient-reported outcomes. Also included are the results of a pilot study. METHODS: A population-based sample of approximately 1,888 older adults will be recruited from the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago's AmeriSpeak Panel to complete surveys at three waves: enrollment (Wave 1), 6 months (Wave 2), and 12 months (Wave 3). To determine the feasibility, a pilot test of the enrollment survey was conducted among 123 older adults. RESULTS: In the pilot study, older adults with chronic pain reported a range of pain conditions, with osteoarthritis being the most common. Participants reported an array of pharmacological and nonpharmacological pain strategies. Compared to participants without chronic pain, those with chronic pain reported lower physical and cognitive function and poorer quality of life. Data collection for the primary, longitudinal study is ongoing. DISCUSSION: This project will be the first longitudinal population-based study to examine the experience and overall effect of chronic pain in older adults. Pilot study results provide evidence of the feasibility of study methods. Ultimately, this work will inform the development of tailored interventions for older patients targeted to decrease pain and improve function and quality of life.

Mindful Night-to-Day: A Pilot Feasibility Trial of a Mindfulness-Based Insomnia and Symptom Management Intervention for Patients with Hematologic Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with hematologic cancer experience severe symptoms (i.e. insomnia, fatigue, pain, distress). Few interventions addressing insomnia and other symptoms exist for this population. Mindfulness-Based Therapy for Insomnia (MBTI) may be appropriate but has only been tested in healthy outpatients. This study aimed to develop and test an adapted MBTI protocol for hematologic cancer patients. METHODS: Patient (n = 3) and clinician (n = 1) focus groups, and user-testing (N = 5) informed adaptation of Mindful Night-to-Day (MBTI+). A single-arm pilot trial (N = 32) evaluated feasibility (accrual, attrition, adherence), acceptability (intervention satisfaction), and changes to insomnia symptom severity (Insomnia Severity Index; primary outcome) and secondary outcomes (fatigue, pain, distress, pre-sleep arousal, mindfulness, symptom management self-efficacy) at baseline, post-intervention, and 1-month post-intervention. Descriptive statistics and paired sample t-tests were conducted. RESULTS: Qualitative feedback informed MBTI+ content, format, and delivery. Mindfulness was used to increase symptom awareness (sleepiness vs. fatigue). Meditations and behavioral skills were applied to inpatient treatment. MBTI+ met feasibility (N = 32/12 months; 8.1% attrition; 83.8% adherence) and acceptability (M = 3.52/4.00) benchmarks. Insomnia symptom severity decreased (d = 1.20) from baseline to post-intervention, as did most secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: MBTI+ was feasible, acceptable, and showed promise for benefits throughout inpatient and outpatient treatment. Findings warrant further evaluation in a randomized trial.

Meaning-centered pain coping skills training for patients with metastatic cancer: Results of a randomized controlled pilot trial.

OBJECTIVE: For patients with advanced cancer, pain is a common and debilitating symptom that can negatively impact physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being. This trial examined the feasibility and initial effects of Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC), a cognitive-behavioral pain management intervention with an emphasis on enhancing meaning (i.e., a personal sense of purpose, worth, and significance) and peace. METHODS: We enrolled 60 adults with stage IV solid tumor cancers and moderate-severe pain between February 2021 and February 2022. Participants were randomized 1:1 to MCPC + usual care or usual care alone. Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training consisted of four weekly 60-min individual sessions via videoconference or telephone, delivered by a trained therapist using a manualized protocol. Participants completed validated measures of pain severity, pain interference, pain self-efficacy, spiritual well-being (i.e., meaning, peace, and faith), and psychological distress at baseline and 5-week and 10-week follow-ups. RESULTS: All feasibility metrics exceeded prespecified benchmarks. Fifty-eight percent of screened patients were eligible, and 69% of eligible patients consented. Of those assigned to MCPC, 93% completed all sessions and 100% of those who completed follow-ups reported using coping skills weekly. Retention was strong at 5-week (85%) and 10-week (78%) follow-ups. Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training participants reported better scores than control participants across outcome measures, including moderate-to-large sized differences at 10-week follow-up in pain severity (Cohen's d = -0.75 [95% confidence interval: -1.36, -0.14]), pain interference (d = -0.82 [-1.45, -0.20]), and pain self-efficacy (d = 0.74 [0.13, 1.35]). CONCLUSIONS: MCPC is a highly feasible, engaging, and promising approach for improving pain management in advanced cancer. Future efficacy testing is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04431830, registered 16 June 2020.

Effect of a Patient Engagement, Education, and Restructuring of Cognitions (PEERC) approach on conservative care in rotator cuff related shoulder pain treatment: a randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite similar outcomes for surgery and physical therapy (PT), the number of surgeries to treat rotator cuff related shoulder pain (RCRSP) is increasing. Interventions designed to enhance treatment expectations for PT have been shown to improve patient expectations, but no studies have explored whether such interventions influence patient reports of having had surgery, or being scheduled for surgery. The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to examine the effect of a cognitive behavioral intervention aimed at changing expectations for PT on patient-report of having had or being scheduled for surgery and on the outcomes of PT. METHODS: The Patient Engagement, Education, and Restructuring of Cognitions (PEERC) intervention, was designed to change expectations regarding PT. PEERC was evaluated in a randomized, pragmatic "add-on" trial in by randomizing patients with RCRSP to receive either PT intervention alone (PT) or PT + PEERC. Fifty-four (54) individuals, recruited from an outpatient hospital-based orthopedic clinic, were enrolled in the trial (25 randomized to PT, 29 randomized to PT + PEERC). Outcomes assessed at enrollment, 6 weeks, discharge, and six months after discharge included the patient report of having had surgery, or being scheduled for surgery (primary) and satisfaction with PT outcome, pain, and function (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: The average age of the 54 participants was 51.81; SD = 12.54, and 63% were female. Chronicity of shoulder pain averaged 174.61 days; SD = 179.58. Study results showed that at the time of six months follow up, three (12%) of the participants in the PT alone group and one (3.4%) in the PT + PEERC group reported have had surgery or being scheduled for surgery (p = .32). There were no significant differences between groups on measures of satisfaction with the outcome of PT (p = .08), pain (p = .58) or function (p = .82). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with RCRSP, PT plus the cognitive behavioral intervention aimed at changing expectations for PT provided no additional benefit compared to PT alone with regard to patient report of having had surgery, or being scheduled to have surgery, patient reported treatment satisfaction with the outcome of PT, or improvements in pain, or function. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03353272 (27/11/2017).

A Primary Care-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Intervention for Long-Term Opioid Users With Chronic Pain : A Randomized Pragmatic Trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is common, disabling, and costly. Few clinical trials have examined cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions embedded in primary care settings to improve chronic pain among those receiving long-term opioid therapy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of a group-based CBT intervention for chronic pain. DESIGN: Pragmatic, cluster randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02113592). SETTING: Kaiser Permanente health care systems in Georgia, Hawaii, and the Northwest. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (aged ≥18 years) with mixed chronic pain conditions receiving long-term opioid therapy. INTERVENTION: A CBT intervention teaching pain self-management skills in 12 weekly, 90-minute groups delivered by an interdisciplinary team (behaviorist, nurse, physical therapist, and pharmacist) versus usual care. MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported pain impact (primary outcome, as measured by the PEGS scale [pain intensity and interference with enjoyment of life, general activity, and sleep]) was assessed quarterly over 12 months. Pain-related disability, satisfaction with care, and opioid and benzodiazepine use based on electronic health care data were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 850 patients participated, representing 106 clusters of primary care providers (mean age, 60.3 years; 67.4% women); 816 (96.0%) completed follow-up assessments. Intervention patients sustained larger reductions on all self-reported outcomes from baseline to 12-month follow-up; the change in PEGS score was -0.434 point (95% CI, -0.690 to -0.178 point) for pain impact, and the change in pain-related disability was -0.060 point (CI, -0.084 to -0.035 point). At 6 months, intervention patients reported higher satisfaction with primary care (difference, 0.230 point [CI, 0.053 to 0.406 point]) and pain services (difference, 0.336 point [CI, 0.129 to 0.543 point]). Benzodiazepine use decreased more in the intervention group (absolute risk difference, -0.055 [CI, -0.099 to -0.011]), but opioid use did not differ significantly between groups. LIMITATION: The inclusion of only patients with insurance in large integrated health care systems limited generalizability, and the clinical effect of change in scores is unclear. CONCLUSION: Primary care-based CBT, using frontline clinicians, produced modest but sustained reductions in measures of pain and pain-related disability compared with usual care but did not reduce use of opioid medication. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Effectiveness of spinal manipulation and biopsychosocial self-management compared to medical care for low back pain: a randomized trial study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is widespread, costly, and burdensome to patients and health systems. Little is known about non-pharmacological treatments for the secondary prevention of cLBP. There is some evidence that treatments addressing psychosocial factors in higher risk patients are more effective than usual care. However, most clinical trials on acute and subacute LBP have evaluated interventions irrespective of prognosis. METHODS: We have designed a phase 3 randomized trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design. The study is also a Hybrid type 1 trial with focus on intervention effectiveness while simultaneously considering plausible implementation strategies. Adults (n = 1000) with acute/subacute LBP at moderate to high risk of chronicity based on the STarT Back screening tool will be randomized in to 1 of 4 interventions lasting up to 8 weeks: supported self-management (SSM), spinal manipulation therapy (SMT), both SSM and SMT, or medical care. The primary objective is to assess intervention effectiveness; the secondary objective is to assess barriers and facilitators impacting future implementation. Primary effectiveness outcome measures are: (1) average pain intensity over 12 months post-randomization (pain, numerical rating scale); (2) average low back disability over 12 months post-randomization (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire); (3) prevention of cLBP that is impactful at 10-12 months follow-up (LBP impact from the PROMIS-29 Profile v2.0). Secondary outcomes include: recovery, PROMIS-29 Profile v2.0 measures to assess pain interference, physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, and ability to participate in social roles and activities. Other patient-reported measures include LBP frequency, medication use, healthcare utilization, productivity loss, STarT Back screening tool status, patient satisfaction, prevention of chronicity, adverse events, and dissemination measures. Objective measures include the Quebec Task Force Classification, Timed Up & Go Test, the Sit to Stand Test, and the Sock Test assessed by clinicians blinded to the patients' intervention assignment. DISCUSSION: By targeting those subjects at higher risk this trial aims to fill an important gap in the scientific literature regarding the effectiveness of promising non-pharmacological treatments compared to medical care for the management of patients with an acute episode of LBP and the prevention of progression to a severe chronic back problem. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03581123.

Economic Evaluation: A Randomized Pragmatic Trial of a Primary Care-based Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Adults Receiving Long-term Opioids for Chronic Pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is prevalent and costly; cost-effective nonpharmacological approaches that reduce pain and improve patient functioning are needed. OBJECTIVE: Report the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), compared with usual care, of cognitive behavioral therapy aimed at improving functioning and pain among patients with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment. DESIGN: Economic evaluation conducted alongside a pragmatic cluster randomized trial. SUBJECTS: Adults with chronic pain on long-term opioid treatment (N=814). INTERVENTION: A cognitive behavioral therapy intervention teaching pain self-management skills in 12 weekly, 90-minute groups delivered by an interdisciplinary team (behaviorists, nurses) with additional support from physical therapists, and pharmacists. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, and cost per additional responder (≥30% improvement on standard scale assessment of Pain, Enjoyment, General Activity, and Sleep). Costs were estimated as-delivered, and replication. RESULTS: Per patient intervention replication costs were $2145 ($2574 as-delivered). Those costs were completely offset by lower medical care costs; inclusive of the intervention, total medical care over follow-up was $1841 lower for intervention patients. Intervention group patients also had greater QALY and responder gains than did controls. Supplemental analyses using pain-related medical care costs revealed ICERs of $35,000, and $53,000 per QALY (for replication, and as-delivered intervention costs, respectively); the ICER when excluding patients with outlier follow-up costs was $106,000. LIMITATIONS: Limited to 1-year follow-up; identification of pain-related utilization potentially incomplete. CONCLUSION: The intervention was the optimal choice at commonly accepted levels of willingness-to-pay for QALY gains; this finding was robust to sensitivity analyses.

A Dyadic Investigation of Depressed Affect and Interspousal Behavior in Couples With Chronic Back Pain.

BACKGROUND: Depression and marital discord are characteristic not only of individuals with chronic low back pain (ICPs) but also of their spouses. PURPOSE: We examined actor-partner interdependence models to evaluate associations among depressed affect and criticism and support of partners at the same time point (concurrent effects) and 3 hr later (lagged effects). Fully dyadic models were used to account for both within-person and cross-spouse associations among depressed affect, criticism, and support for ICPs and spouses. We also examined the direction of the relationships (depressed affect predicting behavior and behavior predicting depressed affect) all while controlling for pain intensity, pain behavior, and the prior dependent variable. METHODS: ICPs (n = 105) and their spouses completed electronic diary measures of depressed affect and behavior (criticism and support) five times a day for 2 weeks. Hierarchical linear modeling with person-mean centering was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Within the same 3 hr epoch, more depressed affect was related to higher criticism and generally less support. Lagged analyses suggested bidirectional relationships between spouse's own depressed affect and spouse's own criticism of ICPs. Spouse depressed affect was also associated with decreased support received from ICPs. Pain behavior and pain intensity were also related to depressed affect, criticism, and support especially concurrently. CONCLUSIONS: Theories and interventions need to address not only ICP depressed affect but also spouse depressed affect, as spouse depressed affect may be a stress generating precursor to criticism and support.

Partnering to cope with pain: A pilot study of a caregiver-assisted pain coping skills intervention for patients with cognitive impairment and dementia.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a new caregiver-assisted pain coping skills training protocol specifically tailored for community-dwelling persons with cognitive impairment and pain, and assess its feasibility and acceptability. METHOD: In Phase I, we conducted interviews with 10 patient-caregiver dyads to gather feedback about intervention content and delivery. Phase II was a single-arm pilot test to evaluate the intervention's feasibility and acceptability. Dyads in the pilot study (n = 11) completed baseline surveys, received five intervention sessions, and then completed post-intervention surveys. Analyses focused on feasibility and acceptability. RESULTS: Dyads responded positively to the pain coping skills presented in the interviews; their feedback was used to refine the intervention. Findings from the pilot study suggested that the intervention was feasible and acceptable. 69% of eligible dyads consented, 82% completed all five intervention sessions, and 100% completed the post-treatment assessment. Caregivers reported high satisfaction ratings. They also reported using the pain coping skills on a regular basis, and that they found most of the skills helpful and easy to use. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: These preliminary findings suggest that a caregiver-assisted pain coping skills intervention is feasible and acceptable, and that it may be a promising approach to managing pain in patients with cognitive impairment.

Virtual reality for improving pain and pain-related symptoms in patients with advanced stage colorectal cancer: A pilot trial to test feasibility and acceptability.

OBJECTIVE: Virtual reality (VR) has the potential to improve pain and pain-related symptoms. We examined the feasibility, acceptability, safety, and impact of a 30-min virtual underwater/sea environment (VR Blue) for reducing pain and pain-related symptoms in advanced colorectal cancer patients. A qualitative exit interview was conducted to understand preferences, thoughts, and feelings about the VR session. METHOD: Participants (N = 20) had stage IV colorectal cancer and moderate-to-severe pain. Participants completed a 30-min VR Blue session that visually and aurally immersed them in virtual ocean scenarios. Feasibility was assessed by accrual (N = 20), protocol adherence (≥80% completing VR Blue), and completed data (≥80% assessment completion). Acceptability was determined by patients reporting ≥80% intervention satisfaction. Safety was determined by ≥80% of patients completing the session without self-reported side effects. Measures of pain, tension, relaxation, stress, anxiety, and mood were collected before, during, and after the VR Blue session. A semi-structured qualitative interview was conducted after VR Blue to assess participants' VR experiences. RESULTS: All participants (100%) completed the VR Blue session. There was 100% data collection at the pre- and post-assessments. Satisfaction with VR Blue was high M = 3.3 (SD = 0.4) (83%). No significant side effects were reported. Pain decreased by 59% (Pre-M = 3 [1]; Post-M = 1 [1]). Tension decreased by 74% (Pre-M = 30 [24]; Post-M = 8 [13]). Relaxation improved by 38% (Pre-M = 62 [21]); Post-M = 86 [17]). Stress decreased by 68% (Pre-M = 24 [24]; Post-M = 8 [14]). Anxiety decreased by 65% (Pre-M = 20 [23]; Post-M = 7 [13]). Mood improved by 70% (Pre-M = 13 [16]; Post-M = 4 [11]). Qualitative data suggested a positive response to the VR Blue protocol. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: This work supports the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of VR Blue for advanced colorectal cancer patients. Participants showed significant pre-post improvement in pain and pain-related symptoms hinting to the potential feasibility of VR interventions in this population. Larger, randomized trials with a control condition are needed to examine the efficacy of VR-based interventions for patients with advanced colorectal cancer and pain.

Effects of a Weight and Pain Management Program in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis With Obesity: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Investigation.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is associated with poor outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Effective weight management is imperative. Although traditional lifestyle behavioral weight loss programs have demonstrated efficacy for reducing weight, these interventions do not meet the pain-related weight loss challenges of RA patients with obesity. OBJECTIVE: A 12-session group program (90 minutes per session) was developed integrating pain coping skills training into a lifestyle behavioral weight loss intervention. In addition to the weekly group sessions, participants engaged in supervised exercise sessions 3 times per week. METHODS: Through a small, pilot randomized trial, 50 participants were randomized to receive the intervention (n = 29) or standard care of RA (n = 21). Feasibility data (i.e., accrual, attrition, adherence) was examined using descriptive statistics (e.g., percent). We examined patterns of change in study outcomes from baseline to follow-up separately for the intervention and standard care arms using descriptive statistics and paired t tests. Effect sizes are also presented. RESULTS: Of those randomized to the intervention group,79.3% initiated treatment, with participants attending 74.3% of group skills sessions and 64.2% of exercise sessions. Intervention participants evidenced reductions in weight (mean, -2.28 kg) and waist circumference (mean, -4.76 cm) and improvements in physical functioning, eating behaviors, pain, and self-efficacy for weight control. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that incorporating a combined pain coping skills training and behavioral weight loss intervention into medical management of RA may improve outcomes. Study accrual and attrition, as well as intervention adherence, will inform future, larger randomized efficacy trials of the intervention.Retrospectively registered: January 29, 2020, NCT04246827.

Feasibility, engagement, and acceptability of a behavioral pain management intervention for colorectal cancer survivors with pain and psychological distress: data from a pilot randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer survivors report pain and psychological distress to be burdensome long-term cancer consequences. Quality cancer survivorship care includes interventions for managing these symptoms. Yet, no studies have tested the efficacy of an accessible behavioral intervention for colorectal cancer survivors with pain and comorbid psychological distress. This paper reports on the feasibility (i.e., accrual, attrition, and adherence to study procedures), engagement, acceptability, and descriptive outcomes of a telephone-based coping skills training (CST) intervention. METHODS: This randomized pilot trial assigned colorectal cancer patients (N=31) to 5 sessions of CST or standard care. CST sessions focused on cognitive-behavioral theory-based coping skills tailored to colorectal cancer symptoms of pain and psychological distress. Participants completed assessments of pain severity, self-efficacy for pain management, health-related quality of life, and psychological distress at baseline, post-treatment, and 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Data indicated strong feasibility, evidenced by high completion rates for intervention sessions and assessments (93% completed all sessions; M=48.7 days; baseline=100%; post-treatment=97%; 3-month follow-up=94%). Participants demonstrated robust engagement with CST (M days per week with reported skills use=3.8) and reported high protocol satisfaction (M=3.6/4.0). Descriptive statistics showed self-efficacy for pain management and health-related quality of life improved for all participants. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that a telephone-based CST intervention has strong feasibility, evidenced by accrual, low attrition, and adherence to intervention sessions and assessments. Likewise, participant engagement and acceptability with CST were high. These data provide a foundation for larger randomized efficacy trials of the telephone-based CST intervention.

Caregiver-guided pain coping skills training for patients with advanced cancer: Results from a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a major concern among patients with advanced cancer and their family caregivers. Evidence suggests that pain coping skills training interventions can improve outcomes, however they have rarely been tested in this population. AIM: To test the efficacy of a caregiver-guided pain coping skills training intervention. The primary outcome was caregiver self-efficacy for helping the patient manage pain. DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial compared the intervention to an enhanced treatment-as-usual control. Dyads in both conditions received pain education, and those in the intervention received three sessions of pain coping skills training. Caregiver outcomes (self-efficacy; caregiver strain, caregiving satisfaction, psychological distress) and patient outcomes (self-efficacy, pain intensity and interference, psychological distress) were collected at baseline and post-intervention. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred two patients with stage III-IV cancer and pain and their family caregivers were enrolled from four outpatient oncology clinics and a free-standing hospice/palliative care organization. RESULTS: Compared to those in the control arm, caregivers in the intervention reported significant increases in caregiving satisfaction (p < 0.01) and decreased anxiety (p = 0.04). In both conditions, caregivers reported improvements in self-efficacy, and patients reported improvements in self-efficacy, pain severity and interference, and psychological distress. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to test a pain coping skills intervention targeted to patients and caregivers facing advanced cancer. Findings suggest that pain education provides benefits for patients and caregivers, and coping skills training may be beneficial for caregivers. Further research is needed to optimize the benefits of education and pain coping skills training for improving cancer pain outcomes.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02430467, Caregiver-Guided Pain Management Training in Palliative Care.

Changes in Identification of Possible Pain Coping Strategies by People with Osteoarthritis who Complete Web-based Pain Coping Skills Training.

BACKGROUND: We previously demonstrated that automated, Web-based pain coping skills training (PCST) can reduce osteoarthritis pain. The present secondary analyses examined whether this program also changed coping strategies participants identified for use in hypothetical pain-related situations. METHOD: People with hip/knee osteoarthritis (n = 107) were randomized to Web-based PCST or standard care control. At baseline and post-intervention, they reported their pain severity and impairment, then completed a task in which they described how they would cope with pain in four hypothetical pain-related situations, also reporting their perceived risk for pain and self-efficacy for managing it. We coded the generated coping strategies into counts of adaptive behavioral, maladaptive behavioral, adaptive cognitive, and discrete adaptive coping strategies (coping repertoire). RESULTS: Compared to the control arm, Web-based PCST decreased the number of maladaptive behavioral strategies generated (p = 0.002) while increasing the number of adaptive behavioral strategies generated (p = 0.006), likelihood of generating at least one adaptive cognitive strategy (p = 0.01), and the size of participants' coping repertoire (p = 0.009). Several of these changes were associated with changes in pain outcomes (ps = 0.01 to 0.65). Web-based PCST also reduced perceived risk for pain in the situations (p = 0.03) and increased self-efficacy for avoiding pain in similar situations (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Salutary changes found in this study appear to reflect intervention-concordant learning.

The influence of a cognitive behavioural approach on changing patient expectations for conservative care in shoulder pain treatment: a protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite similar outcomes for surgery and conservative care, the number of surgeries to treat rotator cuff related shoulder pain has increased. Interventions designed to enhance treatment expectations for conservative care have been shown to improve patient expectations, but no studies have yet explored whether such interventions influence patient decisions to pursue surgery. The purpose of this randomized clinical trial is to examine the effect of an intervention designed to improve expectations of conservative care on the decision to have surgery. METHODS: We will test the effectiveness of the Patient Engagement, Education, and Restructuring of Cognitions (PEERC) intervention which is intended to change expectations regarding conservative care. The PEERC intervention will be evaluated in a randomized, pragmatic "add-on" trial, to better understand the effect the intervention has on outcomes. Ninety-four (94) participants with rotator cuff related shoulder pain referred for physical therapy will be randomized to receive either impairment-based care or impairment-based care plus PEERC. Both groups will receive impairment-based conservative treatment created by compiling the evidence associated with established, effective interventions. Participants assigned to the impairment-based care plus PEERC condition will also receive the PEERC intervention. This intervention, informed by principles of cognitive behavioral therapy, involves three components: (1) strategies to enhance engagement, (2) education and (3) cognitive restructuring and behavioral activation. Outcomes will be assessed at multiple points between enrolment and six months after discharge. The primary outcome is patient reported decision to have surgery and the secondary outcomes are pain, function, expectations and satisfaction with conservative care. DISCUSSION: Rotator cuff related shoulder pain is highly prevalent, and because conservative and surgical treatments have similar outcomes, an intervention that changes expectations about conservative care could alter patient reports of their decision to have surgery and ultimately could lead to lower healthcare costs and decreased risk of surgical complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered as NCT03353272 at ClincialTrials.gov.

Greater mindfulness associated with lower pain, fatigue, and psychological distress in women with metastatic breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) report high levels of disease-related symptoms including pain, fatigue, psychological distress, and sleep disturbance. Mindfulness may be particularly relevant to women with MBC given the high symptom burden and psychological toll of this disease; however, the topic is understudied among this patient population. Therefore, we aimed to test the associations between mindfulness and patient-reported symptoms among a sample of women with MBC. METHODS: Sixty-four women with MBC completed baseline questionnaires of mindfulness (Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire-Short Form [FFMQ-SF]) and symptoms of pain severity and interference, fatigue, psychological distress, and sleep disturbance as part of a randomized controlled trial of a Mindful Yoga intervention. Correlational analyses of data collected at baseline tested associations between the five mindfulness facets (observing, describing, acting with awareness, nonjudging, and nonreactivity) and patient-reported measures of symptoms. RESULTS: Overall, higher mindfulness was associated with lower symptom levels including lower pain severity, pain interference, fatigue, anxiety, depression, and sleep disturbance. However, degree of association varied by mindfulness facet. Nonreactivity, nonjudging, and describing showed the most frequent associations and largest effect sizes across symptoms, while observing showed the least frequent associations and lowest effect sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Mindfulness-and in particular nonreactivity, nonjudging, and describing-may be a personal resource for women with MBC in coping with complex symptoms of this life-threatening illness. Findings are discussed relative to their implications for interventions aimed at increasing mindfulness in this vulnerable population.

Improving Veteran Access to Integrated Management of Back Pain (AIM-Back): Protocol for an Embedded Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Coordinated efforts between the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Defense, and the Department of Veterans Affairs have built the capacity for large-scale clinical research investigating the effectiveness of nonpharmacologic pain treatments. This is an encouraging development; however, what constitutes best practice for nonpharmacologic management of low back pain (LBP) is largely unknown. DESIGN: The Improving Veteran Access to Integrated Management of Back Pain (AIM-Back) trial is an embedded pragmatic cluster-randomized trial that will examine the effectiveness of two different care pathways for LBP. Sixteen primary care clinics will be randomized 1:1 to receive training in delivery of 1) an integrated sequenced-care pathway or 2) a coordinated pain navigator pathway. Primary outcomes are pain interference and physical function (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Short Form [PROMIS-SF]) collected in the electronic health record at 3 months (n=1,680). A subset of veteran participants (n=848) have consented to complete additional surveys at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months for supplementary pain and other measures. SUMMARY: AIM-Back care pathways will be tested for effectiveness, and treatment heterogeneity will be investigated to identify which veterans may respond best to a given pathway. Health care utilization patterns (including opioid use) will also be compared between care pathways. Therefore, the AIM-Back trial will provide important information that can inform the future delivery of nonpharmacologic treatment of LBP.

Acceptability of telephone-based pain coping skills training among African Americans with osteoarthritis enrolled in a randomized controlled trial: a mixed methods analysis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) disproportionately impacts African Americans compared to Caucasians, including greater pain severity. The Pain Coping Skills Training for African Americans with Osteoarthritis (STAART) study examined a culturally enhanced Pain Coping Skills Training (CST) program among African Americans with OA. This mixed methods study evaluated the acceptability of the Pain CST program among STAART participants. METHODS: STAART was a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of an 11-session, telephone-based pain CST program, compared to a usual care control group. Participants were from the University of North Carolina and Durham Veterans Affairs Healthcare Systems. The present analyses included 93 participants in the CST group who completed a questionnaire about experiences with the program. Descriptive statistics of the questionnaire responses were calculated using SAS software. Thematic analysis was applied to open-response data using Dedoose software. RESULTS: Participants' mean rating of overall helpfulness of the pain CST program for managing arthritis symptoms was 8.0 (SD = 2.2) on a scale of 0-10. A majority of participants reported the program made a positive difference in their experience with arthritis (83.1%). Mean ratings of helpfulness of the specific skills ranged from 7.7 to 8.8 (all scales 0-10). Qualitative analysis of the open-response data identified four prominent themes: Improved Pain Coping, Mood and Emotional Benefits, Improved Physical Functioning, and experiences related to Intervention Delivery. CONCLUSIONS: The high ratings of helpfulness demonstrate acceptability of this culturally enhanced pain CST program by African Americans with OA. Increasing access to cognitive-behavioral therapy-based programs may be a promising strategy to address racial disparities in OA-related pain and associated outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02560922 , registered September 25, 2015.

Better Knee, Better Me™: effectiveness of two scalable health care interventions supporting self-management for knee osteoarthritis - protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although education, exercise, and weight loss are recommended for management of knee osteoarthritis, the additional benefits of incorporating weight loss strategies into exercise interventions have not been well investigated. The aim of this study is to compare, in a private health insurance setting, the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of a remotely-delivered, evidence- and theory-informed, behaviour change intervention targeting exercise and self-management (Exercise intervention), with the same intervention plus active weight management (Exercise plus weight management intervention), and with an information-only control group for people with knee osteoarthritis who are overweight or obese. METHODS: Three-arm, pragmatic parallel-design randomised controlled trial involving 415 people aged ≥45 and ≤ 80 years, with body mass index ≥28 kg/m2 and < 41 kg/m2 and painful knee osteoarthritis. Recruitment is Australia-wide amongst Medibank private health insurance members. All three groups receive access to a bespoke website containing information about osteoarthritis and self-management. Participants in the Exercise group also receive six consultations with a physiotherapist via videoconferencing over 6 months, including prescription of a strengthening exercise and physical activity program, advice about management, and additional educational resources. The Exercise plus weight management group receive six consultations with a dietitian via videoconferencing over 6 months, which include a very low calorie ketogenic diet with meal replacements and resources to support behaviour change, in addition to the interventions of the Exercise group. Outcomes are measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Primary outcomes are self-reported knee pain and physical function at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include weight, physical activity levels, quality of life, global rating of change, satisfaction with care, knee surgery and/or appointments with an orthopaedic surgeon, and willingness to undergo surgery. Additional measures include adherence, adverse events, self-efficacy, and perceived usefulness of intervention components. Cost-effectiveness of each intervention will also be assessed. DISCUSSION: This pragmatic study will determine whether a scalable remotely-delivered service combining weight management with exercise is more effective than a service with exercise alone, and with both compared to an information-only control group. Findings will inform development and implementation of future remotely-delivered services for people with knee osteoarthritis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12618000930280 (01/06/2018).

Enhancing meaning in the face of advanced cancer and pain: Qualitative evaluation of a meaning-centered psychosocial pain management intervention.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to obtain patient evaluations of the content, structure, and delivery modality of Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC), a novel psychosocial intervention for patients with advanced cancer and pain. MCPC aims to help patients connect with valued sources of meaning in their lives (e.g., family relationships), while providing training in evidence-based cognitive and behavioral skills (e.g., guided imagery) to reduce pain. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 patients with stage IV solid tumor cancers and persistent pain. Transcripts were analyzed using methods from applied thematic analysis. RESULTS: When evaluating MCPC's educational information and skills training descriptions, participants described ways in which this content resonated with their experience. Many coped with their pain and poor prognosis by relying on frameworks that provided them with a sense of meaning, often involving their personally held religious or spiritual beliefs. They also expressed a need for learning ways to cope with pain in addition to taking medication. A few participants offered helpful suggestions for refining MCPC's content, such as addressing common co-occurring symptoms of sleep disturbance and fatigue. Concerning MCPC's structure and delivery modality, most participants preferred that sessions include their family caregiver and described remote delivery (i.e., telephone or videoconference) as being more feasible than attending in-person sessions. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Participants were interested in an intervention that concurrently focuses on learning pain coping skills and enhancing a sense of meaning. Using remote delivery modalities may reduce access barriers (e.g., travel) that would otherwise prevent many patients from utilizing psychosocial services.