Testing the credibility, feasibility and acceptability of an optimised behavioural intervention (OBI) for avoidant chronic low back pain patients: protocol for a randomised feasibility study

Trials

Amanda J Farrin⁴  Michelle Collinson⁴  Liz Graham⁴  Alison McGregor¹  Lance McCracken²  Shamaila Anwar⁴  Tamar Pincus³ 

[1] Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Hospital, London W6 8RF, UK;Health Psychology Section, Psychology Department, King’s College, 5th Floor Bermondsey Wing Guy’s Campus, London SE1 9RT, UK;Department of Psychology, University of London, Royal Holloway, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, UK;Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK

关键词: Fear avoidance;    Contextual Cognitive Behavioural Therapy;    Psychology;    Low back pain;   

Others  :  1093723
DOI  :  10.1186/1745-6215-14-172

 received in 2013-03-14, accepted in 2013-05-16,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Chronic back pain continues to be a costly and prevalent condition. The latest NICE guidelines issued in 2009 state that for patients with persistent back pain (of between six weeks and twelve months duration), who are highly distressed and/or disabled and for whom exercise, manual therapy and acupuncture has not been beneficial, the evidence supports a combination of around 100 hours of combined physical and psychological treatment. This is costly, and may prove unacceptable to many patients. A key recommendation of these guidelines was for further randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological treatment and to target treatment to specific sub-groups of patients. Recent trials that have included psychological interventions have shown only moderate improvement at best, and results are not maintained long term. There is therefore a need to test theoretically driven interventions that focus on specific high-risk sub-groups, in which the intervention is delivered at full integrity against a credible control.

Methods/design

A feasibility study of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial comparing psychologist-delivered Contextual Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CCBT) against Treatment As Usual (TAU) physiotherapy delivered by physiotherapists for the treatment of chronic lower back pain in ‘avoidant’ patients. Ninety-two patients referred for physiotherapy will be recruited and randomised on a 1:1 basis to receive CCBT or TAU. Treatment groups will be balanced by centre and pain interference score. Primary outcomes include assessing the credibility and acceptability of the intervention, and to demonstrate proof of principle through a greater change in pain acceptance in the CCBT arm, measured by the Acceptance and Action –II and the Chronic Pain Acceptance questionnaires. In addition, the feasibility of carrying out a full trial will be explored with reference to recruitment and follow-up rates including the assessment of the burden of outcome measure completion. Secondary patient outcomes include disability, pain, fear of movement, mood, quality of life, and global recovery. Outcomes are measured at three and six months post-randomisation.

Discussion

This paper details the rationale, design, therapist training system and recruitment methods to be used in a feasibility study which will inform the design and efficient implementation of a future definitive RCT.

Trial registration

ISRCTN43733490

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Pincus et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Lim SS, Vos T, Flaxman AD, Danaei D, Shibuya K, Adair Rohani H, Amann M, Anderson HR, Andrews KG, Aryee M, Atkinson C, Bacchus LJ, Bahalim AN, Balakrishnan K, Balmes J, Barker-Collo S, Baxter A, Bell ML, Blore JD, Blyth F, Bonner C, Borges G, Bourne R, Boussinesq M, Brauer M, Brooks P, Bruce NG, Brunekreef B, Bryan-Hancock C, Bucello C, et al.: A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet 2010, 380:2224-2260.
• [2]Maniadakis N, Gray A: The economic burden of back pain in the UK. Pain 2000, 8:495-103.
• [3]Kendall NAS: Psychosocial approaches to the prevention of chronic pain: the low back paradigm. Bailliere's Clincial Rheumatol 1999, 13:545-554.
• [4]National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care: Lower Back Pain, Early Management of Persistent Non-specific Low Back Pain Guideline 88. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2009.
• [5]Artus M, van der Windt DA, Jordan KP, Hay EM: Low back pain symptoms show a similar pattern of improvement following a wide range of primary care treatments: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Rheumatol 2010, 49:2346-2356.
• [6]Williams AC, Eccleston C, Morley S: Psychological therapies for the management of chronic pain (excluding headache) in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012., (11) CD007407
• [7]Engers AJ, Jellema P, Wensing M, Van Der Windt DAWM, Grol R, Van Tulder MW: Individual patient education for low back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008., (1) CD004057
• [8]Hill JC, Whitehurst DG, Lewis M, Bryan S, Dunn KM, Foster NE, Konstantinou K, Main CJ, Mason E, Somerville S, Sowden G, Vohora K, Hay EM: Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2012, 378:1560-1571.
• [9]Hayes S, Strosahl EAK: Acceptance and Committment Therapy: An Experiential Approach to Behavior Change. New York: Guildford Press; 1999.
• [10]Kabat-Zinn J: Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Mind to Face Stress, Pain and Illness. New York: Dell Publishing; 1990.
• [11]Baer RA, Smith GT: Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment 2006, 13:27-45.
• [12]Vlaeyen JW, Linton SJ: Fear avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal pain: a state of the art. Pain 2000, 85:317-332.
• [13]Lineham MM: Cognitive Behavioural Treatment of Borderline Personality Disorder. New York: Guildford Press; 1993.
• [14]Segal ZV, Williams JMG: Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Depression: A New Approach to Preventing Relapse. New York: Guildford Press; 2001.
• [15]McCracken LM, Eccleston C: A prospective study of acceptance of pain and patient functioning with chronic pain. Pain 2005, 118:164-169.
• [16]Kori SH, Miller RP, Todd DD: Kinesiophobia: a new view of chronic pain behaviour. Pain Manage 1990, 3:35-43.
• [17]Hill JC, Dunn KM: A primary care back pain screening tool: identifying patient subgroups for initial treatment. Arthritis Rheum 2008, 59:632-641.
• [18]Luoma JB, Hayes SC: Augmenting continuing education with psychologically focused group consultation: Effects on adoption of group drug counselling. Psychother Theory Res Practice Training 2007, 44:463-469.
• [19]Keller S, Bann MA: Validity of the Brief Pain Inventory for use in documenting the outcomes of patients with noncancer pain. Clincal J Pain 2004, 20:310-318.
• [20]Cleeland CS: Effect of cancer on quality of life. In Effect of Cancer on Quality of Life. Edited by Florida OD, Osaba D. Florida: CRC Press; 1991:293-305.
• [21]Cleeland CS: Measurement of pain by subjective report. In Issues in pain measurement. In Advances in Pain Research and Therapy. Edited by Chapman CR. New York: Raven; 1989:391-403.
• [22]Borkovec TD, Nau SD: Credibility of analogue therapy rationales. J Behav Therapy Exp Psychiatry 1972, 34:257-260.
• [23]McCracken LM, Vowles KE: Acceptance of chronic pain: component analysis and a revised assessment method. Pain 2004, 107:159-166.
• [24]Bond FW, Hayes SC, Baer RA, Carpenter KM, Orcutt HK, Waltz T, et al.: Preliminary psychometric properties of the Acceptance Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II): a revised measure of psychological flexibility and experiential avoidance. Behav Therapy 2011, 42:676-688.
• [25]Roland M, Morris R: A study of the natural history of back pain. Part 1: Development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine 1983, 8:141-144.
• [26]Zigmond AS, Snaith RP: The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983, 67:361-370.
• [27]The EuroQol Group: EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990, 16:199-208.
• [28]Brooks R: EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996, 37:53-72.
• [29]Ware JE, Kosinski M Jr, Turner Bowker DM, Gandek B: How to Score Version 2 of the SF-12v2® Health Survey (With a Supplement Documenting SF-12® Health Survey). Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated; 2002.
• [30]Dworkin RH, Turk DC: Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain 2005, 113:9-19.
• [31]Guy W: ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Rockville USA: Public Health Service, Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, National Institute of Mental Health, Psychopharmacology Research Branch, Division of Extramural Research Programs; 1976.
• [32]Shih WJ, Ohman-Strickland PA, Lin Y: Analysis of pilot and early phase studies with small sample sizes. Stat Med 2004, 23:1827-1842.
• [33]Lancaster GA, Dodd S: Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice. J Eval Clin Pract 2004, 10:307-312.
• [34]Browne RH: On the use of a pilot sample for sample size determination. Stat Med 1995, 14:1933-1940.
• [35]Hsieh HF, Shannon SE: Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res 2005, 15:1277-1288.