The journal of pain : official journal of the American Pain Society
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Reciprocal relationship between pain and depression: a 12-month longitudinal analysis in primary care.
Pain and depression are the most prevalent physical and psychological symptom-based disorders, respectively, and co-occur 30 to 50% of the time. However, their reciprocal relationship and potentially causative effects on one another have been inadequately studied. Longitudinal data analysis involving 500 primary care patients with persistent back, hip, or knee pain were enrolled in the Stepped Care for Affective Disorders and Musculoskeletal Pain (SCAMP) study. Half of the participants had comorbid depression and were randomized to a stepped care intervention (n = 123) or treatment as usual (n = 127). Another 250 nondepressed patients with similar pain were followed in a parallel cohort. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Mixed effects model repeated measures (MMRM) multivariable analyses were conducted to determine if change in pain severity predicted subsequent depression severity, and vice versa. Change in pain was a strong predictor of subsequent depression severity (t-value = 6.63, P < .0001). Likewise, change in depression severity was an equally strong predictor of subsequent pain severity (t-value = 7.28, P < .0001). Results from the full cohort were similar in the clinical trial subgroup. In summary, pain and depression have strong and similar effects on one another when assessed longitudinally over 12 months. ⋯ This study strengthens the evidence for a bidirectional and potentially causative influence of pain and depression on one another. A change in severity of either symptom predicts subsequent severity of the other symptom. Thus, recognition and management of both conditions may be warranted, particularly when treatment focused on 1 condition is not leading to an optimal response.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
A qualitative analysis of a randomized controlled trial comparing a cognitive-behavioral treatment with education.
Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is a widely accepted psychosocial treatment for chronic pain. However, the efficacy of CBT has not been investigated within a rural setting. Furthermore, few studies have utilized first-person accounts to qualitatively investigate the key treatment elements and processes of change underlying the well-documented quantitative improvements associated with CBT. To address these gaps, we conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating the efficacy of group CBT compared to an active education condition (EDU) within a rural, low-literacy population. Posttreatment semistructured interviews of 28 CBT and 24 EDU treatment completers were qualitatively analyzed. Emerging themes were collated to depict a set of finalized thematic maps to visually represent the patterns inherent in the data. Patterns were separated into procedural elements and presumed change processes of treatment. Key themes, subthemes, and example extracts for CBT and EDU are presented; unique and shared aspects pertaining to the thematic maps are discussed. Results indicate that while both groups benefited from the program, the CBT group described more breadth and depth of change as compared to the EDU group. Importantly, this study identified key treatment elements and explored possible processes of change from the patients' perspective. ⋯ This qualitative article describes patient-identified key procedural elements and change process factors associated with psychosocial approaches for chronic pain management. Results may guide further adaptations to existing treatment protocols for use within unique, underserved chronic pain populations. Continued development of patient-centered approaches may help reduce health, treatment, and ethnicity disparities.