Cognitive therapy, mindfulness-based stress reduction, and behavior therapy for people with chronic low back pain: A comparative mechanisms study

Understanding the Role of Therapist Quality in Accounting for Heterogeneity of Patient Outcomes in Psychosocial Chronic Pain Treatments

A variety of evidence-based psychosocial treatments now exist for chronic pain. However, on average, effect sizes have tended to be modest and there is a high degree of heterogeneity in treatment response. In this focus article, we explore the potential role that therapist quality in delivering treatment may have in accounting for a degree of this variability in outcome. Therapist quality refers to the skillful delivery of treatment, harnessing both specific and common therapeutic factors during sessions. While recognized as important to assess and report in clinical trials by some reporting guidelines, few randomized controlled trials evaluating psychosocial treatments for chronic pain have reported on therapist factors. We reviewed the clinical trials included in three systematic reviews and meta-analyses of trials of cognitive-behavioral therapy (mainly), mindfulness-based interventions, and acceptance and commitment therapy. We found that of the 134 trials included, only nine assessed and reported therapist quality indicators, with a variety of procedures used. This is concerning as without knowledge of the quality in which treatments are delivered, the estimates of effect sizes reported may be misrepresented. We contextualize this finding by drawing on the broader psychotherapy literature which has shown that more skillful, effective therapists demonstrated ten times better patient response rates. Examination of the characteristics associated with these more effective therapists tends to indicate that skillful engagement of common factors in therapy sessions represents a distinguishing feature. We conclude by providing recommendations for assessing and reporting on therapist quality within clinical trials evaluating psychosocial treatments for chronic pain. PERSPECTIVE: Therapist quality in the delivery of psychosocial treatments for chronic pain has rarely been assessed in clinical trials. We propose that therapist quality indicators are an under-studied mechanism that potentially contributes to the heterogeneity of treatment outcomes. We provide recommendations for assessing and reporting on therapist quality in future trials.

A critical review of the role of manual therapy in the treatment of individuals with low back pain

The number of low back pain (LBP) cases is projected to increase to more than 800 million by 2050. To address the substantial burden of disease associated with this rise in prevalence, effective treatments are needed. While clinical practice guidelines (CPG) consistently recommend non-pharmacological therapies as first-line treatments, recommendations regarding manual therapy (MT) in treating low back pain vary. The goal of this narrative review was to critically summarize the available evidence for MT behind these recommendations, to scrutinize its mechanisms of action, and propose some actionable steps for clinicians on how this knowledge can be integrated into a person-centered approach. Despite disparate recommendations from CPG, MT is as effective as other available treatments and may be offered to patients with LBP, especially as part of a treatment package with exercise and education. Most of the effects of MT are not specific to the technique. MT and other interventions share several mechanisms of action that mediate treatment success. These mechanisms can encompass patients' expectations, prior experiences, beliefs and convictions, epistemic trust, and nonspecific contextual effects. Although MT is safer than opioids for patients with LBP, this alone is insufficient. Our goal is to encourage clinicians to shift away from outdated and refuted ideas in MT and embrace a person-centered approach rooted in a comprehensive biopsychosocial framework while incorporating patients' beliefs, addressing illness behaviors, and seeking to understand each patient's journey.

Concurrent and lagged associations among pain medication use, pain, and negative affect: a daily diary study of people with chronic low back pain

ABSTRACT

People with chronic pain often attempt to manage pain and concurrent emotional distress with analgesic substances. Habitual use of such substances-even when not opioid-based-can pose side effect risks. A negative reinforcement model has been proposed whereby relief of pain and emotional distress following medication consumption increases the likelihood that the experience of elevated pain and distress will spur further medication use. People with chronic low back pain (N = 105) completed electronic diary assessments 5 times/day for 14 consecutive days. Lagged and cross-lagged analyses focused on links between time 1 pain and negative affect (NA) and time 2 analgesic medication use and vice versa. Sex differences were also explored. Primary results were as follows: (1) participants on average reported taking analgesic medication during 41.3% of the 3-hour reporting epochs (29 times over 14 days); (2) time 1 within-person increases in pain and NA predicted time 2 increases in the likelihood of ingesting analgesic medications; (3) time 1 within-person increases in medication use predicted time 2 decreases in pain and NA; and (4) lagged associations between time 1 pain/NA and time 2 medication use were strongest among women. Findings suggest that the use of analgesic medications for many people with chronic pain occurs frequently throughout the day. Results support the validity of a negative reinforcement model where pain and distress lead to pain medication use, which in turn leads to relief from pain and distress.

Cognitive Therapy, Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction, and Behavior Therapy for the Treatment of Chronic Pain: Predictors and Moderators of Treatment Response

Psychosocial interventions for people with chronic pain produce significant improvements in outcomes, but these effects on average are modest with much variability in the benefits conferred on individuals. To enhance the magnitude of treatment effects, characteristics of people that might predict the degree to which they respond more or less well could be identified. People with chronic low back pain (N = 521) participated in a randomized controlled trial which compared cognitive therapy, mindfulness-based stress reduction, behavior therapy and treatment as usual. Hypotheses regarding predictors and/or moderators were based on the Limit, Activate, and Enhance model; developed to predict and explain moderators/predictors of psychosocial pain treatments. Results were: 1) low levels of cognitive/behavioral function at pre-treatment predicted favorable pre- to post-treatment outcomes; 2) favorable expectations of benefit from treatment and sound working alliances predicted favorable pre- to post-treatment outcomes; 3) women benefited more than men. These effects emerged without regard to treatment condition. Of note, high levels of cognitive/behavioral function at pre-treatment predicted favorable outcomes only for people in the treatment as usual condition. Analyses identified a set of psychosocial variables that may act as treatment predictors across cognitive therapy, mindfulness-based stress reduction and behavior therapy, as hypothesized by the Limit, Activate, and Enhance model if these 3 treatments operate via similar mechanisms. Findings point toward people who may and who may not benefit fully from the 3 psychosocial treatments studied here, and so may guide future research on matching people to these kinds of psychosocial approaches or to other (eg, forced-based interventions) non-psychosocial approaches. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier is NCT02133976. PERSPECTIVE: This article examines potential predictors/moderators of response to psychosocial treatments for chronic pain. Results could guide efforts to match people to the most effective treatment type or kind.

Changes in pain catastrophizing, fear-avoidance beliefs, and pain self-efficacy mediate changes in pain intensity on disability in the treatment of chronic low back pain

Introduction

Treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP) based on the fear-avoidance model (FAM) has received support in randomized controlled trials, but few studies have examined treatment processes associated with treatment outcome. This study examined changes in pain catastrophizing, fear-avoidance beliefs, and pain self-efficacy as mediators of the relation between changes in pain intensity and disability in exposure-based treatment of CLBP.

Methods

Data from a randomized controlled trial with 2 treatment arms (exposure treatment based on the FAM with/without in-session exposure) was pooled, including only participants with complete data (N = 69). Change scores (pre to booster session) were computed for all variables, and the indirect effect of change in pain intensity on change in 3 measures of disability, through change in the proposed mediators, was tested in parallel mediation analyses.

Results

Decreases in pain catastrophizing and fear-avoidance beliefs, as well as increases in pain self-efficacy, mediated a unique proportion of the relation between changes in pain intensity and disability, depending on the outcome measure. The direct relation between changes in pain intensity and disability was absent when indirect effects were controlled.

Conclusions

The results suggest that the way pain is interpreted (pain catastrophizing, fear-avoidance beliefs), as well as pain self-efficacy, are all more critical for reducing disability in exposure-based treatment of CLBP than symptom relief per se.

Cracking the code: unveiling the specific and shared mechanisms behind musculoskeletal interventions

BACKGROUND

Mechanisms reflect the steps or processes through which an intervention unfolds and produces change in a specified outcome variable. Mechanisms are responsible for determining "how treatments work" which has emerged as a critical question for both developing theory and enhancing treatment efficacy. Studies that evaluate "how" treatments work, not just "if" treatments work are of considerable importance.

DISCUSSION

Specific and shared mechanisms research is a promising approach which aims to improve patient outcomes by tailoring treatments to the specific needs of each patient. Mechanisms research is an underexplored area of research requiring a unique research design.

CONCLUSION

Although mechanisms research is still in its infancy, prioritizing the study of the mechanisms behind manual therapy interventions can provide valuable insight into optimizing patient outcomes.