ClickCease
+1-915-850-0900 spinedoctors@gmail.com
Select Page
Psychological Therapy for Chronic Pain Management in El Paso, TX

Psychological Therapy for Chronic Pain Management in El Paso, TX

by | Back Pain, Chronic Pain, Neck Pain, Physical Rehabilitation, Research Studies, Stress, Treatments

Psychological therapy, also known as psychotherapy, refers to the use of psychological methods to help change an individual’s way of thinking as well as improve their coping skills in order for them to learn how to best deal with stress. Psychological therapies have widely been utilized as a part of the multidisciplinary management of chronic pain. Common psychotherapies include, cognitive-behavioral therapy, mindfulness-based stress reduction and even chiropractic care. The connection between the mind and the body in relation to disease and illness have long been discussed in many research studies.

 

Evidence-based research studies have demonstrated that proper stress management through the use of psychological therapy as well as mindfulness interventions can effectively benefit patients with chronic pain. By way of instance, chiropractic care can safely and effectively help reduce stress, anxiety and depression by correcting spinal misalignments, or subluxation. A balanced spine can improve mood and mental health. Chiropractic care can include lifestyle modifications, such as nutritional advice, physical activity and exercise recommendations, and promote better sleeping habits, to further enhance the benefits of the treatment. The purpose of the following article is to demonstrate how psychological therapies impact the management of chronic pain.

 

Dr.-Jimenez-works-on-patients-back.jpg

 

Psychological Therapies for the Management of Chronic Pain

 

Abstract

 

Pain is a complex stressor that presents a significant challenge to most aspects of functioning and contributes to substantial physical, psychological, occupational, and financial cost, particularly in its chronic form. As medical intervention frequently cannot resolve pain completely, there is a need for management approaches to chronic pain, including psychological intervention. Psychotherapy for chronic pain primarily targets improvements in physical, emotional, social, and occupational functioning rather than focusing on resolution of pain itself. However, psychological therapies for chronic pain differ in their scope, duration, and goals, and thus show distinct patterns of treatment efficacy. These therapies fall into four categories: operant-behavioral therapy, cognitive-behavioral therapy, mindfulness-based therapy, and acceptance and commitment therapy. The current article explores the theoretical distinctiveness, therapeutic targets, and effectiveness of these approaches as well as mechanisms and individual differences that factor into treatment response and pain-related dysfunction and distress. Implications for future research, dissemination of treatment, and the integration of psychological principles with other treatment modalities are also discussed.

 

Keywords: pain management, multidisciplinary pain treatment, psychological therapy

 

Dr Jimenez White Coat

Dr. Alex Jimenez’s Insight

Chiropractic care is an alternative treatment option which utilizes spinal adjustments and manual manipulations to treat injuries and/or conditions associated with the musculoskeletal and nervous system. Chiropractic treatment primarily focuses on spinal health, however, because the spine is the root of the nervous system, chiropractic care can also be effectively used to treat a variety of mental health issues. As a chiropractor, I make sure to focus on the body as a whole, rather than treating the symptoms of a single injury and/or condition. The truth of the matter is, chiropractic treatment must also deal with the emotional component of each health issue in order to provide overall relief. Psychosomatic disorders, refers to a physical illness caused or aggravated by a mental factor, such as stress. Chiropractic care can be utilized as a psychological therapy, in which, a chiropractor may recommend a series of lifestyle modifications to help reduce stress, anxiety and depression, together with spinal adjustments and manual manipulations to reduce symptoms associated with mental health issues. Furthermore, the understanding of the connection between the mind and body is essential in chiropractic treatment towards overall health and wellness.

 

Introduction to the Non-Pharmacological Treatment of Pain

 

Pain is an essential biological function that signals disturbance or damage in the body, prevents further harm through overuse of the afflicted area, and promotes physiological homeostasis.[1] Whether through abnormal healing, additional bodily damage, or failed medical intervention, pain may become chronic. Chronic pain no longer signals damage to the body and is instead a detriment to the physical and psychological well-being of the sufferer. Unfortunately, medical intervention frequently cannot resolve chronic pain, resulting in increased need for management approaches to pain, as is the approach to other chronic medical conditions.[2] In recent years, the biopsychosocial model has informed research and intervention in pain psychology, wherein physical, cognitive, affective, and interpersonal factors are used to inform treatment.[2] Currently, psychological interventions for chronic pain target a variety of domains, including physical functioning, pain medication use, mood, cognitive patterns, and quality of life, while changes in pain intensity may be secondary.[3] As such, psychological interventions for pain are ideally suited as complementary treatments to medical treatment.[4] In order to articulate the distinct philosophies and effects of each psychological intervention, it is important to first consider the variety of ways that pain affects psychological functioning.

 

Psychological Reactions to Pain

 

Recurrent pain may contribute to development of maladaptive cognitions and behavior that worsen daily functioning, increase psychiatric distress, or prolong the experience of pain.[5] Individuals suffering from chronic pain tend to show increased vulnerability to a variety of psychiatric conditions, including depressive disorders,[6] anxiety disorders,[7] and posttraumatic stress disorder.[7] However, the relationship between depression and pain is likely bidirectional, as the presence of a major depressive disorder has been identified as a key risk factor in the transition from acute pain to chronic pain.[8] Additionally, individuals with pain may suffer from significant anxiety and depressive symptomatology that does not reach the severity of a clinical diagnosis.[9] Further, chronic pain negatively impacts quality of life[10] and contributes to higher levels of disability.[10] Individuals with chronic pain are also vulnerable to higher rates of obesity,[11] sleep disturbance,[12] and fatigue,[13] show greater rates of medical utilization,[10] and are vulnerable to problematic pain medication use.[14] Given the negative psychological consequences of chronic pain, it is worthwhile to consider three psychological mechanisms related to pain-related distress that have proven to be suitable targets for intervention: pain catastrophizing, fear of pain, and pain acceptance.

 

Pain catastrophizing is defined as a negative cognitive and affective mental set related to expected or actual pain experience.[15] Pain catastrophizing is characterized by magnification of the negative effects of pain, rumination about pain, and feelings of helplessness in coping with pain.[16] Pain catastrophizing has been associated with various forms of dysfunction, including increased rates of depression[17] and anxiety,[16] greater functional impairment and disability due to pain,[17] and lower overall quality of life.[18] Individuals who catastrophize about their pain report lower levels of perceived control over pain,[19] poorer emotional and social functioning,[20] and poorer responses to medical intervention.[21] Pain catastrophizing also contributes to poorer pain coping and overall functioning, making pain catastrophizing a viable target for psychological intervention. Addressing catastrophic thoughts about pain improves physical and psychological functioning in the short term[22] and improves the likelihood of returning to work despite the presence of persistent pain.[23]

 

Pain-related fear is another psychological mechanism that has significant implications for physical and psychological functioning in chronic pain. Pain-related fear reflects a fear of injury or worsening of one�s physical condition through activities that may trigger pain.[24] Pain-related fear is associated with increased pain intensity[25] and increased disability.[26] Pain-related fear contributes to disability by fostering passive or avoidant pain-coping behaviors that contribute to physical deconditioning and pain.[27] If left unaddressed, fear of pain can impair gains in physical rehabilitation settings.[28] Evidence suggests that pain catastrophizing precedes pain-related fear,[24] but both of these mechanisms uniquely contribute to pain and physical disability.[5,29]

 

Recently, there has been increased attention to the psychological flexibility model, which extends the fear-avoidance model of chronic pain and proposes to improve treatment outcomes through fostering of accepting attitudes towards pain.[30] Psychological flexibility has been defined as an ability to engage in the present moment in a way that allows the individual to either maintain or adjust his or her behavior in the way that is most consistent with internally held goals and values;[31] this idea is especially important in times of greater pain, given the narrowing of focus that is common during times of pain.[32] Similar to psychological acceptance, which fosters a nonjudgmental approach to distressing thoughts and emotions, pain acceptance is defined as a process of nonjudgmentally acknowledging pain, stopping maladaptive attempts to control pain, and learning to live a richer life in spite of pain.[33] Pain acceptance influences emotional functioning through two distinct mechanisms: a willingness to experience pain, which buffers against negative emotional reactions to pain, and continued engagement in valued activities despite the presence of pain, which bolsters positive emotions.[34] Acceptance of pain is theorized to uncouple the occurrence of catastrophic thoughts about pain from subsequent emotional suffering[35] and reduces reliance on control- or avoidance-based coping,[36] thereby freeing cognitive and emotional resources for more meaningful pursuits.[33] Pain acceptance has demonstrated positive associations with cognitive, emotional, social, and occupational functioning in chronic pain populations.[36] Acceptance of pain predicts lower levels of pain catastrophizing[37] and greater levels of positive affect, which in turn reduce the association between pain intensity and negative emotions.[38] Pain acceptance is a particularly salient target for intervention in mindfulness- and acceptance-based therapies for chronic pain, which will be discussed later (see Table 1).

 

Table 1 Descriptions of Psychological Therapies for Pain

Table 1: Descriptions of psychological therapies for pain.

 

Psychological Intervention as an Approach to Pain Management

 

Operant Behavioral Approaches

 

Fordyce[39] proposed a behavioral model of pain adaptation in which maladaptive behavioral responses to pain develop through contingent relief from pain or pain-related fear. According to this theory, a behavioral drive to avoid pain leads individuals to avoid behaviors that are painful but maintain their physical and emotional health; this avoidance contributes to the development and maintenance of pain chronicity, deconditioning, and depression.[40] Operant therapy for chronic pain utilizes reinforcement and punishment contingencies to reduce pain-related behaviors and foster more adaptive behaviors, including graded patterns of activity, activity pacing, and time-contingent medication management.[40] Behavioral therapy for pain has shown positive effects on a variety of domains, including pain experience, mood, negative cognitive appraisals, and functioning in social roles.[3]

 

A recent application of learning theory to chronic pain involves in vivo exposure treatment for pain-related fear, which focuses on decreasing the perceived harmfulness of physical activity.[41] Learning theory posits that the aversive signal of pain may be passed to neutral stimuli (like physical movement behaviors), which contributes to avoidant behavior. In vivo exposure therapy extinguishes threat, fear, and behavioral avoidance through progressively increasing engagement in painful behaviors in the absence of catastrophic outcomes; when these behaviors are performed without serious negative consequences, patients may realize that their expectations about the consequences of physical movement and pain are unrealistic.[24,42] Consistent with exposure treatments for phobias and other anxiety disorders, in vivo exposure treatment for fear of pain involves development of a personalized, graded hierarchy of activities that elicit a fearful response, psychoeducation related to pain, fear, and behavior, and ultimately slow and systematic exposure to activities related to the individual�s fear hierarchy.[41] In vivo exposure treatment for pain-related fear has demonstrated efficacy in improving pain, pain catastrophizing, and functional disability,[41] and in decreasing pain-related fear and anxiety, depression, and anxiety.[43] Exclusively behavioral approaches to pain have been less prevalent in recent years but have demonstrated efficacy in lower back pain samples, among others (see Table 2). The effects of in vivo exposure on functional disability appear to be mediated by decreased catastrophizing and perceived harmfulness of activity[41] but may be differentially effective for patients of differing baseline levels of functionality.[40]

 

Table 2 Demonstrated Efficacy of Psychological Interventions

Table 2: Demonstrated efficacy of psychological interventions by pain population.

 

Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy

 

Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) adopts a biopsychosocial approach to the treatment of chronic pain by targeting maladaptive behavioral and cognitive responses to pain and social and environmental contingencies that modify reactions to pain.[44] CBT principles have demonstrated efficacy for a variety of psychiatric disorders and physical illnesses, in addition to pain.[45] CBT for pain develops coping skills intended to manage pain and improve psychological functioning, including structured relaxation, behavioral activation and scheduling of pleasurable events, assertive communication, and pacing of behavior in order to avoid prolongation or exacerbation of pain flares. Unlike operant-behavioral approaches, CBT for pain also addresses maladaptive beliefs about pain and pain catastrophizing through formal use of cognitive restructuring: identification and replacement of unrealistic or unhelpful thoughts about pain with thoughts that are oriented towards adaptive behavior and positive functioning.[44] CBT for pain has been widely implemented as a standard treatment for pain and constitutes the current �gold standard� for psychological intervention for pain.[44]

 

According to recent meta-analytic studies,[45] CBT for pain demonstrates small-to-medium effect sizes in a variety of domains and shows effects on pain and functioning comparable to standard medical care for pain.[3] CBT significantly improves disability and pain catastrophizing after treatment and yields longer-term improvements in disability, above and beyond the effects of usual medical care,[3] as well as smaller effects on pain, catastrophizing, and mood when compared to no treatment.[3] CBT-related changes in helplessness and catastrophizing are uniquely predictive of later changes in pain intensity and pain-related interference in daily functioning.[22] CBT is also a valuable adjunct treatment in physical rehabilitation programs.[46] The benefits of CBT for pain have been noted in many chronic pain populations (see Table 2) but may not be as robust in some populations, including fibromyalgia.[47] Further, some have suggested that the effects of CBT are at best moderately sized and not maintained long-term.[30] The intractable nature of chronic pain may make adaptation difficult as attempts to control pain may prove ineffectual, ultimately contributing to greater psychological distress.[36] Recent efforts have thus expanded the cognitive-behavioral model of pain intervention to address these issues, which has yielded two newer treatment modalities: mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) and acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT). Unlike CBT, these approaches focus on fostering acceptance of chronic pain rather than emphasizing strategies for controlling pain, thereby improving emotional well-being and greater engagement in nonpain-related pursuits. Though these interventions both target acceptance of pain, they differ in their therapeutic implementation and approach to meditation and daily practice.

 

Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction

 

Mindfulness-based interventions approach seeks to uncouple the sensory aspects of pain from the evaluative and emotional aspects of pain,[48] and promote detached awareness of the somatic and psychological sensations within the body.[48] As the chronic pain signal often cannot be extinguished, this detachment may enhance individual responses to chronic pain.[48] Through mindful awareness and meditation, thoughts about pain can be viewed as discrete events rather than an indication of an underlying problem that necessitates immediate and possibly maladaptive responses.[49] An individual may then recognize these sensations or thoughts as something familiar, which may serve to ameliorate emotional or maladaptive behavioral responses to pain.

 

MBSR is a form of meditation developed in Eastern philosophy and later adapted to Western intervention that enhances awareness and acceptance of physical, cognitive, and emotional states and disconnects psychological reactions from the uncontrollable experience of pain flares.[44] MBSR interventions have traditionally been structured as 2-hour sessions occurring weekly over 10 weeks that develop awareness of the body and proprioceptive signals, awareness of the breath and physical sensations, and development of mindful activities (such as eating, walking, and standing).[48] MBSR promotes mindfulness through daily meditation, which is a requisite component of the treatment.[50] The mechanisms underlying effective MBSR intervention may be similar to desensitization to pain, as meditations involve motionless sitting practices that expose participants to painful sensations in the absence of catastrophic consequences.[48,50] In this way, MBSR interventions may function similarly to in vivo exposure for pain but serve the additional purpose of increasing tolerance for negative emotions, thereby fostering more adaptive responses to pain.[50] MBSR also reduces rumination[51] and interoception of distressing physical signals[52] and increases mindful awareness[51] and acceptance of pain.[53] MBSR necessitates cultivation of daily mindfulness practices,[48] yet compliance rates of MBSR have been found to compare favorably to behavioral pain management techniques.[54] However, evidence on the importance of daily practice is mixed; the amount of time devoted to these mindful activities correlates with symptom improvement in some studies,[55] yet compliance rates appear to correlate only modestly with improvement in others.[54] Unlike CBT, which identifies thoughts as distorted and in need of change, practitioners of mindfulness adopt a nonjudgmental approach to thoughts as �discrete events� that encourage emotional distance from thoughts.[44,50] Further, CBT is a goal-oriented treatment modality, targeting an increased relaxation response or an altered behavioral or thought response, whereas mindfulness does not prescribe specific goals, relying instead on nonjudgmental observation.[50] Further, mindfulness instructors are expected to engage in their own daily mindfulness practices, whereas CBT practitioners do not necessarily need daily practice in CBT to teach it effectively.[50]

 

MBSR has demonstrated efficacy in addressing the severity of medical symptoms and psychological symptoms,[48] pain intensity,[56] and coping with stress and pain;[54] these treatment gains may last up to 4 years after intervention in many domains.[54] MBSR has been effective in diverse pain samples,[48,54,56] and in individuals with irritable bowel syndrome,[52] neck pain,[57] migraine,[57] fibromyalgia,[58] and chronic musculoskeletal pain.[59] Additionally, MBSR addresses co-occurring symptoms of depression in individuals with some chronic pain conditions like fibromyalgia[60] and enhances the effects of multidisciplinary treatment on disability, anxiety, depression, and catastrophizing.[61] Meta-analytic studies of MBSR in chronic pain have shown small to moderate effects of MBSR on anxiety, depression, and psychological distress in patients with chronic illnesses including pain,[62] and these benefits tend to be robust across studies.[63] However, as with CBT, MBSR may be differentially effective across populations; a recent longitudinal study noted greater improvements in pain, health-related quality of life, and psychological well-being for back or neck pain than in fibromyalgia, chronic migraine, or headache.[57]

 

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

 

ACT adopts a theoretical approach that thoughts do not need to be targeted or changed; instead, responses to thoughts may be altered so that their negative consequences are minimized.[31] ACT interventions improve well-being through nonjudgmental and purposeful acknowledgment of mental events (ie, thoughts and emotions), fostering acceptance of these events, and increasing the ability of the individual to remain present and aware of personally relevant psychological and environmental factors; in doing so, individuals are able to adjust their behavior in a way that is consistent with their goals or values, rather than focusing on immediate relief from thoughts and emotions.[31] In the treatment of pain, ACT fosters purposeful awareness and acceptance of pain, thereby minimizing the focus on reducing pain or thought content and instead directing efforts towards fulfilling behavioral functioning.[44] ACT shares conceptual similarity with MBSR due to shared goals of promoting mindfulness and acceptance of pain but, unlike MBSR, ACT does not utilize daily mindful meditation and instead focuses on identification of the values and goals of the individual, which serve to direct behavior.[64] ACT-based interventions have demonstrated benefits on various aspects of mental health in chronic pain populations, including mental health quality of life, self-efficacy, depression, and anxiety.[65] Some studies of ACT interventions for chronic pain have reported medium or larger effect sizes for improvements in pain-related anxiety and distress, disability, number of medical visits, current work status, and physical performance,[66,67] with smaller effects of this intervention noted on pain and depression.[64] However, meta-analytic studies of acceptance-based therapies for pain have revealed that ACT does not show incrementally greater efficacy in comparison to other established psychological treatments for chronic pain.[64]

 

Future Directions and Remaining Questions

 

The extant literature suggests that each of the previously reviewed psychological interventions has retained value for the treatment of chronic pain. At present, there is little evidence of the superiority of any treatment approach, with one exception: CBT has demonstrated incrementally greater benefit in many areas than the effects of behavioral therapy.[3] As previously noted, however, operant-behavioral principles have been adopted for newer treatment approaches like in vivo exposure for fear of pain, which has demonstrated good benefit in multidisciplinary treatment with some pain populations.[41] Recent reviews have concluded that MBSR and ACT are promising but yield generally comparable effects to CBT, despite their distinct intervention methods.[64] The ability to draw conclusions regarding treatment superiority is further limited by the smaller number of high-quality studies of ACT or MBSR compared to the more robust CBT literature.[64]

 

Some critical questions remain regarding the comparative effectiveness of these interventions. First, the effects of CBT are significant in the short term but are not consistently maintained across time, possibly due to decreased adherence.[3] It is conceivable that acceptance-based approaches, which are predicated less on mechanistic coping strategies and instead foster accepting attitudes towards pain, may show greater rates of long-term adherence and longer-term benefits than CBT, though future study of this question is needed. Further, some pain disorders (such as fibromyalgia) have shown comparatively poorer treatment response to CBT than other pain disorders in some studies, which highlights the possible benefit of alternative interventions in such populations. Indeed, ACT and MBSR have also shown efficacy in fibromyalgia populations, though there remains a need to identify predictors of differential treatment response.[65]

 

Safety and Tolerability of Psychological Therapies

 

Psychological therapies for pain are presumed to be at low risk for adverse effects to the recipient; as a result, there is a dearth of empirical evidence regarding the risks of psychological interventions.[68] Some have suggested that patients who enter psychological treatment face risks of incorrect psychological diagnosis, psychological dependence, undermining of a patient�s ability to make their own decisions, or manipulation by the therapist to achieve nontherapeutic goals.[69,70] However, these concerns are alleviated through proper clinical and ethical training of practitioners and are not typically considered salient risks of psychological therapies when they are properly administered.[70] Recently, there has been a call for additional research to address the possibility of adverse psychotherapeutic effects[71] as well as a more systematic method of monitoring and identifying adverse events related to psychotherapy.[68] Though the rates of adverse effects of psychotherapy are still largely unknown, it is encouraging that recent studies have begun to specifically report the incidence of adverse events directly.[72]

 

Factors Affecting the Outcomes of Psychological Intervention

 

Practitioners should be cautioned against the assumption of homogeneity among patients with pain disorders, as a variety of factors may predict treatment response.[69,71] Turk[73] proposed that individuals coping with comparable levels of pain show distinct patterns of response that could be clustered into recognizable subclasses: �dysfunctional� patients, who report high levels of pain-related interference and distress; �interpersonally distressed� patients, who report lacking the support of loved ones in coping with their pain; and �adaptive copers,� who report notably higher levels of function and perceived social support and lower levels of pain-related dysfunction. Turk proposed that these patient subgroups respond differently to psychological intervention, and subsequent findings have supported this idea: �dysfunctional� patients have demonstrated greater response to interdisciplinary treatment involving psychological care than �interpersonally distressed� patients.[74] Identification of patient subgroups may be accomplished using instruments like the Multidisciplinary Pain Inventory[75] and through detailed assessment of chronic pain intensity and disability.[76] Additionally, patients� readiness to adopt a self-management approach to their own chronic pain appears to have significant implications for treatment response;[77] patients who are in the precontemplation stage of treatment readiness may benefit more from insight-focused therapy, versus those in an action stage, who may benefit more from establishing relaxation-based and other active coping strategies.[77] Patient readiness to self-manage pain may be assessed using the Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire.[77] Additionally, treatment response may be subject to patient beliefs about the importance of intervention-specific behaviors and about one�s own ability to perform these actions.[78]

 

Additionally, there may be demographic, psychological, and medical differences among patients that are relevant to treatment response, including the etiology of pain conditions, socioeconomic status, and cultural and ethnic background; these factors require further empirical research in order to optimize clinical outcomes but have not yet received adequate attention in the clinical literature.[79] For example, baseline levels of physical functioning appear to predict response to certain psychological treatment modalities like in vivo exposure for fear of pain.[40] Further, baseline levels of pain, depression, and anxiety have been found to predict dropout rates in some samples,[80,81] though these effects are not apparent in all samples.[3] In addition to being an important mechanism of treatment, there is evidence that baseline levels of fear of pain may also predict differential treatment response; individuals more fearful of pain at the outset of a multidisciplinary pain treatment program showed greater responsiveness to in vivo exposure for this problem.[28] The presence of medical comorbidities that are likely to impact future functioning is also important to consider; recently, psychological interventions have been developed that address comorbid symptoms of sleep,[82] obesity,[29] and fatigue[83] that may accompany chronic pain. Hybrid treatments may be more important in independent clinical practice, where comorbidity is more common.[82] Notably, there is little evidence that personality variables factor significantly into treatment response; most of the connections between personality traits and variables relevant to psychological intervention for pain are theoretical and have not consistently emerged in empirical research.[84,85]

 

Patient age is also an important consideration in examining responses to interventions for pain. Older adults have increased risks of various ailments related to pain, including arthritis and osteoporosis, but may have poor tolerance to medications for these conditions.[86] Further, age may alter psychological reactions to pain; the emotional aspects of pain are more strongly correlated with pain catastrophizing in younger adults than older adults while sensory aspects of pain appear more strongly related to pain catastrophizing in older adults.[87] Additionally, treatment protocols may require accommodation for elderly populations; addressing an elderly patient�s fear of movement may be complicated by a fear of falling that is absent in younger populations.[88] As memory concerns are more common in older adulthood, treatment protocols may be improved if they minimize the demand for memorized tasks.[89] Unfortunately, research is lacking for specific psychological interventions in elderly populations.[86] In general, psychological interventions are presumed to be of low risk for older adults,[90] and CBT for pain has received comparatively greater empirical support for older adults.[88] Overall, the efficacy of psychological intervention for pain in older adults is an area that warrants additional study in the future.

 

Treatment availability is a key consideration for psychological intervention, especially for patients in poverty or living in remote geographical locations. Though it is beyond the scope of this paper to review ethnic and socioeconomic contributors to health, low socioeconomic status is a significant risk factor for the development of chronic pain and factors heavily into racial disparities in health outcomes.[91] As financial challenges may restrict access to traditional psychological interventions, the importance of alternative modalities for provision of mental health interventions for chronic pain is paramount. Teleinterventions[92] and Internet-based interventions[93] may be viable for psychological treatment of chronic pain; Internet-based programs delivering ACT,[94] CBT,[46] and mindfulness interventions[95] have demonstrated benefits in psychosocial functioning, mood, and pain coping. However, methodologically rigorous clinical trials and evidence for maximally effective and efficient implementation of these programs are needed, as many interventions have shown modest effects and comparatively high dropout rates.[96]

 

Combining psychological treatment modalities with one another and with other medical interventions may constitute the next logical step in enhancing treatment outcomes. Institution of a flexible, goal-oriented approach, akin to ACT, may enhance engagement and adherence in CBT.[97] Additionally, a combination of graded in vivo exposure and ACT may show incremental benefit in addressing pain-related fear and anxiety.[98] Effects of CBT may also be enhanced in conjunction with treatments like biofeedback[99] and hypnosis.[100] A word of caution: presentation of psychological treatment by nontraditional practitioners may show variable effectiveness unless treatment approaches are adjusted appropriately.[101] If trained properly, however, appropriately-designed cognitive-behavioral interventions can be effectively administered by physiotherapists,[102] physical therapists,[103] nurses, and occupational therapists.[104]

 

Conclusion

 

Psychotherapy constitutes a valuable modality for addressing the behavioral, cognitive, emotional, and social factors that both result from and contribute to pain-related dysfunction and distress through enhancement of self-management strategies. There are several distinct psychological interventions that differ in their theoretical approaches, therapeutic targets, and areas of efficacy, but CBT, ACT, MBSR, and operant behavioral approaches to pain may all play important roles for enhancing the self-management abilities of individuals with chronic pain. However, there remains a need to identify predictors of differential treatment response and salient patient subgroups to optimize treatment outcomes, as well as additional and alternative means to provision of psychological services for those who are unwilling or unable to engage in traditional psychotherapy. More empirical research into contributing factors of differential treatment response and the dissemination of psychological treatment for pain may result in significant savings to the physical, emotional, and financial costs of chronic pain.

 

Footnotes

 

Disclosure:�The author reports no conflicts of interest in this work.

 

In conclusion, psychological therapies, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy, mindfulness-based stress reduction and even chiropractic care, have been demonstrated to effective help treat chronic pain, according to research studies. The connection between the mind and body has previously been referenced as a cause for a variety of health issues, including chronic pain. Finally, the article above demonstrated the effects of psychological therapy for chronic pain management. Information referenced from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). The scope of our information is limited to chiropractic as well as to spinal injuries and conditions. To discuss the subject matter, please feel free to ask Dr. Jimenez or contact us at 915-850-0900 .

 

Curated by Dr. Alex Jimenez

Green-Call-Now-Button-24H-150x150-2-3.png

 

Additional Topics: Back Pain

 

According to statistics, approximately 80% of people will experience symptoms of back pain at least once throughout their lifetimes. Back pain is a common complaint which can result due to a variety of injuries and/or conditions. Often times, the natural degeneration of the spine with age can cause back pain. Herniated discs occur when the soft, gel-like center of an intervertebral disc pushes through a tear in its surrounding, outer ring of cartilage, compressing and irritating the nerve roots. Disc herniations most commonly occur along the lower back, or lumbar spine, but they may also occur along the cervical spine, or neck. The impingement of the nerves found in the low back due to injury and/or an aggravated condition can lead to symptoms of sciatica.

 

blog picture of cartoon paperboy big news

 

EXTRA IMPORTANT TOPIC: Managing Workplace Stress

 

 

MORE IMPORTANT TOPICS: EXTRA EXTRA: Car Accident Injury Treatment El Paso, TX Chiropractor

 

Blank
References
1.�Craig AD. A new view of pain as a homeostatic emotion.�Trends Neurosci.�2003;26(6):303�307.[PubMed]
2.�Gatchel RJ. Comorbidity of chronic pain and mental health disorders: the biopsychosocial perspective.�Am Psychol.�2004;59(8):795�805.�[PubMed]
3.�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.�[PubMed]
4.�Turk DC, Audette J, Levy RM, Mackey SC, Stanos S. Assessment and treatment of psychosocial comorbidities in patients with neuropathic pain.�Mayo Clin Proc.�2010;85(Suppl 3):S42�S50.[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
5.�Thibault P, Loisel P, Durand MJ, Catchlove R, Sullivan MJ. Psychological predictors of pain expression and activity intolerance in chronic pain patients.�Pain.�2008;139(1):47�54.�[PubMed]
6.�Bair MJ, Robinson RL, Katon W, Kroenke K. Depression and pain comorbidity: a literature review.�Arch Intern Med.�2003;163(20):2433�2445.�[PubMed]
7.�McWilliams LA, Cox BJ, Enns MW. Mood and anxiety disorders associated with chronic pain: an examination in a nationally representative sample.�Pain.�2003;106(1�2):127�133.�[PubMed]
8.�Young Casey C, Greenberg MA, Nicassio PM, Harpin RE, Hubbard D. Transition from acute to chronic pain and disability: a model including cognitive, affective, and trauma factors.�Pain.�2008;134(1�2):69�79.[PubMed]
9.�Geenen R, Newman S, Bossema ER, Vriezekolk JE, Boelen PA. Psychological interventions for patients with rheumatic diseases and anxiety or depression.�Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol.�2012;26(3):305�319.[PubMed]
10.�Winkelmann A, Perrot S, Schaefer C, et al. Impact of fibromyalgia severity on health economic costs: results from a European cross- sectional study.�Appl Health Econ Health Policy.�2011;9(2):125�136.[PubMed]
11.�Wright LJ, Schur E, Noonan C, Ahumada S, Buchwald D, Afari N. Chronic pain, overweight, and obesity: findings from a community-based twin registry.�J Pain.�2010;11(7):628�635.�[PMC free article][PubMed]
12.�Smith MT, Haythornthwaite JA. How do sleep disturbance and chronic pain inter-relate? Insights from the longitudinal and cognitive- behavioral clinical trials literature.�Sleep Med Rev.�2004;8(2):119�132.[PubMed]
13.�Kato K, Sullivan PF, Eveng�rd B, Pedersen NL. Chronic widespread pain and its comorbidities: a population-based study.�Arch Intern Med.�2006;166(15):1649�1654.�[PubMed]
14.�Richardson LP, Russo JE, Katon W, et al. Mental health disorders and long-term opioid use among adolescents and young adults with chronic pain.�J Adolesc Health.�2012;50(6):553�558.�[PMC free article][PubMed]
15.�Sullivan MJ, Thorn B, Haythornthwaite JA, et al. Theoretical perspectives on the relation between catastrophizing and pain.�Clin J Pain.�2001;17(1):52�64.�[PubMed]
16.�Sullivan MJL, Bishop SR, Pivik J. The pain catastrophizing scale: development and validation.�Psychol Assess.�1995;7(4):524�532.
17.�Keefe FJ, Brown GK, Wallston KA, Caldwell DS. Coping with rheumatoid arthritis pain: catastrophizing as a maladaptive strategy.�Pain.�1989;37(1):51�56.�[PubMed]
18.�Wollaars MM, Post MW, van Asbeck FW, Brand N. Spinal cord injury pain: the influence of psychologic factors and impact on quality of life.�Clin J Pain.�2007;23(5):383�391.�[PubMed]
19.�Crisson JE, Keefe FJ. The relationship of locus of control to pain coping strategies and psychological distress in chronic pain patients.�Pain.�1988;35(2):147�154.�[PubMed]
20.�Hamilton NA, Karoly P, Zautra AJ. Health goal cognition and adjustment in women with fibromyalgia.�J Behav Med.�2005;28(5):455�466.�[PubMed]
21.�Mankovsky T, Lynch M, Clark A, Sawynok J, Sullivan MJ. Pain catastrophizing predicts poor response to topical analgesics in patients with neuropathic pain.�Pain Res Manag.�2012;17(1):10�14.[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
22.�Burns JW, Glenn B, Bruehl S, Harden RN, Lofland K. Cognitive factors influence outcome following multidisciplinary chronic pain treatment: a replication and extension of a cross-lagged panel analysis.�Behav Res Ther.�2003;41(10):1163�1182.�[PubMed]
23.�Sullivan MJL, Adams H, Ellis T. Targeting catastrophic thinking to promote return to work in individuals with fibromyalgia.�J Cogn Psychother.�2012;26(2):130�142.
24.�Leeuw M, Goossens ME, Linton SJ, Crombez G, Boersma K, Vlaeyen JW. The fear-avoidance model of musculoskeletal pain: current state of scientific evidence.�J Behav Med.�2007;30(1):77�94.�[PubMed]
25.�Demmelmaier I, Asenl�f P, Lindberg P, Denison E. Biopsychosocial predictors of pain, disability, health care consumption, and sick leave in first-episode and long-term back pain: a longitudinal study in the general population.�Int J Behav Med.�2010;17(2):79�89.�[PubMed]
26.�Zale EL, Lange KL, Fields SA, Ditre JW. The relation between pain-related fear and disability: a meta-analysis.�J Pain.�2013;14(10):1019�1030.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
27.�Samwel HJ, Evers AW, Crul BJ, Kraaimaat FW. The role of helplessness, fear of pain, and passive pain-coping in chronic pain patients.�Clin J Pain.�2006;22(3):245�251.�[PubMed]
28.�Werneke MW, Hart DL, George SZ, Stratford PW, Matheson JW, Reyes A. Clinical outcomes for patients classified by fear-avoidance beliefs and centralization phenomenon.�Arch Phys Med Rehabil.�2009;90(5):768�777.�[PubMed]
29.�Somers TJ, Keefe FJ, Pells JJ, et al. Pain catastrophizing and pain-related fear in osteoarthritis patients: relationships to pain and disability.�J Pain Symptom Manage.�2009;37(5):863�872.�[PMC free article][PubMed]
30.�Pincus T, McCracken LM. Psychological factors and treatment opportunities in low back pain.�Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol.�2013;27(5):625�635.�[PubMed]
31.�Hayes SC, Luoma JB, Bond FW, Masuda A, Lillis J. Acceptance and commitment therapy: model, processes and outcomes.�Behav Res Ther.�2006;44(1):1�25.�[PubMed]
32.�Eccleston C, Crombez G, Aldrich S, Stannard C. Worry and chronic pain patients: a description and analysis of individual differences.�Eur J Pain.�2001;5(3):309�318.�[PubMed]
33.�McCracken LM. Learning to live with the pain: acceptance of pain predicts adjustment in persons with chronic pain.�Pain.�1998;74(1):21�27.�[PubMed]
34.�Kranz D, Bollinger A, Nilges P. Chronic pain acceptance and affective well-being: a coping perspective.�Eur J Pain.�2010;14(10):1021�1025.�[PubMed]
35.�Vowles KE, McCracken LM, Eccleston C. Patient functioning and catastrophizing in chronic pain: the mediating effects of acceptance.�Health Psychol.�2008;27(Suppl 2):S136�S143.�[PubMed]
36.�McCracken LM, Eccleston C. A prospective study of acceptance of pain and patient functioning with chronic pain.�Pain.�2005;118(1�2):164�169.�[PubMed]
37.�Vowles KE, McCracken LM, Eccleston C. Processes of change in treatment for chronic pain: the contributions of pain, acceptance, and catastrophizing.�Eur J Pain.�2007;11(7):779�787.�[PubMed]
38.�Kratz AL, Davis MC, Zautra AJ. Pain acceptance moderates the relation between pain and negative affect in female osteoarthritis and fibromyalgia patients.�Ann Behav Med.�2007;33(3):291�301.[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
39.�Fordyce WE.�Behavioral Methods for Chronic Pain and Illness.�St Louis, MO: Mosby; 1976. p. 1.
40.�Gatzounis R, Schrooten MG, Crombez G, Vlaeyen JW. Operant learning theory in pain and chronic pain rehabilitation.�Curr Pain Headache Rep.�2012;16(2):117�126.�[PubMed]
41.�Leeuw M, Goossens ME, van Breukelen GJ, et al. Exposure in vivo versus operant graded activity in chronic low back pain patients: results of a randomized controlled trial.�Pain.�2008;138(1):192�207.[PubMed]
42.�den Hollander M, de Jong JR, Volders S, Goossens ME, Smeets RJ, Vlaeyen JW. Fear reduction in patients with chronic pain: a learning theory perspective.�Expert Rev Neurother.�2010;10(11):1733�1745.[PubMed]
43.�Woods MP, Asmundson GJ. Evaluating the efficacy of graded in vivo exposure for the treatment of fear in patients with chronic back pain: a randomized controlled clinical trial.�Pain.�2008;136(3):271�280.[PubMed]
44.�Day MA, Thorn BE, Burns JW. The continuing evolution of biopsychosocial interventions for chronic pain.�J Cogn Psychother.�2012;26(2):114�129.
45.�Hofmann SG, Asnaani A, Vonk IJ, Sawyer AT, Fang A. The efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy: a review of meta-analyses.�Cognit Ther Res.�2012;36(5):427�440.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
46.�Buhrman M, Fredriksson A, Edstr�m G, et al. Guided Internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy for chronic pain patients who have residual symptoms after rehabilitation treatment: randomized controlled trial.�Eur J Pain.�2013;17(5):753�765.�[PubMed]
47.�Bennett R, Nelson D. Cognitive behavioral therapy for fibromyalgia.�Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol.�2006;2(8):416�424.�[PubMed]
48.�Kabat-Zinn J. An outpatient program in behavioral medicine for chronic pain patients based on the practice of mindfulness meditation: theoretical considerations and preliminary results.�Gen Hosp Psychiatry.�1982;4(1):33�47.�[PubMed]
49.�Lauwerier E, Van Damme S, Goubert L, Paemeleire K, Devulder J, Crombez G. To control or not? A motivational perspective on coping with pain.�Acta Neurol Belg.�2012;112(1):3�7.�[PubMed]
50.�Baer RA. Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: a conceptual and empirical review.�Clin Psychol: Sci Pract.�2003;10(2):125�143.
51.�Campbell TS, Labelle LE, Bacon SL, Faris P, Carlson LE. Impact of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) on attention, rumination and resting blood pressure in women with cancer: a waitlist-controlled study.�J Behav Med.�2012;35(3):262�271.�[PubMed]
52.�Garland EL, Gaylord SA, Palsson O, Faurot K, Douglas Mann J, Whitehead WE. Therapeutic mechanisms of a mindfulness-based treatment for IBS: effects on visceral sensitivity, catastrophizing, and affective processing of pain sensations.�J Behav Med.�2012;35(6):591�602.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
53.�Kabat-Zinn J.�Full Catastrophe Living: The Program of the Stress Reduction Clinic at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center.�New York, NY: Delta; 1990.
54.�Kabat-Zinn J, Lipworth L, Burney R, Sellers W. Four-year follow-up of a meditation-based program for the self-regulation of chronic pain: treatment outcomes and compliance.�Clin J Pain.�1986;2(3):159�173.
55.�Carmody J, Baer RA. Relationships between mindfulness practice and levels of mindfulness, medical and psychological symptoms and well-being in a mindfulness-based stress reduction program.�J Behav Med.�2008;31(1):23�33.�[PubMed]
56.�Randolph P, Caldera YM, Tacone AM, Greak BL. The long-term combined effects of medical treatment and a mindfulness-based behavioral program for the multidisciplinary management of chronic pain in West Texas.�Pain Digest.�1999;9:103�112.
57.�Rosenzweig S, Greeson JM, Reibel DK, Green JS, Jasser SA, Beasley D. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for chronic pain conditions: variation in treatment outcomes and role of home meditation practice.�J Psychosom Res.�2010;68(1):29�36.�[PubMed]
58.�Grossman P, Tiefenthaler-Gilmer U, Raysz A, Kesper U. Mindfulness training as an intervention for fibromyalgia: evidence of postintervention and 3-year follow-up benefits in well-being.�Psychother Psychosom.�2007;76(4):226�233.�[PubMed]
59.�Plews-Ogan M, Owens JE, Goodman M, Wolfe P, Schorling J. A pilot study evaluating mindfulness-based stress reduction and massage for the management of chronic pain.�J Gen Intern Med.�2005;20(12):1136�1138.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
60.�Sephton SE, Salmon P, Weissbecker I, et al. Mindfulness meditation alleviates depressive symptoms in women with fibromyalgia: results of a randomized clinical trial.�Arthritis Rheum.�2007;57(1):77�85.[PubMed]
61.�Cassidy EL, Atherton RJ, Robertson N, Walsh DA, Gillett R. Mindfulness, functioning and catastrophizing after multidisciplinary pain management for chronic low back pain.�Pain.�2012;153(3):644�650.�[PubMed]
62.�Bohlmeijer E, Prenger R, Taal E, Cuijpers P. The effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction therapy on mental health of adults with a chronic medical disease: a meta-analysis.�J Psychosom Res.�2010;68(6):539�544.�[PubMed]
63.�Merkes M. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for people with chronic diseases.�Aust J Prim Health.�2010;16(3):200�210.�[PubMed]
64.�Veehof MM, Oskam MJ, Schreurs KM, Bohlmeijer ET. Acceptance-based interventions for the treatment of chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.�Pain.�2011;152(3):533�542.�[PubMed]
65.�Wicksell RK, Kemani M, Jensen K, et al. Acceptance and commitment therapy for fibromyalgia: a randomized controlled trial.�Eur J Pain.�2013;17(4):599�611.�[PubMed]
66.�McCracken LM, MacKichan F, Eccleston C. Contextual cognitive-behavioral therapy for severely disabled chronic pain sufferers: effectiveness and clinically significant change.�Eur J Pain.�2007;11(3):314�322.�[PubMed]
67.�Vowles KE, McCracken LM. Acceptance and values-based action in chronic pain: a study of treatment effectiveness and process.�J Consult Clin Psychol.�2008;76(3):397�407.�[PubMed]
68.�Dimidjian S, Hollon SD. How would we know if psychotherapy were harmful?�Am Psychol.�2010;65(1):21�33.�[PubMed]
69.�Berk M, Parker G. The elephant on the couch: side-effects of psychotherapy.�Aust N Z J Psychiatry.�2009;43(9):787�794.�[PubMed]
70.�Green B. Adverse effects of psychotherapy.�Advances in Psychiatric Treatment.�2011;17(6):476.
71.�Barlow DH. Negative effects from psychological treatments: a perspective.�Am Psychol.�2010;65(1):13�20.�[PubMed]
72.�Shadick NA, Sowell NF, Frits ML, et al. A randomized controlled trial of an internal family systems-based psychotherapeutic intervention on outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis: a proof-of-concept study.�J Rheumatol.�2013;40(11):1831�1841.�[PubMed]
73.�Turk DC. The potential of treatment matching for subgroups of patients with chronic pain: lumping versus splitting.�Clin J Pain.�2005;21(1):44�55.�discussion 69�72.�[PubMed]
74.�Turk DC, Okifuji A, Sinclair JD, Starz TW. Differential responses by psychosocial subgroups of fibromyalgia syndrome patients to an interdisciplinary treatment.�Arthritis Care Res.�1998;11(5):397�404.[PubMed]
75.�Kerns RD, Turk DC, Rudy TE. The West Haven-Yale multidimensional pain inventory (WHYMPI)�Pain.�1985;23(4):345�356.�[PubMed]
76.�Von Korff M, Ormel J, Keefe FJ, Dworkin SF. Grading the severity of chronic pain.�Pain.�1992;50(2):133�149.�[PubMed]
77.�Kerns RD, Rosenberg R, Jamison RN, Caudill MA, Haythornthwaite J. Readiness to adopt a self-management approach to chronic pain: the Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire (PSOCQ)�Pain.�1997;72(1�2):227�234.�[PubMed]
78.�Kratz AL, Molton IR, Jensen MP, Ehde DM, Nielson WR. Further evaluation of the Motivational Model of Pain Self-Management: coping with chronic pain in multiple sclerosis.�Ann Behav Med.�2011;41(3):391�400.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
79.�Reese C, Mittag O. Psychological interventions in the rehabilitation of patients with chronic low back pain: evidence and recommendations from systematic reviews and guidelines.�Int J Rehabil Res.�2013;36(1):6�12.�[PubMed]
80.�Kraaimaat F, Brons MR, Geenen R, Bijlsma JW. The effect of cognitive behavior therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.�Behav Res Ther.�1995;33(5):487�495.�[PubMed]
81.�Wetherell JL, Afari N, Rutledge T, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of acceptance and commitment therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy for chronic pain.�Pain.�2011;152(9):2098�2107.�[PubMed]
82.�Tang NK, Goodchild CE, Salkovskis PM. Hybrid cognitive-behaviour therapy for individuals with insomnia and chronic pain: a pilot randomised controlled trial.�Behav Res Ther.�2012;50(12):814�821.[PubMed]
83.�Knoop H, Stulemeijer M, Prins JB, van der Meer JW, Bleijenberg G. Is cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome also effective for pain symptoms?�Behav Res Ther.�2007;45(9):2034�2043.[PubMed]
84.�Bishop SR. What do we really know about mindfulness-based stress reduction?�Psychosom Med.�2002;64(1):71�83.�[PubMed]
85.�Turner JA, Holtzman S, Mancl L. Mediators, moderators, and predictors of therapeutic change in cognitive-behavioral therapy for chronic pain.�Pain.�2007;127(3):276�286.�[PubMed]
86.�Park J, Hughes AK. Nonpharmacological approaches to the management of chronic pain in community-dwelling older adults: a review of empirical evidence.�J Am Geriatr Soc.�2012;60(3):555�568.[PubMed]
87.�Kraaij V, Pruymboom E, Garnefski N. Cognitive coping and depressive symptoms in the elderly: a longitudinal study.�Aging Ment Health.�2002;6(3):275�281.�[PubMed]
88.�Keefe FJ, Porter L, Somers T, Shelby R, Wren AV. Psychosocial interventions for managing pain in older adults: outcomes and clinical implications.�Br J Anaesth.�2013;111(1):89�94.�[PMC free article][PubMed]
89.�Nicholson NL, Blanchard EB. A controlled evaluation of behavioral treatment of chronic headache in the elderly.�Behav Ther.�1993;24(3):395�408.
90.�Morone NE, Greco CM. Mind-body interventions for chronic pain in older adults: a structured review.�Pain Med.�2007;8(4):359�375.�[PubMed]
91.�Fuentes M, Hart-Johnson T, Green CR. The association among neighborhood socioeconomic status, race and chronic pain in black and white older adults.�J Natl Med Assoc.�2007;99(10):1160�1169.[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
92.�Naylor MR, Naud S, Keefe FJ, Helzer JE. Therapeutic Interactive Voice Response (TIVR) to reduce analgesic medication use for chronic pain management.�J Pain.�2010;11(12):1410�1419.�[PMC free article][PubMed]
93.�Hoch DB, Watson AJ, Linton DA, et al. The feasibility and impact of delivering a mind-body intervention in a virtual world.�PLoS One.�2012;7(3):e33843.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
94.�Buhrman M, Skoglund A, Husell J, et al. Guided internet-delivered acceptance and commitment therapy for chronic pain patients: a randomized controlled trial.�Behav Res Ther.�2013;51(6):307�315.[PubMed]
95.�Davis MC, Zautra AJ. An online mindfulness intervention targeting socioemotional regulation in fibromyalgia: results of a randomized controlled trial.�Ann Behav Med.�2013;46(3):273�284.�[PubMed]
96.�Macea DD, Gajos K, Daglia Calil YA, Fregni F. The efficacy of Web-based cognitive behavioral interventions for chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.�J Pain.�2010;11(10):917�929.[PubMed]
97.�Schrooten MG, Vlaeyen JW, Morley S. Psychological interventions for chronic pain: reviewed within the context of goal pursuit.�Pain Management.�2012;2(2):141�150.�[PubMed]
98.�Bailey KM, Carleton RN, Vlaeyen JW, Asmundson GJ. Treatments addressing pain-related fear and anxiety in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain: a preliminary review.�Cogn Behav Ther.�2010;39(1):46�63.�[PubMed]
99.�Glombiewski JA, Sawyer AT, Gutermann J, Koenig K, Rief W, Hofmann SG. Psychological treatments for fibromyalgia: a meta-analysis.�Pain.�2010;151(2):280�295.�[PubMed]
100.�Castel A, Casc�n R, Padrol A, Sala J, Rull M. Multicomponent cognitive-behavioral group therapy with hypnosis for the treatment of fibromyalgia: long-term outcome.�J Pain.�2012;13(3):255�265.[PubMed]
101.�Gross AR, Kaplan F, Huang S, et al. Psychological care, patient education, orthotics, ergonomics and prevention strategies for neck pain: a systematic overview update as part of the ICON Project.�Open Orthop J.�2013;7:530�561.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
102.�Hunt MA, Keefe FJ, Bryant C, et al. A physiotherapist-delivered, combined exercise and pain coping skills training intervention for individuals with knee osteoarthritis: a pilot study.�Knee.�2013;20(2):106�112.�[PubMed]
103.�Bruflat AK, Balter JE, McGuire D, Fethke NB, Maluf KS. Stress management as an adjunct to physical therapy for chronic neck pain.�Phys Ther.�2012;92(10):1348�1359.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
104.�Lamb SE, Mistry D, Lall R, et al. Back Skills Training Trial Group Group cognitive behavioural interventions for low back pain in primary care: extended follow-up of the Back Skills Training Trial (ISRCTN54717854)�Pain.�2012;153(2):494�501.�[PubMed]
Close Accordion
Mindfulness Interventions for Chronic Headache in El Paso, TX

Mindfulness Interventions for Chronic Headache in El Paso, TX

by | Chiropractic, Conditions Treated, Physical Rehabilitation, Randomized Controlled Trial, Stress, Treatments

If you’ve experienced a headache, you’re not alone. Approximately 9 out of 10 individuals in the United States suffer from headaches. While some are intermittent, some frequent, some are dull and throbbing, and some cause debilitating pain and nausea, getting rid of the head pain is an immediate response for many. But, how can you most effectively relieve a headache?

 

Research studies have demonstrated that chiropractic care is an effective alternative treatment option for many types of headaches. A 2014 report in the Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics (JMPT) discovered that spinal adjustments and manual manipulations used in chiropractic care improved outcome measures for the treatment of chronic and acute neck pain as well as improved the benefits of a variety of treatment approaches for neck pain. Furthermore, a 2011 JMPT study found that chiropractic care can improve and reduce the frequency of migraine and cervicogenic headaches.

 

How Does Chiropractic Care Treat Headaches?

 

Chiropractic care focuses on the treatment of a variety of injuries and/or conditions of the musculoskeletal and nervous system, including headache. A chiropractor utilizes spinal adjustments and manual manipulations to carefully correct the alignment of the spine. A subluxation, or a spinal misalignment, has been demonstrated to cause symptoms, such as neck and back pain, and headache and migraine. A balanced spine can improve spine function as well as alleviate structural stress. In addition, a doctor of chiropractic can help treat headaches and other painful symptoms by supplying nutritional advice, offering posture and ergonomics advice and recommending stress management and exercise advice. Chiropractic care can ultimately ease muscle tension along the surrounding structures of the spine, restoring the spine’s original function.

 

Dr. Alex Jimenez performs a chiropractic adjustment on a patient.

 

Dr. Alex Jimenez offers fitness advice to patient.

 

Furthermore, chiropractic care can safely and effectively treat other spinal health issues, including symptoms of neck and lower back pain due to cervical and lumbar herniated discs, among other injuries and/or conditions. A chiropractor understands how a spinal misalignment, or subluxation, can affect different areas of the body and they will treat the body as a whole rather than focusing on the symptom alone. Chiropractic treatment can help the human body naturally restore its original health and wellness.

 

Trainer and patient interaction at rehabilitation center.

 

It is well-known that chiropractic care is effective for a variety of injuries and/or conditions, however, over the last few years, research studies have found that chiropractic can enhance our well-being by managing our stress. A number of these recent research studies demonstrated that chiropractic care can alter immune function, affect heart rate, and also reduce blood pressure. A 2011 research from Japan indicated that chiropractic may have a much bigger influence on your body than you believe.

 

Stress is an essential indicator of health, and chronic pain symptoms can tremendously affect wellness. Researchers in Japan sought to check whether chiropractic could alter stress levels in 12 men and women with neck pain and headache. But scientists at Japan wanted to find a more objective picture of how chiropractic spinal adjustments and manual manipulations affect the nervous system, so they used PET scans to monitor brain activity and salvia trials to monitor hormone changes.

 

After chiropractic care, patients had altered brain activity in the areas of the brain responsible for pain processing and stress reactions. They also had significantly reduced cortisol levels, indicating decreased stress. Participants also reported lower pain scores and a greater quality of life after treatment. Mindfulness interventions, such as chiropractic care, are fundamental stress management methods and techniques. Chronic stress can lead to a variety of health issues, including neck and back pain as well as headache and migraine. Other mindfulness interventions can also safely and effectively help improve symptoms. The purpose of the following article is to demonstrate the effectiveness of another mindfulness intervention, known as mindfulness-based stress reduction, on perceived pain intensity and quality of life in patients previously diagnosed with chronic headache.

 

The Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction on Perceived Pain Intensity and Quality of Life in Patients With Chronic Headache

 

Abstract

 

The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress reduction (MBSR) on perceived pain intensity and quality of life in patients with chronic headache. Thus, forty patients based on the diagnosis of a neurologist and diagnostic criteria of the International Headache Society (IHS) for migraine and chronic tension-type headache were selected and randomly assigned to the intervention group and control group, respectively. The participants completed the Pain and quality of life (SF-36) questionnaire. The intervention group enrolled in an eight-week MBSR program that incorporated meditation and daily home practice, per week, session of 90-minutes. Results of covariance analysis with the elimination of the pre-test showed significantly improvement of pain and quality of life in the intervention group compared with the control group. The findings from this study revealed that MBSR can be used non-pharmacological intervention for improvement the quality of life and development of strategies to cope with pain in patients with chronic headache. And can be used in combination with other therapies such as pharmacotherapy.

 

Keywords: chronic pain, migraine headache, mindfulness, quality of life, tension headache

 

Dr Jimenez White Coat

Dr. Alex Jimenez’s Insight

Chronic headache is a debilitating symptoms which affects many people. There are many different types of headaches, however, a majority of them often share a common trigger. Chronic stress can cause a variety of health issues of not properly managed, including muscle tension, which may lead to spinal misalignment, or subluxation, as well as other symptoms, such as neck and back pain, headaches and migraines. Stress management methods and techniques can ultimately help improve and manage stress associated symptoms. Mindfulness interventions like chiropractic care and mindfulness-based stress reduction have been determined to effectively help reduce stress and alleviate chronic headache symptoms.

 

Introduction

 

Headache is one of the most common complaints investigated in adult and pediatric neurological clinics. The vast majority of these headaches are migraine and tension-type headaches (Kurt & Kaplan, 2008). Headaches are classified into two categories of main or primary and secondary headaches. Ninety percent of headaches are primary headaches, among which migraine and tension headaches are the most common types (International Headache Society [IHS], 2013). According to the definition, migraine headache is usually unilateral and pulsating in nature and lasts from 4 to 72 hours. The associated symptoms include nausea, vomiting, increased sensitivity to light, sound and pain, and it generally increases with increasing physical activity. Also, tension headache is characterized by bilateral, non-pulsating pain, pressure or tightness, blunt pain, like a bandage or a hat, and a continuum of mild to moderate pain, preventing daily life activities (IHS, 2013).

 

Stovner et al. (2007) using the IHS diagnostic criteria, estimated the percentages of the adult population with an active headache disorder about 46% for headache in general, 42% for tension-type headache. This suggests that the incidence and the prevalence of tension-type headache are much higher than it was predicted. It is estimated that about 12 to 18 percent of the people have migraines (Stovner & Andree, 2010). Women are more likely to experience migraines compared to men, migraine prevalence is about 6% for men and 18% for women (Tozer et al., 2006).

 

Migraine and tension-type headaches are common and well-documented responses to psychological and physiological stressors (Menken, Munsat, & Toole, 2000). Migraine is a periodic and debilitating chronic pain and has a negative impact on quality of life, relationships and productivity. The World Health Organization (WHO) has announced the severe migraine as one of the most debilitating diseases with the nineteenth rank (IHS, 2013; Menken et al., 2000).

 

Despite the development of many medications for treatment and prevention of migraine attacks, a number of patients find them ineffective and some other find them inappropriate because of their side effects and side-effects often times lead to early discontinuation of treatment. As a result, a great interest in the development of non-pharmacologic treatments can be observed (Mulleners, Haan, Dekker, & Ferrari, 2010).

 

Biological factors alone cannot explain vulnerability to the experience of the headache, the onset of the attack and its course, intensified attacks of headache, headache-related disability and also the quality of life in patients with chronic headache. Negative life events are (as psychosocial factor) often known as a key factor in the development and exacerbation of headache (Nash & Thebarge, 2006).

 

The program of Mindfulness-Based Stress reduction (MBSR) is among the treatments, which have been studied in the past two decades on a variety of chronic pain. MBSR developed by Kabat-Zinn and used in a wide range of population with stress-related disorders and chronic pain (Kabat-Zinn, 1990). Especially in recent years, many studies have been conducted to examine the therapeutic effects of MBSR. Most studies have shown the significant effects of MBSR on different psychological conditions including the reduction of psychological symptoms of distress, anxiety, rumination, anxiety and depression (Bohlmeijer, Prenger, Taal, & Cuijpers, 2010; Carlson, Speca, Patel, & Goodey, 2003; Grossman, Niemann, Schmidt, & Walach, 2004; Jain et al., 2007; Kabat-Zinn, 1982; Kabat-Zinn, Lipworth, & Burney, 1985; Kabat-Zinn et al., 1992; Teasdale et al., 2002), pain (Flugel et al., 2010; Kabat-Zinn, 1982; Kabat-Zinn et al., 1985; La Cour & Petersen, 2015; Rosenzweig et al., 2010; Zeidan, Gordon, Merchant, & Goolkasian, 2010) and quality of life (Brown & Ryan, 2003; Carlson et al., 2003; Flugel et al., 2010; Kabat-Zinn, 1982; La Cour & Petersen, 2015; Morgan, Ransford, Morgan, Driban, & Wang, 2013; Rosenzweig et al., 2010).

 

Bohlmeijer et al. (2010) conducted a meta-analysis of eight randomized controlled studies on the effects of MBSR program, concluded that MBSR has small effects on depression, anxiety and psychological distress in people with chronic medical diseases. Also Grossman et al. (2004) in a meta-analysis of 20 controlled and uncontrolled studies on the effects of the MBSR program on physical and mental health of medical and non-medical samples, found an effect size of moderate for controlled studies on mental health. No effect sizes for specific symptoms such as depression and anxiety were reported. The most recent review includes 16 studies controlled and uncontrolled, This review reports that MBSR intervention decrease pain intensity, and most controlled trial studies (6 of 8) show higher reductions in pain intensity for intervention group compared with control group (Reiner, Tibi, & Lipsitz, 2013).

 

In another study, researchers found significant effect sizes for some subscales of quality of life for example vitality scale and bodily pain, nonsignificant effect sizes for pain and significant medium to large size effects for lower general anxiety and depression (La Cour & Petersen, 2015). Also in a study by Rosenzweig et al. (2010) on patients with chronic pain including those suffering from migraine, there were significant differences in pain intensity, pain-related functional limitations between patients. However, those suffering from migraine experienced the lowest improvement in pain and different aspects of quality of life. In general, different groups of chronic pain showed significant improvements in pain intensity and pain-related functional limitations in this study. Two other studies were conducted by Kabat-Zinn and using MBSR methods for treating patients with chronic pain, including a number of patients with chronic headaches. Statistical analysis showed a significant reduction in pain, pain interference with daily activities, medical and psychiatric signs and symptoms, anxiety and depression, negative body image, pain interference with daily activities, use of the drug and also increase in confidence (Kabat-Zinn, 1982; Kabat-Zinn et al., 1985).

 

Due to pain and loss of function and reduced work productivity and increased use of health care, chronic headache impose costs on individual and society, it seems that the chronic headache is a major health problem and finding ways to control and treat this problem could be of great importance. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of MBSR in addition to conventional pharmacotherapy in a clinical population sample of patients with chronic headache to show the effectiveness of this technique as a method of pain management and enhancement of the quality of life in patients with chronic headaches.

 

Methods

 

Participants and Procedure

 

This is a randomized controlled trial two- group �pretest-posttest� study design. Also an approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Zahedan University of Medical Sciences. The participants selected through convenience sampling method from patients with chronic migraine and tension-type headache, diagnosed by a neurologist and a psychiatrist using IHS diagnostic criteria-referred to university hospitals of Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan-Iran.

 

After evaluating each patient for meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria and taking an initial interview, 40 out of eighty-seven primary patients with chronic headache were selected and randomly assigned into two equal groups of intervention and control. Both the control and intervention groups received common pharmacotherapy under the supervision of the neurologist. During therapy sessions three subjects, due to the lack of a regular presence or exclusion criteria, opted out or were excluded from the study.

 

Inclusion Criteria

 

  • (1) Informed consent to participate in the sessions.
  • (2) Minimum age of 18 years.
  • (3) Minimum educational qualification of middle-school degree.
  • (4) The diagnosis of chronic headache (primary chronic migraine and tension-type headache) by the neurologist and according to IHS diagnostic criteria.
  • (5) 15 or more days per month for more than 3 months and least six months history of migraines and tension-type headache

 

Exclusion Criteria

 

  • (1) Subjects who were not willing to continue the participation in the study or leave the study for any reason.
  • (2) Other chronic pain problems.
  • (3) Psychosis, delirium and cognitive disorders.
  • (4) Cases of interpersonal difficulties interfering with teamwork.
  • (5) Drug and substance abuse.
  • (6) Mood disorder

 

Intervention Groups

 

Therapy sessions (MBSR) were held for 1.5 to 2 hours a week for the members of the intervention group (drug plus MBSR); While no MBSR was performed for the control group (only common drugs used) until the end of the research. The MBSR was carried out for 8 weeks. In this study, the 8-session MBSR program (Chaskalon, 2011) has been used. To do the meditation homework while training participants in sessions, the necessary measures have been provided in a CD and a booklet. If any one of subjects did not participate in a session or sessions, at the beginning of the next session the therapist would provide written notes of the sessions to the subjects, in addition to repeat the previous session summaries. MBSR program and discussions were presented to the patients in the eight sessions including: understanding pain and its aetiology, discuss about relationship stress, anger and emotion with pain, Understanding negative automatic thoughts, identyfying thoughts and feelings, introducing the concept of Acceptance, breathing space, three-minute breathing space, breath focus exercise, pleasant and unpleasant events daily, behavioral activation, mindfulness of routine activity, body scan practice, Seeing and hearing exercise, sitting meditation, mindful walking, reading poems related to mindfulness and also discuss how to keep up what has been developed over the whole course, discuss plans and positive reasons for maintaining the practice. Patients also received information about learning how to detect any future relapses as well as strategies and plans on which to base early detection of symptom pain attacks and for being self-directed towards new situations.

 

Control Group

 

Patients who were randomized in the control group were continuing usual pharmacotherapy(including specific and nonspecific drugs) by their neurologist until the end of the research.

 

Instruments

 

Two main tools were used in the pre-test and post-test to collect data, in addition to demographic data form. Headache log was used to determine the perceived intensity of pain using three parts: (1) 10-point likert-scale ratings, (2) the number of hours of pain per day and (3) pain frequency during the month. Each part is scored from 0 to 100, the highest level being 100. Since each patient rates their perceived pain intensity in the questionnaire, validity and reliability are not considered. And the other was a short-form 36 questionnaire (SF-36). The questionnaire is applicable in the various age groups and different diseases. The reliability and validity of the questionnaire was approved by Ware et al (Ware, Osinski, Dewey, & Gandek, 2000). The SF-36 assesses the perception of the quality of life in 8 subscales include: physical functioning (PF), role limitations due to physical health (RP), bodily pain (PB), general health (GH), energy and vitality (VT), social functioning (SF), role limitations due to emotional problems (RE) and affect health (AH). The tool has also two summary scales for Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores. Each scale is scored from 0 to 100, the highest functional status level being 100. The validity and reliability of the SF-36 were examined in an Iranian population. Internal consistency coefficients were between 0.70 and 0.85 for the 8 subscales and test-retest coefficients were between 0.49 and 0.79 with an interval of one week (Montazeri, Goshtasebi, Vahdaninia, & Gandek, 2005).

 

Data Analysis

 

For analyzing the data, in addition to the use of descriptive indicators, to compare the results of the intervention and control groups, the analysis of covariance was used to determine the effectiveness and the removal of the pre-test results at 95% confidence level.

 

Drop-Out

 

During therapy sessions three subjects, due to the lack of a regular presence or exclusion criteria, opted out or were excluded from the study. Thirty-seven out of 40 patients completed current study and the gathered data were then analyzed.

 

Results

 

Analysis for comparison of demographic distribution between the two groups was performed using chi-square and independent t-test. Demographic data of both groups are shown in Table 1. Distribution of age, educational years, gender and marital status were the same in each group.

 

Table 1 Demographic Characteristics of Participants

Table 1: Demographic characteristics of participants.

 

Table 2 shows the results of analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Levene�s test was non-significant, F (1, 35) = 2.78, P = 0.105, indicating that the assumption of homogeneity of variance had been approved. This finding shows that the variances across groups are equal and no difference was observed between two groups.

 

Table 2 The Results of Covarice Analysis

Table 2: The results of covariance analysis for the effectiveness of MBSR on pain intensity.

 

The main effect of MBSR intervention was significant, F (1, 34) = 30.68, P = 0.001, partial ?2 = 0.47, indicating that the pain intensity was lower after MBSR intervention (Mean = 53.89, SD.E = 2.40) than control group (Mean = 71.94, SD.E = 2.20). The covariate (pre-test of pain) was also significant, F (1, 34) = 73.41, P = 0.001, partial ?2 = 0.68, indicating that level of pain intensity before MBSR intervention had a significant effect on level of pain intensity. In other words, there was a positive relationship in the pain scores between pre-test and post-test. Therefore, the first research hypothesis is confirmed and MBSR treatment on perceived intensity was effective in patients with chronic headache and could reduce the intensity of perceived pain in these patients. All significant values are reported at p<0.05.

 

The second hypothesis of this study is the effectiveness of MBSR technique on quality of life in patients with chronic headache. To evaluate the effectiveness of MBSR technique on quality of life in patients with chronic headaches and eliminating the confounding variables and the effect of pre-test, for the analysis of data, multivariate covariance analysis (MANCOVA) of the dimensions of quality of life is used that Table 3 shows the results of analysis in the intervention group.

 

Table 3 The Results of Covariance Analysis

Table 3: The results of covariance analysis for the effectiveness of MBSR on quality of life.

 

The Table 3 shows the results of analysis of covariance (MANCOVA). The following information is needed to understand the results presented in Table 3.

 

The box�s test was non- significant, F = 1.08, P = 0.320, indicating that the variance�covariance matrices are the same in two groups and therefore the assumption of homogeneity is met. Also F (10, 16) = 3.153, P = 0.020, Wilks� Lambda = 0.33, partial ?2 = 0.66, indicating was a significant difference between the pre-test of the groups in the dependent variables.

 

Levene�s test was non-significant in some of dependent variables including [PF: F (1, 35) = 3.19, P = 0.083; RF: F (1, 35) = 1.92, P = 0.174; BP: F (1, 35) = 0.784, P = 0.382; GH: F (1, 35) = 0.659, P = 0.422; PCS: F (1, 35) = 2.371, P = 0.133; VT: F (1, 35) = 4.52, P = 0.141; AH: F (1, 35) = 1.03, P = 0.318], indicating that the assumption of homogeneity of variance had been approved in subscales of quality of life and Levene�s test was significant in some of dependent variables including [RE: F (1, 35) = 4.27, P = 0.046; SF: F (1, 35) = 4.82, P = 0.035; MCS: F (1, 35) = 11.69, P = 0.002], showing that the assumption of homogeneity of variance had been broken in subscales of quality of life.

 

The main effect of MBSR intervention was significant for some of dependent variables including [RP: F (1, 25) = 5.67, P = 0.025, partial ?2 = 0.18; BP: F (1, 25) = 12.62, P = 0.002, partial ?2 = 0.34; GH: F (1, 25) = 9.44, P = 0.005, partial ?2 = 0.28; PCS: F (1, 25) = 9.80, P = 0.004, partial ?2 = 0.28; VT: F (1, 25) = 12.60, P = 0.002, partial ?2 = 0.34; AH: F (1, 25) = 39.85, P = 0.001, partial ?2 = 0.61; MCS: F (1, 25) = 12.49, P = 0.002, partial ?2 = 0.33], these results indicating that subscales of RP, BP, GH, PCS, VT, AH, and MCS were higher after MBSR intervention [RP: Mean = 61.62, SD.E = 6.18; BP: Mean = 48.97, SD.E = 2.98; GH: Mean = 48.77, SD.E = 2.85; PCS: Mean = 58.52, SD.E = 2.72; VT: Mean = 44.99, SD.E = 2.81; AH: Mean = 52.60, SD.E = 1.97; MCS: Mean = 44.82, SD.E = 2.43] than control group [RP: Mean = 40.24, SD.E = 5.62; BP: Mean = 33.58, SD.E = 2.71; GH: Mean = 36.05, SD.E = 2.59; PCS: Mean = 46.13, SD.E = 2.48; VT: Mean = 30.50, SD.E = 2.56; AH: Mean = 34.49, SD.E = 1.80; MCS: Mean = 32.32, SD.E = 2.21].

 

Nonetheless, the main effect of MBSR intervention was non-significant for some of dependent variables including [PF: F (1, 25) = 1.05, P = 0.314, partial ?2 = 0.04; RE: F (1, 25) = 1.74, P = 0.199, partial ?2 = 0.06; SF: F (1, 25) = 2.35, P = 0.138, partial ?2 = 0.09]. These results indicating, although the means in these subscales of quality of life were higher [PF: Mean = 75.43, SD.E = 1.54; RE: Mean = 29.65, SD.E = 6.02; SF: Mean = 51.96, SD.E = 2.63] than the control group [PF: Mean = 73.43, SD.E = 1.40; RE: Mean = 18.08, SD.E = 5.48; SF: Mean = 46.09, SD.E = 2.40], But Mean difference was non-significant.

 

In summary, Covariance analysis (MANCOVA) results in Table 3 indicate a statistically significant difference in the scores of subscales of role limitation due to physical health (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), energy and vitality (VT), Affect health (AH) and sum of physical health dimensions (PCS) and mental health (MCS). And also indicates that there was not a statistically significant difference in subscale scores of physical functioning (PF), role limitations due to emotional problems (RE) and social functioning (SF) in the intervention group. All significant values are reported at p<0.05.

 

Discussion

 

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of MBSR on perceived pain intensity and quality of life in patients with chronic headache. The results showed that MBSR treatment was significantly effective on reduction of pain intensity perception. The results of current study are consistent with the results of other researchers who had used the same method for chronic pain (e.g. Flugel et al., 2010; Kabat-Zinn, 1982; Kabat-Zinn et al., 1985; La Cour & Petersen, 2015; Reibel, Greeson, Brainard, & Rosenzweig, 2001; Reiner et al., 2013; Rosenzweig et al., 2010; zeidan et al., 2010). For example, in two studies conducted by Kabat-Zinn, where the MBSR program was used for treating patients with chronic pain by physicians, a number of patients with chronic headache were also included. The first study of the two studies, showed a significant reduction in pain, pain interference with daily activities, medical signs and psychiatric disorders, including anxiety and depression (Kabat-Zinn, 1982). The results of second study showed significant reduction in pain, negative body image, anxiety, depression, pain interference with daily activities, medical symptoms, medication use, and also showed an increase in self-confidence (Kabat-Zinn et al., 1985).

 

Also, the findings of the current study are consistent with the results of Rosenzweig et al. (2010), their results suggest that MBSR program is effective for reduction, physical pain, quality of life and psychological well-being of patients with various chronic pains and mindfulness is effective on emotional and sensory components of pain perception by self-regulation of attention through meditation activities. Although the results of Rosenzweig et al. (2010) showed that among patients with chronic pain the minimal impact on the reduction in bodily pain and improvement in quality of life was related to patients with fibromyalgia, chronic headache. In another study conducted by Flugel et al. (2010), although positive changes were observed in the frequency and the intensity of pain, the pain reduction was not statistically significant.

 

In another study, pain severity significantly reduced after the intervention in patients with tension headache. In addition, the MBSR group showed higher scores in mindful awareness in comparison with the control group (Omidi & Zargar, 2014). In a pilot study by Wells et al. (2014), their results showed that MBSR with pharmacological treatment was possible for patients with migraines. Although the small sample size of this pilot study did not provide power to detect a significant difference in the pain severity and migraine frequency, results demonstrated this intervention had a beneficial effect on headache duration, disability, self-efficacy.

 

In explaining the results of the effectiveness of mindfulness based therapies for pain it can be said, psychological models of chronic pain such as fear-avoidance model showed that the ways by which people interpret their feelings of pain and respond to them are important determinants in the experience of pain (Schutze, Rees, Preece, & Schutze, 2010). Pain catastrophizing is significantly associated with fear and anxiety caused by pain, the cognitive paths through which the fear of pain can be caused and also the pain-related disability is associated and also because the negative cognitive assessment of pain explains 7 to 31% of the variance of the pain intensity. Therefore, any mechanism that can reduce pain catastrophizing or make changes in its process can reduce the perception of pain intensity and the disability caused by that. Schutz et al. (2010) argue that the little mindfulness is the primer of pain catastrophizing. In fact, it seems that the tendency of the individual to engage in the automatic processing processes rather than knowledge-based processes with attention of insufficient flexibility, and lack of awareness of the present moment (Kabat-Zinn, 1990), will cause people to think more about the pain and thus overestimate the resulting risk of it. Thus, little mindfulness allows for the development of negative cognitive evaluation of the pain (Kabat-Zinn, 1990).

 

Another possible reason may be that the pain acceptance and readiness for change increase positive emotions, leading to a reduction in pain intensity through effects on the endocrine system and the production of endogenous opioids and reduction in pain-related disability or preparing individuals for the use of effective strategies to deal with pain (Kratz, Davis, & Zautra, 2007). Another possible reason to explain the results of the present study in its effectiveness on pain reduction can be the fact that chronic pain is developed due to an overactive stress response system (Chrousos & Gold, 1992). The result is the disturbing of the physical and mental processes. Mindfulness can allow for the access to the frontal cortex and improve it, brain areas that integrate physical and mental functions (Shapiro et al., 1995). The result is the creation of a little stimulation that reduces the intensity and the experience of physical and mental pain. Thus, pain impulses are experienced as feeling of the real pain rather than a negative recognition. The result is the closing of the pain channels that can reduce pain (Astin, 2004).

 

Mindfulness meditation Reduces Pain Through several Brain Mechanisms and various pathways such as changing of attention in meditation practices might impress both sensory and affective components of pain perception. On the other hand, mindfulness reduces the reactivity to distressing thoughts and feelings that accompany pain perception and strengthen the pain. Also, mindfulness reduces psychological symptoms such as comorbid anxiety and depression and increases parasympathetic activity, which can promote deep muscle relaxation that may reduce pain. Finally, mindfulness may decrease stress and mood dysfunction-related psychophysiologic activation by strengthening reframing negative situation and self-regulation skills. Higher level of mindfulness predicted lower levels of anxiety, depression, catastrophic thinking and disability. Other research has showed that mindfulness has an important role in cognitive and emotional control, and may be useful in reframing negative situations (Zeidan et al., 2011; Zeidan, Grant, Brown, McHaffie, & Coghill, 2012).

 

The second aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of the MBSR program on quality of life in patients with chronic headache. This study showed that this treatment was significantly effective on quality of life dimensions, including role limitations due to health status, bodily pain, general health, energy and vitality, emotional health and overall physical and mental health scales. However, the MBSR program could not significantly increase the quality of life in physical functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems and social functioning. It seems apparent from previous and current studies and as well as from the present study that MBSR no effect on physical and social functions. This is likely because that the effects on pain levels in patients with headache are small, and that change is slow. On the other hand, patients with chronic pain have often learned to ignore pain in order to function normally (La Cour & Petersen, 2015). Although, the changes have been in the desired direction and increased the mean scores of the intervention group compared with the control group. These findings are consistent with previous findings (Brown & Ryan, 2003; Carlson et al., 2003; Flugel et al., 2010; Kabat-Zinn, 1982; La Cour & Petersen, 2015; Morgan et al., 2013; Reibel et al., 2001; Rosenzweig et al., 2010).

 

With regard to the content of the MBSR sessions, this program emphasizes the application of techniques to reduce stress, deal with pain and the awareness of the situation. Giving up the fight and accepting the present situation, without judgment, is the main concept of the program (Flugel et al., 2010). In fact, changes in acceptance without judgment are associated with improvement in quality of life (Rosenzweig et al., 2010). MBSR is aimed to increase awareness of the present moment. The treatment plan is a new and personal way to deal with stress to the individual. External stressors are part of life and cannot be changed, but coping skills and how to respond to the stress can be changed (Flugel et al., 2010). McCracken and velleman (2010) showed that cognitive flexibility and higher mindfulness is associated with less suffering and disability in patients. Patients with chronic pain with higher levels of mindfulness reported less depression, stress, anxiety and pain and also improvement in the self-efficacy and quality of life. Morgan et al. (2013) studying arthritis patients achieved similar results, so that patients with higher levels of mindfulness reported lower stress, depression and higher self-efficacy and quality of life. As noted above it was expected that pain reduction in patients leads to reduced fear and anxiety associated with pain and thereby reduces the resulting functioning limitations. Also, the results of the several studies (Cho, Heiby, McCracken, Lee, & Moon, 2010; McCracken, Gauntlett-Gilbert, & Vowles, 2007; Rosenzweig et al., 2010; Schutz et al., 2010) confirm this finding.

 

Several studies have been done to evaluate the effectiveness of different types of mindfulness-based treatments on chronic pain, including patients with headache. Unlike other research that examined heterogeneous sets of patients with chronic pain, the advantage of this study is that, it has been only performed on patients with chronic headache.

 

In the end, it should be acknowledged that there are some limitations in this study such as small sample size, lack of a long-term follow-up program, participants� medication use and arbitrary treatments; and despite the efforts of researchers, the lack of fully similar pharmacotherapy for all participants can confound the test results and make it difficult to generalize the results. Since the present study is the first of its type in patients with chronic headache in Iran, it is suggested that similar studies should be carry out in this field, with larger sample sizes as possible. And further studies investigate the stability of the treatment results in long-term follow-up periods of time.

 

Conclusion

 

According to the findings of this study it can be concluded that MBSR methods generally are effective on perceived pain intensity and quality of life of patients with chronic headache. Although there was no statistically significant difference in some aspects of quality of life, such as physical functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems and social functioning, but overall changes in mean were desired to the study. Thus the integrating of MBSR treatment with conventional medical therapy in the treatment protocol for patients with chronic headache can be advised. The researcher also believes that despite the shortcomings and deficiencies of current research, this study could be a new approach to the treatment of chronic headache and could provide a new horizon in this field of treatment.

 

Acknowledgements

 

This research was supported (as a thesis) in part by Zahedan University of Medical Sciences. We would like to thank all participants in the study, local healers, the staff of hospitals- Ali -ebn-abitaleb, Khatam-al-anbia and Ali asghar- for their support and help.

 

In conclusion,�chiropractic care is a safe and effective alternative treatment option utilized to help improve as well as manage chronic headache symptoms by carefully and gently realigning the spine as well as providing stress management methods and techniques. Because stress has been associated with a variety of health issues, including subluxation, or misalignment of the spine, and chronic headache, mindfulness interventions like chiropractic care and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) are fundamental towards chronic headache. Finally, the article above demonstrated that MBSR can be effectively used as a mindfulness intervention for chronic headache and to improve overall health and wellness. Information referenced from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). The scope of our information is limited to chiropractic as well as to spinal injuries and conditions. To discuss the subject matter, please feel free to ask Dr. Jimenez or contact us at 915-850-0900 .

 

Curated by Dr. Alex Jimenez

 

Green-Call-Now-Button-24H-150x150-2-3.png

 

Additional Topics: Back Pain

 

According to statistics, approximately 80% of people will experience symptoms of back pain at least once throughout their lifetimes. Back pain is a common complaint which can result due to a variety of injuries and/or conditions. Often times, the natural degeneration of the spine with age can cause back pain. Herniated discs occur when the soft, gel-like center of an intervertebral disc pushes through a tear in its surrounding, outer ring of cartilage, compressing and irritating the nerve roots. Disc herniations most commonly occur along the lower back, or lumbar spine, but they may also occur along the cervical spine, or neck. The impingement of the nerves found in the low back due to injury and/or an aggravated condition can lead to symptoms of sciatica.

 

blog picture of cartoon paperboy big news

 

EXTRA IMPORTANT TOPIC: Managing Workplace Stress

 

 

MORE IMPORTANT TOPICS: EXTRA EXTRA: Car Accident Injury Treatment El Paso, TX Chiropractor

 

Blank
References

1. Astin J A. Health psychology therapies for the management of pain. Clinical Journal of Pain. 2004;20:27�32. dx.doi.org/10.1097/00002508-200401000-00006 . [PubMed]
2. Bohlmeijer E, Prenger R, Taal E, Cuijpers P. The effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction therapy on mental health of adults with a chronic medical disease: a meta-analysis. J Psychosom Res. 2010;68(6):539�544. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2009.10.005 . [PubMed]
3. Brown K. W, Ryan R. M. The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;84(4):822�848. dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822 . [PubMed]
4. Carlson L. E, Speca M, Patel K. D, Goodey E. Mindfulness-based stress reduction in relation to quality of life, mood, symptoms of stress, and immune parameters in breast and prostate cancer outpatients. Psychosom Med. 2003;65(4):571�581. [PubMed]
5. Chaskalson M. The mindful workplace: developing resilient individuals and resonant organizations with MBSR. John Wiley & Sons; 2011.
6. Cho S, Heiby E. M, McCracken L. M, Lee S. M, Moon D. E. Pain-related anxiety as a mediator of the effects of mindfulness on physical and psychosocial functioning in chronic pain patients in Korea. J Pain. 2010;11(8):789�797. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2009.12.006 . [PubMed]
7. Chrousos G. P, Gold P. W. The concepts of stress and stress system disorders. Overview of physical and behavioral homeostasis. JAMA. 1992;267(9):1244�1252. dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.1992.03480090092034 . [PubMed]
8. Flugel Colle K. F, Vincent A, Cha S. S, Loehrer L. L, Bauer B. A, Wahner-Roedler D. L. Measurement of quality of life and participant experience with the mindfulness-based stress reduction program. Complement Ther Clin Pract. 2010;16(1):36�40. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctcp.2009.06.008 . [PubMed]
9. Grossman P, Niemann L, Schmidt S, Walach H. Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits. A meta-analysis. J Psychosom Res. 2004;57(1):35�43. dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3999(03)00573-7 . [PubMed]
10. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache, Society. The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (beta version) Cephalalgia. 2013;33(9):629�808. dx.doi.org/10.1177/0333102413485658 . [PubMed]
11. Jain S, Shapiro S. L, Swanick S, Roesch S. C, Mills P. J, Bell I, Schwartz G. E. A randomized controlled trial of mindfulness meditation versus relaxation training: effects on distress, positive states of mind, rumination, and distraction. Ann Behav Med. 2007;33(1):11�21. dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324796abm3301_2 . [PubMed]
12. Kabat-Zinn J. An outpatient program in behavioral medicine for chronic pain patients based on the practice of mindfulness meditation: theoretical considerations and preliminary results. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1982;4(1):33�47. [PubMed]
13. Kabat-Zinn Jon, University of Massachusetts Medical Center/Worcester . Stress Reduction Clinic. Full catastrophe living: using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain, and illness. New York, N.Y: Delacorte Press; 1990.
14. Kabat-Zinn J, Lipworth L, Burney R. The clinical use of mindfulness meditation for the self-regulation of chronic pain. J Behav Med. 1985;8(2):163�190. dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00845519 . [PubMed]
15. Kabat-Zinn J, Massion A. O, Kristeller J, Peterson L. G, Fletcher K. E, Pbert L, Santorelli S. F. Effectiveness of a meditation-based stress reduction program in the treatment of anxiety disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 1992;149(7):936�943. dx.doi.org/10.1176/ajp.149.7.936 . [PubMed]
16. Kratz A. L, Davis M. C, Zautra A. J. Pain acceptance moderates the relation between pain and negative affect in female osteoarthritis and fibromyalgia patients. Ann Behav Med. 2007;33(3):291�301. dx.doi.org/10.1080/08836610701359860 . [PMC free article] [PubMed]
17. Kurt S, Kaplan Y. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of headache in university students. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2008;110(1):46�50. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2007.09.001 . [PubMed]
18. La Cour P, Petersen M. Effects of mindfulness meditation on chronic pain: a randomized controlled trial. Pain Med. 2015;16(4):641�652. dx.doi.org/10.1111/pme.12605 . [PubMed]
19. McCracken L. M, Gauntlett-Gilbert J, Vowles K. E. The role of mindfulness in a contextual cognitive-behavioral analysis of chronic pain-related suffering and disability. Pain. 2007;131(1-2):63�69. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2006.12.013 . [PubMed]
20. McCracken L. M, Velleman S. C. Psychological flexibility in adults with chronic pain: a study of acceptance, mindfulness, and values-based action in primary care. Pain. 2010;148(1):141�147. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2009.10.034 . [PubMed]
21. Menken M, Munsat T. L, Toole J. F. The global burden of disease study: implications for neurology. Arch Neurol. 2000;57(3):418�420. dx.doi.org/10.1001/archneur.57.3.418 . [PubMed]
22. Montazeri A, Goshtasebi A, Vahdaninia M, Gandek B. The Short Form Health Survey (SF-36): translation and validation study of the Iranian version. Qual Life Res. 2005;14(3):875�882. dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-004-1014-5 . [PubMed]
23. Morgan N. L, Ransford G. L, Morgan L. P, Driban J. B, Wang C. Mindfulness is associated with psychological symptoms, self-efficacy, and quality of life among patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. 2013;21(Supplement):S257�S258. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2013.02.535 .
24. Mulleners W. M, Haan J, Dekker F, Ferrari M. D. Preventive treatment for migraine. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2010;154:A1512. [PubMed]
25. Nash J. M, Thebarge R. W. Understanding psychological stress, its biological processes, and impact on primary headache. Headache. 2006;46(9):1377�1386. dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-4610.2006.00580.x . [PubMed]
26. Omidi A, Zargar F. Effect of mindfulness-based stress reduction on pain severity and mindful awareness in patients with tension headache: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Nurs Midwifery Stud. 2014;3(3):e21136. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
27. Reibel D. K, Greeson J. M, Brainard G. C, Rosenzweig S. Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health-related quality of life in a heterogeneous patient population. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2001;23(4):183�192. dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0163-8343(01)00149-9 . [PubMed]
28. Reiner K, Tibi L, Lipsitz J. D. Do mindfulness-based interventions reduce pain intensity? A critical review of the literature. Pain Med. 2013;14(2):230�242. dx.doi.org/10.1111/pme.12006 . [PubMed]
29. Rosenzweig S, Greeson J. M, Reibel D. K, Green J. S, Jasser S. A, Beasley D. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for chronic pain conditions: variation in treatment outcomes and role of home meditation practice. J Psychosom Res. 2010;68(1):29�36. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2009.03.010 . [PubMed]
30. Schutze R, Rees C, Preece M, Schutze M. Low mindfulness predicts pain catastrophizing in a fear-avoidance model of chronic pain. Pain. 2010;148(1):120�127. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2009.10.030 . [PubMed]
31. Shapiro D. H, Wu J, Hong C, Buchsbaum M. S, Gottschalk L, Thompson V. E, Hillyard D, Hetu M, Friedman G. Exploring the relationship between having control and losing control to functional neuroanatomy within the sleeping state. Psychologia. 1995;38:133�145.
32. Stovner L, Hagen K, Jensen R, Katsarava Z, Lipton R, Scher A, Zwart J. A. The global burden of headache: a documentation of headache prevalence and disability worldwide. Cephalalgia. 2007;27(3):193�210. dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2982.2007.01288.x . [PubMed]
33. Stovner L. J, Andree C. Prevalence of headache in Europe: a review for the Eurolight project. J Headache Pain. 2010;11(4):289�299. dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10194-010-0217-0 . [PMC free article] [PubMed]
34. Teasdale J. D, Moore R. G, Hayhurst H, Pope M, Williams S, Segal Z. V. Metacognitive awareness and prevention of relapse in depression: empirical evidence. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2002;70(2):275�287. dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.70.2.275 . [PubMed]
35. Tozer B. S, Boatwright E. A, David P. S, Verma D. P, Blair J. E, Mayer A. P, Files J. A. Prevention of migraine in women throughout the life span. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81(8):1086�1091. quiz 1092. dx.doi.org/10.4065/81.8.1086 . [PubMed]
36. Ware J. E, Kosinski M, Dewey J. E, Gandek B. SF-36 health survey: manual and interpretation guide. Quality Metric Inc; 2000.
37. Wells R. E, Burch R, Paulsen R. H, Wayne P. M, Houle T. T, Loder E. Meditation for migraines: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Headache. 2014;54(9):1484�1495. dx.doi.org/10.1111/head.12420 . [PubMed]
38. Zeidan F, Gordon N. S, Merchant J, Goolkasian P. The effects of brief mindfulness meditation training on experimentally induced pain. J Pain. 2010;11(3):199�209. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2009.07.015 . [PubMed]
39. Zeidan F, Grant J. A, Brown C. A, McHaffie J. G, Coghill R. C. Mindfulness meditation-related pain relief: evidence for unique brain mechanisms in the regulation of pain. Neurosci Lett. 2012;520(2):165�173. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2012.03.082 . [PMC free article] [PubMed]
40. Zeidan F, Martucci K. T, Kraft R. A, Gordon N. S, McHaffie J. G, Coghill R. C. Brain mechanisms supporting the modulation of pain by mindfulness meditation. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2011;31(14):5540�5548. dx.doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5791-10.2011 . [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Close Accordion
Mindfulness for Headache and Cervical Disc Herniation in El Paso, TX

Mindfulness for Headache and Cervical Disc Herniation in El Paso, TX

by | Conditions Treated, Herniated Disc, Randomized Controlled Trial, Stress, Treatments

Stress is a result of the human body’s “fight or flight” response, a prehistoric defense mechanism triggered by the sympathetic nervous system (SNS). Stress is an essential component of survival. When stressors activate the fight or flight response, a mixture of chemicals and hormones are secreted into the blood flow, which prepare the body for perceived danger. Although short-term stress is helpful, however, long-term stress can lead to a variety of health issues. Furthermore, stressors in modern society have changed and it’s become more difficult for people to manage their stress and maintain mindfulness.

 

How Does Stress Affect the Body?

 

Stress can be experienced through three different channels: emotion; body and environment. Emotional stress involves adverse situations which affect our mind and decision making. Bodily stress includes improper nutrition and a lack of sleep. And finally, environmental stress occurs based on external experiences. When you experience any of these types of stressors, the sympathetic nervous system will trigger the “fight or flight” response, releasing adrenaline and cortisol to increase heart rate and heighten our senses to make us more alert in order to face the situation ahead of us.

 

However, if perceived stressors are always present, the SNS’s fight or flight response can remain active. Chronic stress can then lead to a variety of health issues, such as anxiety, depression, muscle tension, neck and back pain, digestive problems, weight gain and sleep problems as well as impaired memory and concentration. In addition, muscle tension along the spine due to stress can cause a spinal misalignment, or subluxation, which may in turn lead to disc herniation.

 

Headache and Disc Herniation from Stress

 

A herniated disc occurs when the soft, gel-like center of an intervertebral disc pushes through a tear in its outer, cartilage ring, irritating and compressing the spinal cord and/or the nerve roots. Disc herniation commonly occurs in the cervical spine, or neck, and in the lumbar spine, or low back. Symptoms of herniated discs depend on the location of the compression along the spine. Neck pain and back pain accompanied by numbness, tingling sensations and weakness along the upper and lower extremities are some of the most common symptoms associated with disc herniation. Headache and migraine are also common symptoms associated with stress and herniated discs along the cervical spine, as a result of muscle tension and spinal misalignment.

 

Mindfulness Interventions for Stress Management

 

Stress management is essential towards improving as well as maintaining overall health and wellness. According to research studies, mindfulness interventions, such as chiropractic care and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), among others, can safely and effectively help reduce stress. Chiropractic care utilizes spinal adjustments and manual manipulations to carefully restore the original alignment of the spine, relieving pain and discomfort as well as easing muscle tension. Additionally, a chiropractor may include lifestyle modifications to help further improve symptoms of stress.�A balanced spine can help the nervous system respond to stress more effectively. MBSR can also help reduce stress, anxiety and depression.

 

Contact Us Today

 

If you are experiencing symptoms of stress with headache or migraine as well as neck and back pain associated with disc herniation, mindfulness interventions such as chiropractic care can be a safe and effective treatment for your stress. Dr. Alex Jimenez’s stress management services can help you achieve overall health and wellness. Seeking the proper mindfulness interventions can get you the relief you deserve. The purpose of the following article is to demonstrate the effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction in patients with tension headache. Don’t just treat the symptoms, get to the source of the issue.

 

Effects of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction on Perceived Stress and Psychological Health in Patients with Tension Headache

 

Abstract

 

Background: Programs for improving health status of patients with illness related to pain, such as headache, are often still in their infancy. Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) is a new psychotherapy that appears to be effective in treating chronic pain and stress. This study evaluated efficacy of MBSR in treatment of perceived stress and mental health of client who has tension headache.

 

Materials and Methods: This study is a randomized clinical trial. Sixty patients with tension type headache according to the International Headache Classification Subcommittee were randomly assigned to the Treatment As Usual (TAU) group or experimental group (MBSR). The MBSR group received eight weekly classmates with 12-min sessions. The sessions were based on MBSR protocol. The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) and Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) were administered in the pre- and posttreatment period and at 3 months follow-up for both the groups.

 

Results: The mean of total score of the BSI (global severity index; GSI) in MBSR group was 1.63 � 0.56 before the intervention that was significantly reduced to 0.73 � 0.46 and 0.93 � 0.34 after the intervention and at the follow-up sessions, respectively (P < 0.001). In addition, the MBSR group showed lower scores in perceived stress in comparison with the control group at posttest evaluation. The mean of perceived stress before the intervention was 16.96 � 2.53 and was changed to 12.7 � 2.69 and 13.5 � 2.33 after the intervention and at the follow-up sessions, respectively (P < 0.001). On the other hand, the mean of GSI in the TAU group was 1.77 � 0.50 at pretest that was significantly reduced to 1.59 � 0.52 and 1.78 � 0.47 at posttest and follow-up, respectively (P < 0.001). Also, the mean of perceived stress in the TAU group at pretest was 15.9 � 2.86 and that was changed to 16.13 � 2.44 and 15.76 � 2.22 at posttest and follow-up, respectively (P < 0.001).

 

Conclusion: MBSR could reduce stress and improve general mental health in patients with tension headache.

 

Keywords: Mental health, tension headache, mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), perceived stress, treatment as usual (TAU)

 

Dr Jimenez White Coat

Dr. Alex Jimenez’s Insight

Chiropractic care is an effective stress management treatment because it focuses on the spine, which is the base of the nervous system. Chiropractic utilizes spinal adjustments and manual manipulations to carefully restore the alignment of the spine in order to allow the body to naturally heal itself. A spinal misalignment, or subluxation, can create muscle tension along the spine and lead to a variety of health issues, including headache and migraine, as well as disc herniation and sciatica. Chiropractic care can also include lifestyle modifications, such as nutritional advice and exercise recommendations, to further enhance its effects. Mindfulness-based stress reduction can also effectively help with stress management and symptoms.

 

Introduction

 

Tension headache constitutes 90% of total headaches. About 3% of the population are suffering from chronic tension headache.[1] Tension headaches are often associated with lower quality of life and high levels of psychological discomforts.[2] In recent years, several meta-analyses evaluating the established pain treatments used today have shown that medical treatments, which may be effective in acute pain, are not effective with chronic pain and may, in fact, be causing further problems. Most of the pain treatments are designed for and useful for acute pain but if used in the long run may create more problems such as substance abuse and avoidance of important activities.[3] A common element in most of the pain treatments is that they emphasize on either avoiding pain or fighting to reduce pain. The pain in tension headache can be intolerable. Painkillers and pain management strategies can increase intolerance and sensitivity to pain. Therefore, the treatments that increase acceptance and tolerance to pain, especially chronic pain, are effective. Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) is a new psychotherapy that appears to be effective in improving physical performance and psychological well-being in patients with chronic pain.[4,5,6,7,8] In the past two decades, Kabat-Zinn et al. in the US successfully used mindfulness for the relief of pain and illness related to pain.[9] Recent studies on acceptance-based methods, such as mindfulness, show improved performance in patients with chronic pain. Mindfulness modulates the pain using nonelaborative awareness of thoughts, feelings and sensations, and an emotionally distanced relationship with internal and external experience.[10] Studies found that MBSR program can significantly alleviate medical illness related to chronic pains such as fibromyalgia, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic musculoskeletal pain, chronic low back pain, and multiple sclerosis.[7,11,12,13] MBSR has significant changes in pain intensity, anxiety, depression, somatic complaints, well-being, adaptation, quality of sleep, fatigue, and physical functioning.[6,14,15,16,17] But the programs for improving health status of patients with illness related to pain, such as tension headache, are often still in their infancy. Therefore, the study was conducted to assess the effects of MBSR on perceived stress and general mental health in patients with tension headache.

 

Materials and Methods

 

This randomized controlled clinical trial was performed in 2012 in Shahid Beheshti Hospital in Kashan City. The Research Ethics Committee of the Kashan University of Medical Sciences approved this study (IRCT No: 2014061618106N1). The participants of the study included adults with tension headache who were referred by the psychiatrists and neurologists in Kashan. The inclusion criteria were as follows: Having tension headache according to the International Headache Classification Subcommittee, willing to participate in the study, not having a medical diagnosis of organic brain disorder or psychotic disorder, and not having a history of psychological treatment during the preceding 6 months. The patients who did not complete the intervention and missed more than two sessions were excluded from the study. The participants, who signed an informed consent form, completed the measures as a pretest. For estimating the sample size, we referred to another study in which changes in mean of scores of fatigue was 62 � 9.5 in the pretreatment period and 54.5 � 11.5 in the posttreatment period.[18] Then, by utilizing the sample size calculation, 33 participants (with attrition risk) in each group with ? = 0.95 and 1 � ? = 0.9 were segregated. After sample size calculation, 66 patients with tension headache were selected via convenient sampling according to the inclusion criteria. Then, the patients were called and invited to participate in the study. If a patient agreed to participate, then he/she was invited to attend the study-briefing session and if not another patient was selected similarly. Then using a random number table, they were assigned either to the experimental group (MBSR) or to the control group that treated as usual. Finally, 3 patients were excluded from each group and 60 patients were included (30 patients in each group). The TAU group was treated only by antidepressant medication and clinical management. The MBSR group received MBSR training in addition to TAU. The patients in MBSR group were trained for 8 weeks by a clinical psychologist with PhD degree. The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) and Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) were administered before the first treatment session in the MBSR group, after the eighth session (posttest), and 3 months after the test (follow-up) in both groups. The TAU group was invited to Shahid Beheshti Hospital to fill out the questionnaires. Figure 1 shows a Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) diagram depicting the flow of study participants.

 

Figure 1 CONSORT Diagram Depicting Flow of Study Participants

Figure 1: CONSORT diagram depicting flow of study participants.

 

Intervention

 

The intervention group (MBSR) was trained in Shahid Beheshti Hospital. The eight weekly sessions (120 min) were held according to the standard MBSR protocol as developed by Kabat-Zinn.[11] Additional sessions were held for the participants who had missed one or two sessions. At the end of the training and 3 months later (follow-up), both MBSR and TAU groups were invited to Shahid Beheshti Hospital (the place of MBSR trial) and were instructed to complete the questionnaires. During the MBSR sessions, the participants were trained to be aware of their thoughts, feelings, and physical sensations nonjudgmentally. Mindfulness exercises are taught as two forms of meditation practices � formal and informal. Formal type exercises include trained sitting meditation, body scan, and mindful yoga. In informal meditation, attention and awareness are focused not only on daily activities, but also on thoughts, feelings, and physical sensation even they are problematic and painful. The overall content of the sessions were mentioned in Table 1.

 

Table 1 Agendas for Sessions of MBSR

Table 1: Agendas for sessions of mindfulness-based stress reduction.

 

Measurement Tools

 

International Headache Classification Subcommittee Diary Scale for Headache

 

Headache was measured by diary scale for headache.[19] The patients were asked to record the pain severity diary on a 0-10 rating scale. Absence of pain and the most intense disabling headache were characterized by 0 and 10, respectively. The mean of headache severity in a week was calculated by dividing the sum of the severity scores by 7. Moreover, the mean of headache severity in a month was calculated by dividing the sum of the severity scores by 30. The minimum and maximum scores of headache severity were 0 and 10, respectively. Headache diary was given to five patients and a neurologist and a psychiatrist confirmed the content validity of the instrument.[20] The reliability coefficient of Persian version of this scale was calculated as 0.88.[20]

 

Brief symptom Inventory (BSI)

 

Psychological symptoms were assessed with the BSI.[21] The inventory consist 53 items and 9 subscales that assess psychological symptoms. Each item scores between 0 and 4 (for example: I have nausea or upset in my stomach). BSI has a global severity index (GSI) achieved a total score of 53 items. The reliability of the test has reported a score of 0.89.[22] In our study, GSI test�retest estimate was .90 based on a sample of 60 patients with tension headache who completed the BSI.

 

Perceived Stress Scale (PSS)

 

Perceived stress was assessed using the PSS,[21,23] a 10-item scale that assesses the degree of uncontrollable and unpredictable situations of life during the past month (for example: Felt that you were unable to control the important things in your life?). Respondents report the prevalence of an item within the last month on a 5-point scale, ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (very often). Scoring is completed by reverse scoring of four positively worded items[4,5,7,8] and summing all item scores. The scale scores range from 0-40. Higher scores indicate higher levels of stress. It assumes that people depending on their coping resources evaluate level of threatening or challenging events. A higher score indicates a greater degree of perceived stress. Adequate test�retest reliability and convergent and discriminate validity have also been reported.[19] In our study, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for assessing internal consistency of this scale were calculated to be 0.88.

 

The repeated measures analysis of variance was performed to compare the MBSR and TAU groups on measures of perceived stress and GSI at pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3-month follow-up. Also, Chi-square test was used to compare the demographics in the two groups. P value less than 0.05 was considered significant in all tests.

 

Results

 

Among 66 subjects, 2 participants from the MBSR group were excluded because of missing more than 2 sessions. Also, three participants were excluded because of did not complete the questionnaires in post-test or follow-up who one of them were from MBSR group and three participants from TAU group. Table 2 showed demographic characteristics of the subjects and results of the randomization check. The results of t-test for differences between the MBSR and TAU groups in age variable and Chi-square test in other variables showed that there was no significant difference between demographic variables in two groups and the subjects were randomly assigned to two groups.

 

Table 2 Demographic Characteristics of the Subjects

Table 2: Demographic characteristics of the subjects a,b.

 

Table 3 provides the mean scores and standard deviations of the dependent variables (perceived stress and GSI) and comparison of outcome measures at pretreatment period, post-treatment period, and 3-month follow-up.

 

Table 3 Means, Standard Deviations and Comparison of Outcome Measures

Table 3: Means, standard deviations, and comparison of outcome measures at pretreatment, posttreatment, and follow-up stages in the MBSR and TAU groups a,b.

 

Table 3 shows the more reduction in received stress and GSI in the intervention group (MBSR) compared to TAU group, while the reduction in received stress and GSI were not observed in the TAU group. The results revealed the significant effect of time and interaction between time and type of treatment on the changes of scores (P < 0.001).

 

Figures ?2 and ?3 present mean received stress and GSI scores for MBSR and TAU groups at posttest and follow-up stages.

 

Figure 2 CONSORT Diagram Depicting Flow of Study Participants

Figure 2: CONSORT diagram depicting flow of study participants.

 

Figure 3 Mean of Perceived Stress in MBSR and Control Groups

Figure 3: Mean of perceived stress in MBSR and control groups in pretest, posttest, and follow-up.

 

Discussion

 

This study compared efficacy of MBSR and Treatment As Usual (TAU) in perceived stress and mental health of patients with tension headache. Although MBSR is recognized as an effective treatment for stress symptoms and pain, there is a need to examine its efficacy for the treatment of mental health problems in patients with tension headache, which is one of the common complaints in the population.

 

The findings of our study demonstrate enhanced general mental health in the GSI index of BSI. In some study, significant improvements by MBSR intervention were reported on all indexes of the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36).[20,24] Studies showed significant reduction in psychological problems in the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R) subscale such as anxiety and depression by MBSR after intervention and 1-year follow-up.[5] Reibel et al. showed MBSR in patients with chronic pain reported a decrease in medical symptoms such as anxiety, depression, and pain.[5] It has been shown that tension headache and anxiety are accompanied with deficits in controlled cognitive processing such as sustained attention and working memory.[25] Negative emotions may amplify suffering associated with pain perception.

 

MBSR implements the following mechanisms to improve the patient’s mental status: First, mindfulness leads to increased awareness for what is happening in each moment, with an accepting attitude, without getting caught up in habitual thoughts, emotions, and behavior patterns. The increased awareness then gives rise to new ways to respond and cope in relation to oneself and the world around.[3] Mindfulness establishes a sense of self that is greater than one’s thoughts, feelings, and bodily sensation such as pain. Mindfulness exercises, learned clients develop an �observer�self�. With this ability, they can observe their thoughts and feelings in a nonreactive and nonjudgmental way that previously avoided, that previously avoided thoughts and feelings be observed in a nonreactive and nonjudgmental way. The clients learn to notice thoughts without necessarily acting on them, being controlled by them, or believing them.[3]

 

Second, mindfulness helps the client develop persistence in taking steps in valued directions that are important to them. Most clients with chronic pain want to become pain free rather than living the vital lives of their choice. But the MBSR program trained them to engage in valued action despite the the pain. Studies have shown attention and emotional reaction to pain has an important role in becoming persistent the pain.[26] Emotional and cognitive components can modulate attention to pain and worry about it that could intensify pain and disrupt the patients activities.[27,28]

 

Third, findings from some studies indicate that MBSR can alter the function of the brain that is responsible for affect regulation and the areas that govern how we react to stressful impulses, and this in turn may normalize body functions such as breathing, heart rate, and immune function.[29,30] Mindfulness practice reduces reactivity to distressing thoughts and feelings that comorbid and strengthen pain perception.[31] Also mindfulness may lessen psychophysiological activation related to stress and mood dysfunction by strengthening positive reappraisal and emotion regulation skills.[32]

 

The strength of this study is the use of a new effective psychotherapy in reducing the stress on a complaint that is less studied, but it is a common medical problem. The implications of our study are using a simple psychotherapy that does not make too much cognitive demand and is readily usable as a coping skill for the patient with tension headache. Therefore, the health-care professionals related to this complaint and the patient will be able to use this treatment. Also, MBSR will change the patient’s lifestyle who would be exacerbated by his/her problem. The main limitation of this study was the lack of comparison between MBSR and the gold standard psychotherapies such as cognitive behavior therapy (CBT). It is suggested that future studies need to compare the efficacy of MBSR and other traditional and newer cognitive behavioral therapies in patients with tension headache.

 

Conclusion

 

Our study supports the hypothesis that patients suffering from tension headache can enhance their general mental health by participating in the MBSR program. In summary, the results of the present study suggest that MBSR can reduce pain-related anxiety and interference in daily activities in the short term. The unique features of mindfulness exercises are easy training and no need to complex cognitive abilities.

 

Financial support and sponsorship: Nil.

 

Conflicts of interest: There are no conflicts of interest.

 

Author’s Contribution

 

AO contributed in the conception of the work, conducting the study, and agreed for all aspects of the work. FZ contributed in the conception of the work, revising the draft, approval of the final version of the manuscript and agreed for all aspects of the work.

 

Acknowledgments

 

Authors are grateful to the staff of Shahid Beheshti Hospital and participants. Authors also express their gratitude to Kabat-Zinn from the Center for Mindfulness (CFM) at the University of Massachusetts who graciously provided electronic copies of the MBSR guidelines.

 

In conclusion,�while short-term stress is helpful, long-term stress can eventually lead to a variety of health issues, including anxiety and depression as well as neck and back pain, headache and disc herniation. Fortunately, mindfulness interventions, such as chiropractic care and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) are safe and effective stress management alternative treatment options. Finally, the article above demonstrated evidence-based results that MBSR could reduce stress and improve general mental health in patients with tension headache. Information referenced from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). The scope of our information is limited to chiropractic as well as to spinal injuries and conditions. To discuss the subject matter, please feel free to ask Dr. Jimenez or contact us at 915-850-0900 .

 

Curated by Dr. Alex Jimenez

 

Green-Call-Now-Button-24H-150x150-2-3.png

 

Additional Topics: Back Pain

 

According to statistics, approximately 80% of people will experience symptoms of back pain at least once throughout their lifetimes. Back pain is a common complaint which can result due to a variety of injuries and/or conditions. Often times, the natural degeneration of the spine with age can cause back pain. Herniated discs occur when the soft, gel-like center of an intervertebral disc pushes through a tear in its surrounding, outer ring of cartilage, compressing and irritating the nerve roots. Disc herniations most commonly occur along the lower back, or lumbar spine, but they may also occur along the cervical spine, or neck. The impingement of the nerves found in the low back due to injury and/or an aggravated condition can lead to symptoms of sciatica.

 

blog picture of cartoon paperboy big news

 

EXTRA IMPORTANT TOPIC: Managing Workplace Stress

 

 

MORE IMPORTANT TOPICS: EXTRA EXTRA: Car Accident Injury Treatment El Paso, TX Chiropractor

 

Blank
References
1.�Trkanjec Z, Aleksic-Shihabi A. Tension-type headaches.�Acta Med Croatica.�2008;62:205�10.[PubMed]
2.�Zirke N, Seydel C, Szczepek AJ, Olze H, Haupt H, Mazurek B. Psychological comorbidity in patients with chronic tinnitus: Analysis and comparison with chronic pain, asthma or atopic dermatitis patients.�Qual Life Res.�2013;22:263�72.�[PubMed]
3.�Dionne F, Blais MC, Monestes JL. Acceptance and commitment therapy in the treatment of chronic pain.�Sante Ment Que.�2013;38:131�52.�[PubMed]
4.�Cathcart S, Galatis N, Immink M, Proeve M, Petkov J. Brief mindfulness-based therapy for chronic tension-type headache: A randomized controlled pilot study.�Behav Cogn Psychother.�2013;42:1�15.[PubMed]
5.�Reibel DK, Greeson JM, Brainard GC, Rosenzweig S. Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health-related quality of life in a heterogeneous patient population.�Gen Hosp Psychiatry.�2001;23:183�92.[PubMed]
6.�Grossman P, Niemann L, Schmidt S, Walach H. Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits. A meta-analysis.�J Psychosom Res.�2004;57:35�43.�[PubMed]
7.�Rosenzweig S, Greeson JM, Reibel DK, Green JS, Jasser SA, Beasley D. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for chronic pain conditions: Variation in treatment outcomes and role of home meditation practice.�J Psychosom Res.�2010;68:29�36.�[PubMed]
8.�Kerrigan D, Johnson K, Stewart M, Magyari T, Hutton N, Ellen JM, et al. Perceptions, experiences, and shifts in perspective occurring among urban youth participating in a mindfulness-based stress reduction program.�Complement Ther Clin Pract.�2011;17:96�101.�[PubMed]
9.�Kabat-Zinn J. New York: Dell Publishing; 1990. Full Catastrophe Living; p. 185.
10.�Hayes AM, Feldman G. Clarifying the construct of mindfulness in the context of emotion regulation and the process of change in therapy.�Clin Psychol-Sci Pr.�2004:255�62.
11.�Schmidt S, Grossman P, Schwarzer B, Jena S, Naumann J, Walach H. Treating fibromyalgia with mindfulness-based stress reduction: Results from a 3-armed randomized controlled trial.�Pain.�2011;152:361�9.�[PubMed]
12.�Pradhan EK, Baumgarten M, Langenberg P, Handwerger B, Gilpin AK, Magyari T, et al. Effect of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction in rheumatoid arthritis patients.�Arthritis Rheum.�2007;57:1134�42.[PubMed]
13.�Cramer H, Haller H, Lauche R, Dobos G. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for low back pain. A systematic review.�BMC Complement Altern Med.�2012;12:162.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
14.�Bazarko D, Cate RA, Azocar F, Kreitzer MJ. The impact of an innovative mindfulness-based stress reduction program on the health and well-being of nurses employed in a corporate setting.�J Workplace Behav Health.�2013;28:107�33.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
15.�Carlson LE, Garland SN. Impact of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) on sleep, mood, stress and fatigue symptoms in cancer outpatients.�Int J Behav Med.�2005;12:278�85.�[PubMed]
16.�Lengacher CA, Kip KE, Barta M, Post-White J, Jacobsen PB, Groer M, et al. A pilot study evaluating the effect of mindfulness-based stress reduction on psychological status, physical status, salivary cortisol, and interleukin-6 among advanced-stage cancer patients and their caregivers.�J Holist Nurs.�2012;30:170�85.�[PubMed]
17.�Simpson J, Mapel T. An investigation into the health benefits of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) for people living with a range of chronic physical illnesses in New Zealand.�N Z Med J.�2011;124:68�75.�[PubMed]
18.�Omidi A, Mohammadi A, Zargar F, Akbari H. Efficacy of mindfulness-based stress reduction on mood States of veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder.�Arch Trauma Res.�2013;1:151�4.�[PMC free article][PubMed]
19.�Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R. A global measure of perceived stress.�J Health Soc Behav.�1983;24:385�96.�[PubMed]
20.�Roth B, Robbins D. Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health-related quality of life: Findings from a bilingual inner-city patient population.�Psychosom Med.�2004;66:113�23.�[PubMed]
21.�Brown KW, Ryan RM. The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being.�J Pers Soc Psychol.�2003;84:822�48.�[PubMed]
22.�Astin JA, Shapiro SL, Lee RA, Shapiro DH., Jr The construct of control in mind-body medicine: Implications for healthcare.�Altern Ther Health Med.�1999;5:42�7.�[PubMed]
23.�Cohen S, Williamson G. Perceived stress in a probability sample of the United States. In: Spacapan S, Oskamp S, editors.�The Social Psychology of Health.�Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1988. p. 185.
24.�Geary C, Rosenthal SL. Sustained impact of MBSR on stress, well-being, and daily spiritual experiences for 1 year in academic health care employees.�J Altern Complement Med.�2011;17:939�44.[PubMed]
25.�Dick BD, Rashiq S, Verrier MJ, Ohinmaa A, Zhang J. Symptom burden, medication detriment, and support for the use of the 15D health-related quality of life instrument in a chronic pain clinic population.�Pain Res Treat 2011.�2011:809071.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
26.�McCabe C, Lewis J, Shenker N, Hall J, Cohen H, Blake D. Don�t look now! Pain and attention.�Clin Med.�2005;5:482�6.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
27.�Bener A, Verjee M, Dafeeah EE, Falah O, Al-Juhaishi T, Schlogl J, et al. Psychological factors: Anxiety, depression, and somatization symptoms in low back pain patients.�J Pain Res.�2013;6:95�101.[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
28.�Lee JE, Watson D, Frey-Law LA. Psychological factors predict local and referred experimental muscle pain: A cluster analysis in healthy adults.�Eur J Pain.�2013;17:903�15.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
29.�Davidson RJ, Kabat-Zinn J, Schumacher J, Rosenkranz M, Muller D, Santorelli SF, et al. Alterations in brain and immune function produced by mindfulness meditation.�Psychosom Med.�2003;65:564�70.[PubMed]
30.�Lazar SW, Kerr CE, Wasserman RH, Gray JR, Greve DN, Treadway MT, et al. Meditation experience is associated with increased cortical thickness.�Neuroreport.�2005;16:1893�7.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
31.�McCracken LM, Jones R. Treatment for chronic pain for adults in the seventh and eighth decades of life: A preliminary study of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT)�Pain Med.�2012;13:860�7.[PubMed]
32.�McCracken LM, Guti�rrez-Mart�nez O. Processes of change in psychological flexibility in an interdisciplinary group-based treatment for chronic pain based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy.�Behav Res Ther.�2011;49:267�74.�[PubMed]
Close Accordion
Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Auto Accident Injuries in El Paso, TX

Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Auto Accident Injuries in El Paso, TX

by | Back Pain, Chronic Pain, Conditions Treated, Herniated Disc, Neck Pain, Physical Rehabilitation, Randomized Controlled Trial, Research Studies, Stress, Treatments

Being involved in an automobile accident is an undesirable situation which can result in a variety of physical trauma or injury as well as lead to the development of a number of aggravating conditions. Auto accident injuries, such as whiplash, can be characterized by painful symptoms, including chronic neck pain, however, recent research studies have found that emotional distress resulting from an auto collision could manifest into physical symptoms. Stress, anxiety, depression and post traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, are common psychological issues which may occur as a result of an automobile accident.

 

The researchers of the research studies also determined that cognitive-behavioral therapy may be an effective treatment for emotional distress and psychological issues which may have developed as a result of the auto accident injuries. Additionally, auto accident injuries may also cause stress, anxiety, depression and even PTSD if left untreated for an extended amount of time. The purpose of the article below is to demonstrate the effects of cognitive-behavioral therapy, together with alternative treatment options like chiropractic care and physical therapy. for auto accident injuries, such as whiplash.

 

Neck Exercises, Physical and Cognitive Behavioural-Graded Activity as a Treatment for Adult Whiplash Patients with Chronic Neck Pain: Design of a Randomised Controlled Trial

 

Abstract

 

Background

 

Many patients suffer from chronic neck pain following a whiplash injury. A combination of cognitive, behavioural therapy with physiotherapy interventions has been indicated to be effective in the management of patients with chronic whiplash-associated disorders. The objective is to present the design of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of a combined individual physical and cognitive behavioural-graded activity program on self-reported general physical function, in addition to neck function, pain, disability and quality of life in patients with chronic neck pain following whiplash injury compared with a matched control group measured at baseline and 4 and 12 months after baseline.

 

Methods/Design

 

The design is a two-centre, RCT-study with a parallel group design. Included are whiplash patients with chronic neck pain for more than 6 months, recruited from physiotherapy clinics and an out-patient hospital department in Denmark. Patients will be randomised to either a pain management (control) group or a combined pain management and training (intervention)group. The control group will receive four educational sessions on pain management, whereas the intervention group will receive the same educational sessions on pain management plus 8 individual training sessions for 4 months, including guidance in specific neck exercises and an aerobic training programme. Patients and physiotherapists are aware of the allocation and the treatment, while outcome assessors and data analysts are blinded. The primary outcome measures will be Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF36), Physical Component Summary (PCS). Secondary outcomes will be Global Perceived Effect (-5 to +5), Neck Disability Index (0-50), Patient Specific Functioning Scale (0-10), numeric rating scale for pain bothersomeness (0-10), SF-36 Mental Component Summary (MCS), TAMPA scale of Kinesiophobia (17-68), Impact of Event Scale (0-45), EuroQol (0-1), craniocervical flexion test (22 mmHg – 30 mmHg), joint position error test and cervical range of movement. The SF36 scales are scored using norm-based methods with PCS and MCS having a mean score of 50 with a standard deviation of 10.

 

Discussion

 

The perspectives of this study are discussed, in addition to the strengths and weaknesses.

 

Trial registration

 

The study is registered in www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01431261.

 

Background

 

The Danish National Board of Health estimates that 5-6,000 subjects per year in Denmark are involved in a traffic accident evoking whiplash-induced neck pain. About 43% of those will still have physical impairment and symptoms 6 months after the accident [1]. For Swedish society, including Swedish insurance companies, the economic burden is approximately 320 million Euros [2], and this burden is likely to be comparable to that of Denmark. Most studies suggest that patients with Whiplash-Associated Disorders (WAD) report chronic neck symptoms one year after the injury [3]. The main problems in whiplash patients with chronic neck pain are cervical dysfunction and abnormal sensory processing, reduced neck mobility and stability, impaired cervicocephalic kinaesthetic sense, in addition to local and possibly generalised pain [4,5]. Cervical dysfunction is characterised by reduced function of the deep stabilising muscles of the neck.

 

Besides chronic neck pain, patients with WAD may suffer from physical inactivity as a consequence of prolonged pain [6,7]. This influences physical function and general health and can result in a poor quality of life. In addition, WAD patients may develop chronic pain followed by sensitisation of the nervous system [8,9], a lowering of the threshold for different sensory inputs (pressure, cold, warm, vibration and electrical impulses) [10]. This can be caused by an impaired central pain inhibition [11] – a cortical reorganisation [12]. Besides central sensitisation, the group with WAD may have poorer coping strategies and cognitive functions, compared with patients with chronic neck pain in general [13-15].

 

Studies have shown that physical training, including specific exercises targeting the deep postural muscles of the cervical spine, is effective in reducing neck pain [16-18] for patients with chronic neck pain, albeit there is a variability in the response to training with not every patient showing a major change. Physical behavioural-graded activity is a treatment approach with a focus on increasing general physical fitness, reducing fear of movement and increasing psychological function [19,20]. There is insufficient evidence for the long-term effect of treatment of physical and cognitive behavioural-graded activity, especially in chronic neck pain patients. Educational sessions, where the focus is on understanding complex chronic pain mechanisms and development of appropriate pain coping and/or cognitive behavioural strategies, have shown reduced general pain [6,21-26]. A review indicated that interventions with a combination of cognitive, behavioural therapy with physiotherapy including neck exercises is effective in the management of WAD patients with chronic neck pain [27], as also recommended by the Dutch clinical guidelines for WAD [28]. However, the conclusions regarding the guidelines are largely based on studies performed on patients with either acute or sub-acute WAD [29]. A more strict conclusion was drawn for WAD patients with chronic pain in the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force, stating, that ‘because of conflicting evidence and few high-quality studies, no firm conclusions could be drawn about the most effective non-invasive interventions for patients with chronic WAD” [29,30]. The concept of combined treatment for WAD patients with chronic pain has been used in a former randomised controlled trial [31]. The results indicated that a combination of non-specific aerobic exercises and advice containing standardised pain education and reassurance and encouragement to resume light activity, produced better outcomes than advice alone for patients with WAD 3 months after the accident. The patients showed improvements in pain intensity, pain bothersomeness and functions in daily activities in the group receiving exercise and advice, compared with advice alone. However, the improvements were small and only apparent in the short term.

 

This project is formulated on the expectation that rehabilitation of WAD patients with chronic neck pain must target cervical dysfunctions, training of physical function and the understanding and management of chronic pain in a combined therapy approach. Each single intervention is based upon former studies that have shown effectiveness [6,18,20,32]. This study is the first to also include the long-term effect of the combined approach in patients with chronic neck pain after whiplash trauma. As illustrated in Figure ?Figure1,1, the conceptual model in this study is based upon the hypothesis that training (including both individually-guided specific neck exercises and graded aerobic training) and education in pain management (based on a cognitive behavioural approach) is better for increasing the patients’ physical quality of life, compared with education in pain management alone. Increasing the physical quality of life includes increasing the general physical function and level of physical activity, decreasing fear of movement, reducing post-traumatic stress symptoms, reducing neck pain and increasing neck function. The effect is anticipated to be found immediately after the treatment (i.e. 4 months; short-term effect) as well as after one year (long-term effect).

 

Figure 1 Hypothesis of the Intervention Effect

Figure 1: Hypothesis of the intervention effect for patients with chronic neck pain after a whiplash accident.

 

Using a randomised controlled trial (RCT) design, the aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of: graded physical training, including specific neck exercises and general aerobic training, combined with education in pain management (based on a cognitive behavioural approach) versus education in pain management (based on a cognitive behavioural approach), measured on physical quality of life’, physical function, neck pain and neck functions, fear of movement, post-traumatic symptoms and mental quality of life, in patients with chronic neck pain after whiplash injury.

 

Methods/Design

 

Trial Design

 

The study is conducted in Denmark as an RCT with a parallel group design. It will be a two-centre study, stratified by recruitment location. Patients will be randomised to either the Pain Management group (control) or the Pain Management and Training group (intervention). As illustrated in Figure ?Figure2,2, the study is designed to include a secondary data assessment 12 months after baseline; the primary outcome assessment will be performed immediately after the intervention program 4 months after baseline. The study utilises an allocation concealment process, ensuring that the group to which the patient is allocated is not known before the patient is entered into the study. The outcome assessors and data analysts will be kept blinded to the allocation to intervention or control group.

 

Figure 2 Flowchart of the Patients in the Study

Figure 2: Flowchart of the patients in the study.

 

Settings

 

The participants will be recruited from physiotherapy clinics in Denmark and from The Spine Centre of Southern Denmark, Hospital Lilleb�lt via an announcement at the clinics and the Hospital. Using physiotherapy clinics spread across Denmark, the patients will receive the intervention locally. The physiotherapy clinics in Denmark receive patients via referral from their general practitioners. The Spine Centre, a unit specialising in treating patients with musculoskeletal dysfunctions and only treating out-patients, receives patients referred from general practitioners and/or chiropractors.

 

Study Population

 

Two hundred adults with a minimum age of 18 years, receiving physiotherapy treatment or having been referred for physiotherapy treatment will be recruited. For patients to be eligible, they must have: chronic neck pain for at least 6 months following a whiplash injury, reduced physical neck function (Neck Disability Index score, NDI, of a minimum of 10), pain primarily in the neck region, finished any medical /radiological examinations, the ability to read and understand Danish and the ability to participate in the exercise program. The exclusion criteria include: neuropathies/ radiculopathies (clinically tested by: positive Spurling, cervical traction and plexus brachialis tests) [33], neurological deficits (tested as in normal clinical practice through a process of examining for unknown pathology), engagement in experimental medical treatment, being in an unstable social and/or working situation, pregnancy, known fractures, depression according to the Beck Depression Index (score > 29) [18,34,35], or other known coexisting medical conditions which could severely restrict participation in the exercise program. The participants will be asked not to seek other physiotherapy or cognitive treatment during the study period.

 

Intervention

 

Control

 

The Pain Management (control) group will receive education in pain management strategies. There will be 4 sessions of 11/2 hours, covering topics regarding pain mechanisms, acceptance of pain, coping strategies, and goal-setting, based upon pain management and cognitive therapy concepts [21,26,36].

 

Intervention

 

The Pain Management plus Training (intervention) group will receive the same education in pain management as those in the control group plus 8 treatment sessions (instruction in neck exercises and aerobic training) with the same period of 4 months length. If the treating physiotherapist estimates additional treatments are needed, the treatment can be extended with 2 more sessions. Neck training: The treatment of neck-specific exercises will be progressed through different phases, which are defined by set levels of neck function. At the first treatment session, patients are tested for cervical neuromuscular function to identify the specific level at which to start neck training. A specific individually tailored exercise program will be used to target the neck flexor and extensor muscles. The ability to activate the deep cervical neck flexor muscles of the upper cervical region to increase their strength, endurance and stability function is trained progressively via the craniocervical training method using a biopressure feedback transducer [18,37]. Exercises for neck-eye coordination, neck joint positioning, balance and endurance training of the neck muscles will be included as well, since it has been shown to reduce pain and improve sensorimotor control in patients with insidious neck pain [17,38]. Aerobic training: The large trunk and leg muscles will be trained with a gradually increasing physical training program. Patients will be allowed to select activities such as walking, cycling, stick walking, swimming, and jogging. The baseline for training duration is set by exercising 3 times at a comfortable level, that does not exacerbate pain and aims at a rated perceived exertion (RPE) level of between 11 and 14 on a Borg scale [39]. The initial duration of training is set 20% below the average time of the three trials. Training sessions are carried out every second day with a prerequisite that pain is not worsened, and that RPE is between 9 and 14. A training diary is used. If patients do not experience a relapse, and report an average RPE value of 14 or less, the exercise duration for the following period (1 or 2 weeks) is increased by 2-5 minutes, up to a maximum of 30 minutes. If the RPE level is 15 or higher, the exercise duration will be reduced to an average RPE score of 11 to 14 every fortnight [20,40]. By using these pacing principles, the training will be graded individually by the patient, with a focus on perceived exertion – with the aim of increasing the patient’ s general physical activity level and fitness.

 

Patients’ compliance will be administered by registration of their participation in the control and intervention group. The patients in the control group will be considered to have completed the pain management if they have attended 3 out of 4 sessions. The patiesnts in the intervention group will be considered to have completed if the patient has attended a minimum of 3 out of 4 pain management sessions and a minimum of 5 out of 8 trainings sessions. Each patient’s home training with neck exercises and aerobic training will be registered by him/her in a logbook. Compliance with 75% of the planned home training will be considered as having completed the intervention.

 

Physiotherapists

 

The participating physiotherapists will be recruited via an announcement in the Danish Physiotherapy Journal. The inclusion criteria consist of: being a qualified physiotherapist, working at a clinic and having at least two years of working experience as a physiotherapist, having attended a course in the described intervention and passed the related exam.

 

Outcome Measures

 

At baseline the participants’ information on age, gender, height and weight, type of accident, medication, development of symptoms over the last two months (status quo, improving, worsening), expectation of treatment, employment and educational status will be registered. As a primary outcome measure, Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF36) – Physical Component Summary (PCS) will be used [41,42]. The PCS scales are scored using norm-based methods [43,44] with a mean score of 50 with a standard deviation of 10. The primary outcome with respect to having an effect, will be calculated as a change from baseline [45]. Secondary outcomes contain data on both clinical tests and patient-reported outcomes. Table ?Table11 presents clinical tests for measuring the intervention effect on neuromuscular control of the cervical muscles, cervical function and mechanical allodynia. Table ?Table22 presents the patient-related outcomes from questionnaires used to test for perceived effect of the treatment, neck pain and function, pain bothersomeness, fear of movement, post-traumatic stress and quality of life and potential treatment modifiers.

 

Table 1 Clinical Outcomes Used for Measurement of Treatment Effect

Table 1: Clinical outcomes used for measurement of treatment effect on muscle strategy, function and treatment modifiers.

 

Table 2 Patient Reported Outcomes Used for Measured of Treatment Effect

Table 2: Patient reported outcomes used for measured of treatment effect on pain and function.

 

Patients will be tested at baseline, 4 and 12 months after baseline, except for GPE, which will only be measured 4 and 12 months after baseline.

 

Power and Sample Size Estimation

 

The power and sample size calculation is based on the primary outcome, being SF36-PCS 4 months after baseline. For a two-sample pooled t-test of a normal mean difference with a two-sided significance level of 0.05, assuming a common SD of 10, a sample size of 86 per group is required to obtain a power of at least 90% to detect a group mean difference of 5 PCS points [45]; the actual power is 90.3%, and the fractional sample size that achieves a power of exactly 90% is 85.03 per group. In order to adjust for an estimated 15% withdrawal during the study period of 4 months, we will include 100 patients in each group. For sensitivity, three scenarios were applied: firstly, anticipating that all 2 � 100 patients complete the trial, we will have sufficient power (> 80%) to detect a group mean difference as low as 4 PCS points; secondly, we will be able to detect a statistically significant group mean difference of 5 PCS points with sufficient power (> 80%) even with a pooled SD of 12 PCS points. Thirdly and finally, if we aim for a group mean difference of 5 PCS points, with a pooled SD of 10, we will have sufficient power (> 80%) with only 64 patients in each group. However, for logistical reasons, new patients will no longer be included in the study 24 months after the first patient has been included.

 

Randomisation, Allocation and Blinding Procedures

 

After the baseline assessment, the participants are randomly assigned to either the control group or the intervention group. The randomisation sequence is created using SAS (SAS 9.2 TS level 1 M0) statistical software and is stratified by centre with a 1:1 allocation using random block sizes of 2, 4, and 6. The allocation sequence will be concealed from the researcher enrolling and assessing participants in sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed and stapled envelopes. Aluminium foil inside the envelope will be used to render the envelope impermeable to intense light. After revealing the content of the envelope, both patients and physiotherapists are aware of the allocation and the corresponding treatment. Outcome assessors and data analysts are however kept blinded. Prior to the outcome assessments, the patients will be asked by the research assistant not to mention the treatment to which they have been allocated.

 

Statistical Analysis

 

All the primary data analyses will be carried out according to a pre-established analysis plan; all analyses will be done applying SAS software (v. 9.2 Service Pack 4; SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). All descriptive statistics and tests are reported in accordance with the recommendations of the ‘Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research’ (EQUATOR) network; i.e., various forms of the CONSORT statement [46]. Data will be analysed using a two-factor Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA), with a factor for Group and a factor for Gender, using the baseline value as covariate to reduce the random variation, and increase the statistical power. Unless stated otherwise, results will be expressed as the difference between the group means with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and associated p-values, based on a General Linear Model (GLM) procedure. All the analyses will be performed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (version 19.0.0, IBM, USA) as well as the SAS system (v. 9.2; SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures (Mixed model) will be performed to test the difference over time between the intervention and the control groups; interaction: Group � Time. An alpha-level of 0.05 will be considered as being statistically significant (p < 0.05, two- sided). The data analysts will be blinded to the allocated interventions for primary analyses.

 

The baseline scores for the primary and secondary outcomes will be used to compare the control and intervention groups. The statistical analyses will be performed on the basis of the intention-to-treat principle, i.e. patients will be analysed in the treatment group to which they were randomly allocated. In the primary analyses, missing data will be replaced with the feasible and transparent ‘Baseline Observation Carried Forward’ (BOCF) technique, and for sensitivity also a multiple imputation technique will apply.

 

Secondarily, to relate the results to compliance, a ‘per protocol’ analysis will be used as well. The ‘per protocol’ population he patients who have ‘completed’ the intervention to which they were allocated, according to the principles described in the intervention section above.

 

Ethical Considerations

 

The Regional Scientific Ethical Committee of Southern Denmark approved the study (S-20100069). The study conformed to The Declaration of Helsinki 2008 [47] by fulfilling all general ethical recommendations.

 

All subjects will receive information about the purpose and content of the project and give their oral and written consent to participate, with the possibility to drop out of the project at any time.

 

Dr Jimenez White Coat

Dr. Alex Jimenez’s Insight

Managing stress, anxiety, depression and symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, after being involved in an automobile accident can be difficult, especially if the incident caused physical trauma and injuries or aggravated a previously existing condition. In many cases, the emotional distress and the psychological issues caused by the incident may be the source of the painful symptoms. In El Paso, TX, many veterans with PTSD visit my clinic after manifesting worsening symptoms from a previous auto accident injury. Chiropractic care can provide patients the proper stress management environment they need to improve their physical and emotional symptoms. Chiropractic care can also treat a variety of auto accident injuries, including whiplash, head and neck injuries, herniated disc and back injuries.

 

Discussion

 

This study will contribute to a better understanding of treating patients with chronic neck pain following a whiplash accident. The knowledge from this study can be implemented into clinical practice, as the study is based on a multimodal approach, mirroring the approach, which in spite of the current lack of evidence, is often used in a clinical physiotherapy setting. The study may also be included in systematic reviews thereby contributing to updating the knowledge about this population and to enhancing evidence-based treatment.

 

Publishing the design of a study before the study is performed and the results obtained has several advantages. It allows the design to be finalised without its being influenced by the outcomes. This can assist in preventing bias as deviations from the original design can be identified. Other research projects will have the opportunity to follow a similar approach with respect to population, interventions, controls and outcome measurements. The challenges of this study are related to standardising the interventions, treating a non-homogeneous population, defining and standardising relevant outcome measures on a population with long-lasting symptoms and having a population from two different clinical settings. Standardisation of the interventions is obtained by teaching the involved physiotherapists in an instructional course. Population homogeneity will be handled by strict inclusion and exclusion criteria and by monitoring the baseline characteristics of the patients, and differences between groups based on other influences than the intervention/control will be possible to analyse statistically. This research design is composed as an ‘add-on’ design: both groups receive pain education; the intervention group receives additional physical training, including specific neck exercises and general training. Today there is insufficient evidence for the effect of treatment for patients with chronic neck pain following a whiplash accident. All participating patients will be referred for a treatment (control or intervention), as we consider it unethical not to offer some form of treatment, i.e. randomising the control group to a waiting list. The add-on design is chosen as a pragmatic workable solution in such a situation [48].

 

For whiplash patients with chronic pain, the most responsive disability measures (for the individual patient, not for the group as a whole) are considered to be the Patient Specific Functional Scale and the numerical rating scale of pain bothersomeness [49]. By using these and NDI (the most often used neck disability measure) as secondary outcome measures, it is anticipated that patient-relevant changes in pain and disability can be evaluated. The population will be recruited from and treated at two different clinical settings: the out-patient clinic of The Spine Centre, Hospital Lilleb�lt and several private physiotherapy clinics. To avoid any influence of the different settings on the outcome measures, the population will be block randomised related to the settings, securing equal distribution of participants from each setting to the two intervention groups.

 

Competing Interests

 

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

 

Authors’ Contributions

 

IRH drafted the manuscript. IRH, BJK and KS participated in the design of the study. All contributed to the design. RC, IRH; BJK and KS participated in the power and sample size calculation and in describing the statistical analysis as well as the allocation and randomization procedure. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Suzanne Capell provided writing assistance and linguistic corrections.

 

Pre-Publication History

 

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/12/274/prepub

 

Acknowledgements

 

This study has received funding from the Research Fund for the Region of Southern Denmark, the Danish Rheumatism Association, the Research Foundation of the Danish Association of Physiotherapy, the Fund for Physiotherapy in Private Practice, and the Danish Society of Polio and Accident Victims (PTU). The Musculoskeletal Statistics Unit at the Parker Institute is supported by grants from the Oak Foundation. Suzanne Capell provided writing assistance and linguistic correction.

 

The trial is registered in www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01431261.

 

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for the Treatment of PTSD in the context of Chronic Whiplash

 

Abstract

 

Objectives

 

Whiplash-associated disorders (WAD) are common and involve both physical and psychological impairments. Research has shown that persistent posttraumatic stress symptoms are associated with poorer functional recovery and physical therapy outcomes. Trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy (TF-CBT) has shown moderate effectiveness in chronic pain samples. However, to date, there have been no clinical trials within WAD. Thus, this study will report on the effectiveness of TF-CBT in individuals meeting the criteria for current chronic WAD and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

 

Method

 

Twenty-six participants were randomly assigned to either TF-CBT or a waitlist control, and treatment effects were evaluated at posttreatment and 6-month follow-up using a structured clinical interview, self-report questionnaires, and measures of physiological arousal and sensory pain thresholds.

 

Results

 

Clinically significant reductions in PTSD symptoms were found in the TF-CBT group compared with the waitlist at postassessment, with further gains noted at the follow-up. The treatment of PTSD was also associated with clinically significant improvements in neck disability, physical, emotional, and social functioning and physiological reactivity to trauma cues, whereas limited changes were found in sensory pain thresholds.

 

Discussion

 

This study provides support for the effectiveness of TF-CBT to target PTSD symptoms within chronic WAD. The finding that treatment of PTSD resulted in improvements in neck disability and quality of life and changes in cold pain thresholds highlights the complex and interrelating mechanisms that underlie both WAD and PTSD. Clinical implications of the findings and future research directions are discussed.

 

In conclusion, being involved in an automobile accident is an undesirable situation which can result in a variety of physical trauma or injury as well as lead to the development of a number of aggravating conditions. However, stress, anxiety, depression and post traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, are common psychological issues which may occur as a result of an automobile accident. According to research studies, physical symptoms and emotional distress may be closely connected and treating both physical and emotional injuries could help patients achieve overall health and wellness. Information referenced from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). The scope of our information is limited to chiropractic as well as to spinal injuries and conditions. To discuss the subject matter, please feel free to ask Dr. Jimenez or contact us at 915-850-0900 .

 

Curated by Dr. Alex Jimenez

Green-Call-Now-Button-24H-150x150-2-3.png

 

Additional Topics: Back Pain

 

According to statistics, approximately 80% of people will experience symptoms of back pain at least once throughout their lifetimes. Back pain is a common complaint which can result due to a variety of injuries and/or conditions. Often times, the natural degeneration of the spine with age can cause back pain. Herniated discs occur when the soft, gel-like center of an intervertebral disc pushes through a tear in its surrounding, outer ring of cartilage, compressing and irritating the nerve roots. Disc herniations most commonly occur along the lower back, or lumbar spine, but they may also occur along the cervical spine, or neck. The impingement of the nerves found in the low back due to injury and/or an aggravated condition can lead to symptoms of sciatica.

 

blog picture of cartoon paperboy big news

 

EXTRA IMPORTANT TOPIC: Managing Workplace Stress

 

 

MORE IMPORTANT TOPICS: EXTRA EXTRA: Car Accident Injury Treatment El Paso, TX Chiropractor

 

Blank
References

1. The National Institute of Public H. Folkesundhedsrapporten, 2007 (engl: Public Health Report, Denmark, 2007) 2007. p. s.112.
2. Whiplash kommisionen och Svenska Lkl. Diagnostik och tidigt omh�ndertagande av whiplashskador (engl: Diagnostics and early treatment of Whiplash Injuries) Sandviken: Sandvikens tryckeri; 2005.
3. Carroll LJ, Hogg-Johnson S, van dV, Haldeman S, Holm LW, Carragee EJ, Hurwitz EL, Cote P, Nordin M, Peloso PM. et al. Course and prognostic factors for neck pain in the general population: results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. Spine. 2008;12(4 Suppl):S75�S82. [PubMed]
4. Nijs J, Oosterwijck van J, Hertogh de W. Rehabilitation of chronic whiplash: treatment of cervical dysfunctions or chronic pain syndrome? ClinRheumatol. 2009;12(3):243�251. [PubMed]
5. Falla D. Unravelling the complexity of muscle impairment in chronic neck pain. ManTher. 2004;12(3):125�133. [PubMed]
6. Mannerkorpi K, Henriksson C. Non-pharmacological treatment of chronic widespread musculoskeletal pain. BestPractResClinRheumatol. 2007;12(3):513�534. [PubMed]
7. Kay TM, Gross A, Goldsmith C, Santaguida PL, Hoving J, Bronfort G. Exercises for mechanical neck disorders. CochraneDatabaseSystRev. 2005. p. CD004250. [PubMed]
8. Kasch H, Qerama E, Kongsted A, Bendix T, Jensen TS, Bach FW. Clinical assessment of prognostic factors for long-term pain and handicap after whiplash injury: a 1-year prospective study. EurJNeurol. 2008;12(11):1222�1230. [PubMed]
9. Curatolo M, Arendt-Nielsen L, Petersen-Felix S. Central hypersensitivity in chronic pain: mechanisms and clinical implications. PhysMedRehabilClinNAm. 2006;12(2):287�302. [PubMed]
10. Jull G, Sterling M, Kenardy J, Beller E. Does the presence of sensory hypersensitivity influence outcomes of physical rehabilitation for chronic whiplash?–A preliminary RCT. Pain. 2007;12(1-2):28�34. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2006.09.030. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
11. Davis C. Chronic pain/dysfunction in whiplash-associated disorders95. JManipulative Physiol Ther. 2001;12(1):44�51. doi: 10.1067/mmt.2001.112012. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
12. Flor H. Cortical reorganisation and chronic pain: implications for rehabilitation. JRehabilMed. 2003. pp. 66�72. [PubMed]
13. Bosma FK, Kessels RP. Cognitive impairments, psychological dysfunction, and coping styles in patients with chronic whiplash syndrome14. Neuropsychiatry NeuropsycholBehavNeurol. 2002;12(1):56�65. [PubMed]
14. Guez M. Chronic neck pain. An epidemiological, psychological and SPECT study with emphasis on whiplash-associated disorders9. Acta OrthopSuppl. 2006;12(320):receding-33. [PubMed]
15. Kessels RP, Aleman A, Verhagen WI, van Luijtelaar EL. Cognitive functioning after whiplash injury: a meta-analysis5. JIntNeuropsycholSoc. 2000;12(3):271�278. [PubMed]
16. O’Sullivan PB. Lumbar segmental ‘instability’: clinical presentation and specific stabilizing exercise management. ManTher. 2000;12(1):2�12. [PubMed]
17. Jull G, Falla D, Treleaven J, Hodges P, Vicenzino B. Retraining cervical joint position sense: the effect of two exercise regimes. JOrthopRes. 2007;12(3):404�412. [PubMed]
18. Falla D, Jull G, Hodges P, Vicenzino B. An endurance-strength training regime is effective in reducing myoelectric manifestations of cervical flexor muscle fatigue in females with chronic neck pain. ClinNeurophysiol. 2006;12(4):828�837. [PubMed]
19. Gill JR, Brown CA. A structured review of the evidence for pacing as a chronic pain intervention. EurJPain. 2009;12(2):214�216. [PubMed]
20. Wallman KE, Morton AR, Goodman C, Grove R, Guilfoyle AM. Randomised controlled trial of graded exercise in chronic fatigue syndrome. MedJAust. 2004;12(9):444�448. [PubMed]
21. Hayes SC, Luoma JB, Bond FW, Masuda A, Lillis J. Acceptance and commitment therapy: model, processes and outcomes. BehavResTher. 2006;12(1):1�25. [PubMed]
22. Lappalainen R, Lehtonen T, Skarp E, Taubert E, Ojanen M, Hayes SC. The impact of CBT and ACT models using psychology trainee therapists: a preliminary controlled effectiveness trial. BehavModif. 2007;12(4):488�511. [PubMed]
23. Linton SJ, Andersson T. Can chronic disability be prevented? A randomized trial of a cognitive-behavior intervention and two forms of information for patients with spinal pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;12(21):2825�2831. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200011010-00017. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
24. Moseley L. Combined physiotherapy and education is efficacious for chronic low back pain. AustJPhysiother. 2002;12(4):297�302. [PubMed]
25. Soderlund A, Lindberg P. Cognitive behavioural components in physiotherapy management of chronic whiplash associated disorders (WAD)–a randomised group study6. GItalMedLavErgon. 2007;12(1 Suppl A):A5�11. [PubMed]
26. Wicksell RK. Exposure and acceptance in patients with chronic debilitating pain – a behavior therapy model to improve functioning and quality of life. Karolinska Institutet; 2009.
27. Seferiadis A, Rosenfeld M, Gunnarsson R. A review of treatment interventions in whiplash-associated disorders70. EurSpine J. 2004;12(5):387�397. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
28. van der Wees PJ, Jamtvedt G, Rebbeck T, de Bie RA, Dekker J, Hendriks EJ. Multifaceted strategies may increase implementation of physiotherapy clinical guidelines: a systematic review. AustJPhysiother. 2008;12(4):233�241. [PubMed]
29. Verhagen AP, Scholten-Peeters GG, van WS, de Bie RA, Bierma-Zeinstra SM. Conservative treatments for whiplash34. CochraneDatabaseSystRev. 2009. p. CD003338.
30. Hurwitz EL, Carragee EJ, van dV, Carroll LJ, Nordin M, Guzman J, Peloso PM, Holm LW, Cote P, Hogg-Johnson S. et al. Treatment of neck pain: noninvasive interventions: results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. Spine. 2008;12(4 Suppl):S123�S152. [PubMed]
31. Stewart MJ, Maher CG, Refshauge KM, Herbert RD, Bogduk N, Nicholas M. Randomized controlled trial of exercise for chronic whiplash-associated disorders. Pain. 2007;12(1-2):59�68. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2006.08.030. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
32. Ask T, Strand LI, Sture SJ. The effect of two exercise regimes; motor control versus endurance/strength training for patients with whiplash-associated disorders: a randomized controlled pilot study. ClinRehabil. 2009;12(9):812�823. [PubMed]
33. Rubinstein SM, Pool JJ, van Tulder MW, Riphagen II, de Vet HC. A systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of provocative tests of the neck for diagnosing cervical radiculopathy. EurSpine J. 2007;12(3):307�319. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
34. Peolsson M, Borsbo B, Gerdle B. Generalized pain is associated with more negative consequences than local or regional pain: a study of chronic whiplash-associated disorders7. JRehabilMed. 2007;12(3):260�268. [PubMed]
35. Beck AT, Ward CH, Mendelson M, Mock J, Erbaugh J. An inventory for measuring depression. ArchGenPsychiatry. 1961;12:561�571. [PubMed]
36. Wicksell RK, Ahlqvist J, Bring A, Melin L, Olsson GL. Can exposure and acceptance strategies improve functioning and life satisfaction in people with chronic pain and whiplash-associated disorders (WAD)? A randomized controlled trial. Cogn BehavTher. 2008;12(3):169�182. [PubMed]
37. Falla D, Jull G, Dall’Alba P, Rainoldi A, Merletti R. An electromyographic analysis of the deep cervical flexor muscles in performance of craniocervical flexion. PhysTher. 2003;12(10):899�906. [PubMed]
38. Palmgren PJ, Sandstrom PJ, Lundqvist FJ, Heikkila H. Improvement after chiropractic care in cervicocephalic kinesthetic sensibility and subjective pain intensity in patients with nontraumatic chronic neck pain. JManipulative Physiol Ther. 2006;12(2):100�106. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2005.12.002. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
39. Borg G. Psychophysical scaling with applications in physical work and the perception of exertion. ScandJWork EnvironHealth. 1990;12(Suppl 1):55�58. [PubMed]
40. Wallman KE, Morton AR, Goodman C, Grove R. Exercise prescription for individuals with chronic fatigue syndrome. MedJAust. 2005;12(3):142�143. [PubMed]
41. McCarthy MJ, Grevitt MP, Silcocks P, Hobbs G. The reliability of the Vernon and Mior neck disability index, and its validity compared with the short form-36 health survey questionnaire. EurSpine J. 2007;12(12):2111�2117. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
42. Bjorner JB, Damsgaard MT, Watt T, Groenvold M. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability of the Danish SF-36. JClinEpidemiol. 1998;12(11):1001�1011. [PubMed]
43. Ware JE Jr, Kosinski M, Bayliss MS, McHorney CA, Rogers WH, Raczek A. Comparison of methods for the scoring and statistical analysis of SF-36 health profile and summary measures: summary of results from the Medical Outcomes Study. MedCare. 1995;12(4 Suppl):AS264�AS279. [PubMed]
44. Ware JE Jr. SF-36 health survey update. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;12(24):3130�3139. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00008. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
45. Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Campbell MJ, Anderson PA. Neck Disability Index, short form-36 physical component summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain: the minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion. Spine J. 2010;12(6):469�474. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.02.007. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
46. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG. CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. JClinEpidemiol. 2010;12(8):e1�37. [PubMed]
47. Subjects WDoH-EPfMRIH. WORLD MEDICAL ASSOCIATION DECLARATION OF HELSINKI. WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. 2008.
48. Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Peirce-Sandner S, Baron R, Bellamy N, Burke LB, Chappell A, Chartier K, Cleeland CS, Costello A. et al. Research design considerations for confirmatory chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain. 2010;12(2):177�193. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.02.018. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
49. Stewart M, Maher CG, Refshauge KM, Bogduk N, Nicholas M. Responsiveness of pain and disability measures for chronic whiplash. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;12(5):580�585. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000256380.71056.6d. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
50. Jull GA, O’Leary SP, Falla DL. Clinical assessment of the deep cervical flexor muscles: the craniocervical flexion test. JManipulative Physiol Ther. 2008;12(7):525�533. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.08.003. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
51. Revel M, Minguet M, Gregoy P, Vaillant J, Manuel JL. Changes in cervicocephalic kinesthesia after a proprioceptive rehabilitation program in patients with neck pain: a randomized controlled study. ArchPhysMedRehabil. 1994;12(8):895�899. [PubMed]
52. Heikkila HV, Wenngren BI. Cervicocephalic kinesthetic sensibility, active range of cervical motion, and oculomotor function in patients with whiplash injury. ArchPhysMedRehabil. 1998;12(9):1089�1094. [PubMed]
53. Treleaven J, Jull G, Grip H. Head eye co-ordination and gaze stability in subjects with persistent whiplash associated disorders. Man Ther. 2010. [PubMed]
54. Williams MA, McCarthy CJ, Chorti A, Cooke MW, Gates S. A systematic review of reliability and validity studies of methods for measuring active and passive cervical range of motion. JManipulative Physiol Ther. 2010;12(2):138�155. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2009.12.009. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
55. Kasch H, Qerama E, Kongsted A, Bach FW, Bendix T, Jensen TS. Deep muscle pain, tender points and recovery in acute whiplash patients: a 1-year follow-up study. Pain. 2008;12(1):65�73. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2008.07.008. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
56. Sterling M. Testing for sensory hypersensitivity or central hyperexcitability associated with cervical spine pain. JManipulative Physiol Ther. 2008;12(7):534�539. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.08.002. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
57. Ettlin T, Schuster C, Stoffel R, Bruderlin A, Kischka U. A distinct pattern of myofascial findings in patients after whiplash injury. ArchPhysMedRehabil. 2008;12(7):1290�1293. [PubMed]
58. Vernon H, Mior S. The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. JManipulative Physiol Ther. 1991;12(7):409�415. [PubMed]
59. Vernon H. The Neck Disability Index: state-of-the-art, 1991-2008. JManipulative Physiol Ther. 2008;12(7):491�502. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.08.006. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
60. Vernon H, Guerriero R, Kavanaugh S, Soave D, Moreton J. Psychological factors in the use of the neck disability index in chronic whiplash patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;12(1):E16�E21. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b135aa. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
61. Sterling M, Kenardy J, Jull G, Vicenzino B. The development of psychological changes following whiplash injury. Pain. 2003;12(3):481�489. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2003.09.013. [PubMed] [Cross Ref]
62. Stalnacke BM. Relationship between symptoms and psychological factors five years after whiplash injury. JRehabilMed. 2009;12(5):353�359. [PubMed]
63. Rabin R, de CF. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. AnnMed. 2001;12(5):337�343. [PubMed]
64. Borsbo B, Peolsson M, Gerdle B. Catastrophizing, depression, and pain: correlation with and influence on quality of life and health – a study of chronic whiplash-associated disorders4. JRehabilMed. 2008;12(7):562�569. [PubMed]

Close Accordion
Mindfulness Interventions for Auto Accident Injuries in El Paso, TX

Mindfulness Interventions for Auto Accident Injuries in El Paso, TX

by | Back Pain, Chiropractic, Neck Pain, Physical Rehabilitation, Randomized Controlled Trial, Stress, Treatments

When you’ve been involved in a car crash, the auto accident injuries resulting from the incident may not always have a physical cause. The emotional distress due to trauma or injury from the impact of an automobile accident may often be so immense, it can lead to a variety of painful symptoms. If such stress is not treated immediately, it could result in the development of psychological conditions. Stress, anxiety, depression and in severe cases, PTSD, or post traumatic stress disorder, are some of the most common psychological issues you may end up encountering after a traumatic auto accident.

 

Anxiety and Irrational Fears

 

In several cases, the victim of an automobile accident may develop irrational fears as a result of the incident. As a matter of fact, many of these individuals report experiencing anxiety about getting behind the wheel again. For them, the fear of being in another accident may ultimately cause them to avoid driving altogether. For many other individuals still, the irrational fear of suffering a panic attack while on the road may be the cause for them to avert driving entirely. If the anxiety and irrational fears caused by the emotional distress of an auto accident worsen, it may permanently�discourage a person from driving again.

 

Depression

 

It is also possible for people who’ve been involved in an auto accident to develop depression following the incident. In the end, you wind up experiencing psychological trauma as a result of physical trauma. There are numerous symptoms of depression which you might readily recognize. These include problems with sleep, losing your appetite, and headaches. As it becomes worse, however, you might end up feeling sad or hopeless all of the time, which could lead to worsening symptoms.

 

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)

 

It’s highly possible for individuals involved in an automobile accident to suffer from post traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD. According to the National Center For PTSD, as much as 9 percent of people who experience auto accident injuries end up suffering from PTSD. Moreover, at least 14 percent of car crash survivors who seek mental health care are experiencing PTSD.

 

A new research study demonstrated that mindfulness interventions might be just as essential to your health as traditional treatment, especially if you’ve got post traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD. Researchers have demonstrated that chiropractic care can lead to a substantial advancement in the mind-body stress component of a patient’s overall health and wellness.

 

 

Chiropractic Care for Auto Accident Injuries

 

Addressing automobile accident injuries, such as whiplash, which also result in anxiety and irrational fears, depression and especially PTSD, demands a multi-disciplinary strategy. Chiropractic is an alternative treatment option which focuses on injuries and/or conditions of the musculoskeletal and nervous system. A chiropractor commonly utilizes spinal adjustments and manual manipulations to carefully correct spinal misalignments, or subluxations, which could be causing pain and discomfort. By releasing pressure and muscle tension, a doctor of chiropractic, or chiropractor, can help reduce stress and emotional distress which could be causing the individual’s anxiety, irrational fears, depression and PTSD. If further help is required, the chiropractor can recommend patients to the best healthcare specialist to help them with their symptoms. The purpose of the following article is to demonstrate the prevalence of PTSD on individuals involved in a traffic collision as well as to show how mindfulness interventions can ultimately help improve as well as manage the stress symptoms people may experience after a car crash.

 

Prediction of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder by Immediate Reactions to Trauma: a Prospective Study in Road Traffic Accident Victims

 

Abstract

 

Road traffic accidents often cause serious physical and psychological sequelae. Specialists of various medical faculties are involved in the treatment of accident victims. Little is known about the factors which might predict psychiatric disorders, e.g. Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after accidents and how psychological problems influence physical treatment. In a prospective study 179 unselected, consecutively admitted road traffic accident victims were assessed a few days after the accident for psychiatric diagnoses, severity of injury and psychopathology. All were inpatients and had to be treated for bone fractures. At 6-months follow-up assessment 152 (85%) of the patients were interviewed again. Of the patients, 18.4% fulfilled the criteria for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (DSM-III-R) within 6 months after the accident. Patients who developed PTSD were injured more severely and showed more symptoms of anxiety, depression and PTSD a few days after the accident than patients with no psychiatric diagnosis. Patients with PTSD stayed significantly longer in the hospital than the other patients. Multiple regression analysis revealed that the length of hospitalization was due mainly to a diversity of factors such as severity of injury, severity of accident, premorbid personality and psychopathology. Posttraumatic stress disorder is common after road traffic accidents. Patients with PTSD at follow-up can be identified by findings from early assessment. Untreated psychological sequelae such as PTSD cause longer hospitalization and therefore more costs than in non-PTSD patients.

 

 

Trauma-Focused Cognitive Behavior Therapy and Exercise for Chronic Whiplash: Protocol of a Randomized Controlled Trial

 

Abstract

 

  • Introduction:�As a consequence of a road traffic crash, persistent pain and disability following whiplash injury are common and incur substantial personal and economic costs. Up to 50% of people who experience a whiplash injury will never fully recover and up to 30% will remain moderately to severely disabled by the condition. The reason as to why symptoms persist past the acute to sub-acute stage and become chronic is unclear, but likely results from complex interactions between structural injury, physical impairments, and psychological and psychosocial factors. Psychological responses related to the traumatic event itself are becoming an increasingly recognised factor in the whiplash condition. Despite this recognition, there is limited knowledge regarding the effectiveness of psychological interventions, either delivered alone or in combination with physiotherapy, in reducing the physical and pain-related psychological factors of chronic whiplash. Pilot study results have shown positive results for the use of trauma-focused cognitive behaviour therapy to treat psychological factors, pain and disability in individuals with chronic whiplash. The results have indicated that a combined approach could not only reduce psychological symptoms, but also pain and disability.
  • Aims:�The primary aim of this randomised, controlled trial is to investigate the effectiveness of combined trauma-focused cognitive behavioural therapy, delivered by a psychologist, and physiotherapy exercise to decrease pain and disability of individuals with chronic whiplash and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The trial also aims to investigate the effectiveness of the combined therapy in decreasing post-traumatic stress symptoms, anxiety and depression.
  • Participants and Setting:�A total of 108 participants with chronic whiplash-associated disorder (WAD) grade II of > 3 months and < 5 years duration and PTSD (diagnosed with the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) according to the DSM-5) will be recruited for the study. Participants will be assessed via phone screening and in person at a university research laboratory. Interventions will take place in southeast Queensland, Australia and southern Denmark.
  • Intervention:�Psychological therapy will be delivered once a week over 10 weeks, with participants randomly assigned to either trauma-focused cognitive behavioural therapy or supportive therapy, both delivered by a clinical psychologist. Participants will then receive ten sessions of evidence-based physiotherapy exercise delivered over a 6-week period.
  • Outcome Measures:�The primary outcome measure is neck disability (Neck Disability Index). Secondary outcomes focus on: pain intensity; presence and severity of PTSD (CAPS V and PTSD Checklist 5); psychological distress (Depression, Anxiety Stress Scale 21); patient perceived functionality (SF-12, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, and Patient-Specific Functional Scale); and pain-specific self-efficacy and catastrophising (Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire and Pain Catastrophizing Scale). After psychotherapy (10 weeks after randomisation) and physiotherapy (16 weeks after randomisation), as well as at the 6-month and 12-month follow-ups, a blind assessor will measure the outcomes.
  • Analysis:�All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary and secondary outcomes that are measured will be analysed using linear mixed and logistic regression models. Any effect of site (Australia or Denmark) will be evaluated by including a site-by-treatment group-by-time interaction term in the mixed models analyses. Effect modification will only be assessed for the primary outcome of the Neck Disability Index.
  • Discussion:�This study will provide a definitive evaluation of the effects of adding trauma-focused cognitive behaviour therapy to physiotherapy exercise for individuals with chronic WAD and PTSD. This study is likely to influence the clinical management of whiplash injury and will have immediate clinical applicability in Australia, Denmark and the wider international community. The study will also have implications for both health and insurance policy makers in their decision-making regarding treatment options and funding.

 

Introduction

 

Persistent pain and disability following whiplash injury as a consequence of a road traffic crash (RTC) is common and incurs substantial personal and economic costs. Up to 50% of people who experience a whiplash injury will never fully recover and up to 30% will remain moderately to severely disabled by the condition [1-3]. Less recognised are the mental health issues that accompany this condition. The prevalence of psychiatric disorders has been shown to be 25% for PTSD, 31% for Major Depressive Episode and 20% for Generalised Anxiety Disorder [4-6]. Whiplash injury accounts for the vast majority of any submitted claims as well as the greatest incurred costs in Queensland compulsory third party scheme [7]. In Australia, Whiplash injuries comprise approximately 75% of all survivable RTC injuries [8] with total costs of more than $950 M per annum [9], exceeding costs for both spinal cord and traumatic brain injury [7]. In Denmark, whiplash costs an estimated 300 million USD per annum if loss of work is included [10].

 

Neck pain is the cardinal symptom of individuals following whiplash injury. It is now generally accepted that there is an initial peripheral injury of some kind to the neck [11] although the specific injured structure in individual patients is difficult to clinically identify with current imaging techniques. The reason as to why symptoms persist past the acute to sub-acute stage and become chronic is not clear but likely results from complex interactions between structural injury, physical impairments, psychological and psychosocial factors [12]. However it is clear that chronic WAD is a heterogeneous and complex condition involving physical impairments such as movement loss, disturbed movement patterns and sensory disturbances [13] as well as pain related psychological responses such as catastrophizing [14, 15], kinesiophobia [16], activity avoidance and poor self-efficacy for pain control [17]. In addition recent studies have shown that posttraumatic stress symptoms or event related distress is common [18-20]. Thus it would seem logical that interventions targeting both the physical and psychological manifestations of the whiplash condition would be of benefit.

 

In contrast to many common musculoskeletal pain conditions (e.g. low back pain, non-specific neck pain) whiplash related neck pain usually occurs following a traumatic event, namely a motor vehicle crash. Psychological responses related to the traumatic event itself, posttraumatic stress symptoms, are emerging as an important additional psychological factor in the whiplash condition. Recent data indicates that post-traumatic stress symptoms are prevalent in individuals who have sustained whiplash injuries following motor vehicle accidents [18, 20, 21]. The early presence of posttraumatic stress symptoms have been shown to be associated with poor functional recovery from the injury [13, 18]. Recent data from our laboratory have shown that following whiplash injury 17% of individuals will follow a trajectory of initial moderate/severe posttraumatic stress symptoms that persist for at least 12 months and 43% will follow a trajectory of moderate initial symptoms that decrease but remain at mild to moderate (sub-clinical) levels for at least 12 months (the duration of the study) [4]. See Figure 1. These figures are significant as they are similar to the prevalence of PTSD in individuals admitted to hospital following �more severe� motor vehicle injuries [22].

 

Figure 1 Data from Whiplash Injured Participants

Figure 1: Data from 155 whiplash injured participants measured at 1, 3, 6 & 12 months post-accident. The Posttraumatic Stress Diagnostic Scale (PDS) was measured at each time point. Group based trajectory modelling identified 3 distinct clinical pathways (trajectories). 1. Chronic moderate/severe (17%) 2. Recovering: initial moderate levels of posttraumatic stress decreasing to mild/ moderate levels. 3. Resilient: negligible symptoms throughout2. PDS symptom score Cut-offs: 1�10 mild, 11�20 moderate, 21�35.

 

Although chronic WAD is a considerable health problem the number of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is very limited [23]. A recent systematic review concluded that there is evidence to suggest that exercise programs are modestly effective in relieving whiplash-related pain, at least over the short term [23]. For example, Stewart et al [24] showed only a 2 point (on a 10 point scale) decrease in pain levels immediately after a 6 week functional exercise management intervention that adhered to pain-related CBT principals but with no significant sustained effects at more long term follow-ups of 6 and 12 months. In a preliminary RCT conducted in our laboratory (published in 2007), a more neck specific exercise approach also delivered only modest effects, in that pain and disability scores decreased by just clinically relevant amounts (8�14% on the Neck disability Index) when compared to a single advice session [25].

 

The systematic review also concluded that there is conflicting evidence regarding the effectiveness of psychological interventions either delivered alone or in combination with physiotherapy [23]. The studies included in the review were of variable quality and mostly utilized CBT in some format to address pain related cognitions and distress [26, 27]. No study specifically targeted PTSD symptoms.

 

Thus the seemingly logical proposal of interventions to target the physical and pain�related psychological factors of chronic WAD is not working as well as would be anticipated. This expectation is based on more favourable outcomes with such approaches for other musculoskeletal pain conditions such as low back [28].

 

In an endeavour to understand why exercise rehabilitation approaches are not very effective for chronic WAD, we undertook a NHMRC (570884) funded randomized controlled trial that included effect modifiers of PTSD symptoms and sensory disturbances. In this larger (n=186) multicentre trial, preliminary analysis indicate that only 30% of patients with chronic WAD and a PTSD diagnosis had a clinically relevant change in Neck Disability Index scores (>10% change) compared to 70% of WAD patients without PTSD following an exercise rehabilitation program. All included participants reported moderate or greater levels of pain and disability indicating that the co-morbid presence of PTSD prevents a good response to physical rehabilitation. We could find no modifying effect of any sensory changes. The results of this study lead us to propose that first treating PTSD and then instituting physical rehabilitation will be a more effective intervention to improve health outcomes for chronic WAD.

 

Trauma-focused CBT is a highly effective treatment for PTSD symptoms [29] and the Australian Guidelines for Treatment of Acute Stress Disorder and PTSD recommend that individually delivered trauma-focused CBT should be provided to people with these conditions [30]. There is data available to indicate that trauma-focused CBT may potentially have an effect not only on PTSD symptoms but also on pain and disability. The results of a recent empirical examination explored directional relationships between PTSD and chronic pain in 323 survivors of accidents [31]. The results indicated a mutual maintenance of pain intensity and posttraumatic stress symptoms at 5 days post injury but by 6 months post injury (chronic stage), PTSD symptoms impacted significantly on pain but not vice versa. Whilst this study did not specifically focus on whiplash injury, it provides indication that addressing PTSD symptoms in the chronic stage of WAD may allow for a decrease in levels of pain thus facilitating the potential effects of more pain/disability focused approaches to management such as exercise and pain-focused CBT.

 

Based on our findings of the co-occurrence of PTSD and WAD, we conducted a small pilot study with the aim being to test the effects of trauma-focused CBT on psychological factors, pain and disability in individuals with chronic WAD [32]. Twenty-six participants with chronic WAD and a diagnosis of PTSD were randomly assigned to treatment (n = 13) or no-Intervention (n = 13) control. The treatment group underwent 10 weekly sessions of trauma-focused CBT for PTSD. Assessments of PTSD diagnosis, psychological symptoms, disability, and pain symptoms were made at baseline and post-assessment (10-12 weeks). Following the treatment intervention, there was not only a significant reduction in psychological symptoms (PTSD symptom severity; numbers meeting the diagnostic criteria for PTSD; depression, anxiety and stress scores) but also a significant decrease in pain and disability and improvements in physical function, bodily pain and role physical items of the SF36 (Table 1).

 

Table 1. Results of pilot randomised control trial

Trauma-focused CBT No-intervention Control
Neck Disability Index (0-100)*
Baseline 43.7 (15) 42.8 (14.3)
Post intervention 38.7 (12.6) 43.9 (12.9)
SF-36 Physical Function �
Baseline 55.8 (25.9) 55.4 (28.2)
Post intervention 61.5 (20.1) 51.1 (26.3)
SF -36 Bodily Pain �
Baseline 31.2 (17.2) 22.6 (15.5)
Post intervention 41.8 (18) 28.2 (15.8)
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Diagnosis (SCID-IV)
Baseline N= 13 (100%) N= 13 (100%)
Post intervention N= 5 (39.5%) N= 12 (92.3%)

* higher score=worse; �higher scores=better

 

The results of this study indicate that trauma-focused CBT provided to individuals with chronic WAD has positive effects, not only on psychological status but also on pain and disability the cardinal symptoms of this condition. Whilst the mean change of 5% was marginal in terms of a clinical relevance [33], the effect size for change of the NDI was moderate (d=0.4) and shows promise for a greater effect in a larger sample size [34]. Nevertheless our pilot trial findings suggest that trauma-focused CBT alone will not be enough for successful management of chronic WAD and for this reason our proposed trial will combine this approach with exercise. These findings are potentially ground breaking in the area of whiplash management and it is imperative that they are now tested in a full randomised controlled design.

 

In summary, we have already shown that individuals with chronic WAD and moderate PTSD symptoms do not respond as well to a physical rehabilitation based intervention as those without PTSD symptoms [25]. Our recent pilot study indicates that trauma-focused CBT has a beneficial effect on both psychological status and pain and disability. We propose that by pre-treating the PTSD, PTSD symptoms and pain related disability will decrease allowing the exercise intervention to be more effective than has been seen to date [24, 25]. Therefore our proposed research will address this identified gap in knowledge by being the first to evaluate the efficacy of a combined trauma-focused CBT intervention followed by exercise for chronic WAD.

 

The primary aim of this project is to investigate the effectiveness of combined trauma-focused CBT and exercise to decrease pain and disability of individuals with chronic whiplash and PTSD. The secondary aims are to investigate the effectiveness of combined trauma-focused CBT and exercise to decrease posttraumatic stress symptoms, anxiety and depression, and to investigate the effectiveness of trauma-focused CBT alone on posttraumatic stress symptoms and pain/disability.

 

This trial is expected to commence in June 2015 and completed by December 2018.

 

Design

 

This study will be a randomised controlled multi-centre trial evaluating 10 weeks of trauma-focused CBT compared with 10 weeks of supported therapy, each followed by a 6 week exercise program. Outcomes will be measured at 10 weeks, 16 weeks, 6 and 12 months post randomisation. A total of 108 people with chronic whiplash disorder (>3 months, <5 years duration) and PTSD (DSM-5 diagnosed with CAPS) will be enrolled in the study. The assessors measuring outcomes will be blinded to the assigned treatment group allocation. The protocol conforms to CONSORT guidelines.

 

Figure 2 Study Design

 

Methods

 

Participants

 

A total of 108 participants with chronic whiplash associated disorder (WAD) grade II (symptom duration >3 months and <5 years) and PTSD will be recruited from Southeast Queensland and Zealand, Denmark. Participants will be recruited via:

 

  1. Advertisements (the Danish national health register, newspaper, newsletter and internet): potential participants will be invited to make contact with project staff.
  2. Physiotherapy and General Medical Practices: the study will be promoted in physiotherapy and medical clinics where project staff already have a relationship. Patients deemed to be appropriate for inclusion will be given an information sheet about the project and invited to contact project staff directly.

 

There is a two-step process to determining inclusion to this study: initial online/telephone interview followed by a screening clinical examination. The initial interview will identify duration of whiplash injury (inclusion criteria) and moderate pain based on NDI scores, and potential exclusion criteria. Likelihood of PTSD will be based on conservative PCL-5 scores, requiring at least one moderate score per symptom and a minimum score of 30 overall. A description of the project will be provided to all volunteers at the point of initial contact. Volunteers deemed likely to be eligible will be invited to attend a screening clinical examination. If more than four weeks passes between the phone interview and clinical screening than the NDI and PCL-5 measures are to be re-administered.

 

Prior to undertaking the screening clinical examination, volunteers will be provided with participant information and asked to complete informed consent documentation. During the screening examination, participants who have significant co-morbidity such as serious spinal pathology will be identified and excluded from participation. To screen for serious pathology, a diagnostic triage will be conducted following the Motor Accident Authority of NSW Whiplash Guidelines [35]. The screening examination will also include a clinical interview by a research assistant who will administer the Clinician Administered PTSD scale 5 (CAPS 5) to determine the presence and severity of PTSD [36]. The research assistant will also confirm the absence of exclusion criteria such as past history or current presentation of psychosis, bipolar disorder, organic brain disorder and severe depression substance abuse. If participants report a diagnosis of an exclusion criteria the relevant section of SCID-I will be utilised to clarify diagnosis.

 

During the initial screen or during treatment, if a participant is identified as being at high risk of self-harm or suicide, they will be referred to appropriate care in accordance with the professional standards of psychologists. Participants who meet the inclusion criteria (NDI >30% and PTSD diagnosis) will then be evaluated on all outcome measures for baseline results. It is possible that volunteers invited to attend the screening clinical examination will not meet the inclusion criteria (NDI >30% and PTSD diagnosis) and will therefore be excluded from further participation. Volunteers will be informed of this possibility during the telephone interview and also during the informed consent process. The Interview will be recorded and a random selection will be assessed for consistency

 

Inclusion Criteria

 

  • Chronic WAD Grade II (no neurological deficit or fracture) [37] of at least 3 months duration but less than 5 years duration
  • At least moderate pain and disability (>30% on the NDI)
  • A diagnosis of PTSD (DSM-5, APA, 2013) using the CAPS 5
  • Aged between 18 and 70 years old
  • Proficient in written English or Danish (depending on country of participation)

 

Exclusion Criteria

 

  • Known or suspected serious spinal pathology (e.g. metastatic, inflammatory or infective diseases of the spine)
  • Confirmed fracture or dislocation at the time of injury (WAD Grade IV)
  • Nerve root compromise (at least 2 of the following signs: weakness/reflex changes/sensory loss associated with the same spinal nerve)
  • Spinal surgery in the last 12 months
  • A history or current presentation of psychosis, bipolar disorder, organic brain disorder or severe depression.

 

Sample Size

 

We are interested in detecting a clinically important difference between the two interventions, given that baseline values for each group are statistically equivalent as a result of the randomisation. Based on a two-sided t-test a sample of 86 (43 per group) will provide 80% power to detect a significant difference at alpha 0.05 between the group means of 10 points on the 100 point NDI (assuming a SD of 16, based on our pilot data and data from recent trials ). Effects smaller than this are unlikely to be considered clinically worthwhile. Allowing for a 20% loss to follow up by 12 months, we would require 54 participants per treatment group.

 

Intervention

 

Randomisation

 

Participants will be randomly allocated to treatment group. The randomisation schedule will be generated by the study biostatistician. Randomisation will be by random permuted blocks of 4 to 8. Consecutively numbered, sealed, opaque envelopes will be used to conceal randomisation. Group allocation will be performed immediately following completion of baseline measures by an independent (non-blinded) research assistant . This same research assistant will arrange all appointment times with the treating practitioners and the blinded assessor for all outcome measures. Participants will be instructed not to reveal details about their treatment to the examiner in order to assist with blinding. Patients will be scheduled to receive their first treatment within one week of randomisation.

 

Intervention group – Trauma-focused Cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT)

 

A psychological intervention that targets PTSD symptoms will consist of 10 weekly 60-90 minute sessions of individually delivered trauma-focused CBT based on the Australian Guidelines for the treatment of Adults with Acute Stress Disorder and PTSD [38] (see Table 2). Session one will focus on providing psycho-education regarding the common symptoms of PTSD, maintaining factors and providing a rationale for various treatment components. Sessions two and three will continue to develop patient�s knowledge of PTSD symptoms and teach anxiety management strategies including deep breathing and progressive muscle relaxation. Cognitive restructuring which involves challenging unhelpful and irrational thoughts and beliefs will commence in session three and continue throughout treatment. Participants will start prolonged exposure in session four which will be paired with relaxation and cognitive challenging. Session six will introduce graded in-vivo exposure. Relapse prevention will also be included in the final two sessions [12]. Participants will be asked to complete a home practice over the course of their sessions which will be recorded and brought to the next session. Treatment will be delivered by registered psychologists with postgraduate clinical training and experience delivering trauma-focused CBT interventions.

 

Table 2. Overview of CBT program

Session Overview
1 Introduction and rationale
2 Relaxation training
3 Relaxation training and cognitive challenging
4 and 5 Cognitive challenging and prolonged exposure
6 Prolonged exposure and in vivo exposure
7 and 8 Prolonged exposure and in-vivo exposure
9 Relapse prevention
10 Relapse prevention and end of treatment

 

 

Control group – Supportive Therapy

 

The first session will involve education about trauma and an explanation of the nature of supportive therapy. The following sessions will include discussions of current problems and general problem-solving skills. Home practice will involve diary keeping of current problems and mood states. Supportive therapy will specifically avoid exposure, cognitive restructuring or anxiety management techniques. If the results of the trial are favourable and participants randomised to this intervention still have a PTSD diagnosis at the 12 month follow-up, they will be offered a referral to a clinical psychologist.

 

Exercise Program

 

Following the 10 week psychological therapy sessions (intervention or control), All participants will participate in the same exercise program. The 6-week exercise program will be carried out under supervision from a physiotherapist (2 sessions in each of the first four weeks; and 1 session in week 5 and week 6) and will comprise specific exercises to improve the movement and control of the neck and shoulder girdles as well as proprioceptive and co-ordination exercises (see Table 3). The exercises will be tailored by the physiotherapist for each individual participant.

 

The program begins with a clinical examination of the cervical muscles and the axio-scapular-girdle muscles and includes tests that assess ability to recruit the muscles in a coordinated manner, tests of balance, cervical kinaesthesia and eye movement control and tests of muscle endurance at low levels of maximum voluntary contraction. The specific impairments that are identified are then addressed with an exercise program that is supervised and progressed by the physiotherapist. This specific treatment program has been described in detail [15] and focuses on activating and improving the co-ordination and endurance capacity of the neck flexor, extensor and scapular muscles in specific exercises and functional tasks, and a graded program directed to the postural control system, including balance exercises, head relocation exercises and exercises for eye movement control.

 

Participants will also perform the exercises at home, once a day. A log book will be completed by participants to record compliance with the exercises. At the same time, the physiotherapist will guide the subject�s return to normal activities.

 

Physiotherapists will adhere to cognitive-behavioural principles during training and supervision of all exercises [26]. The cognitive behavioural therapy principles include the encouragement of skill acquisition by modelling, setting progressive goals, self-monitoring of progress, and positive reinforcement of progress. Self-reliance will be fostered by encouraging subjects to engage in problem-solving to deal with difficulties rather than seeking reassurance and advice, by encouraging relevant and realistic activity goals, and by encouraging self-reinforcement. Daily physical activity at home will be encouraged and monitored using a diary. Written and illustrated exercise instructions will be provided.

 

Table 3. Overview of the exercise program

Week Sessions per week Components
1 2 ������� Baseline & follow-up assessments to guide initial prescription & progression of program

������� Exercise to improve cervical and scapular muscle control, kinaesthesia & balance

������� Education and advice

������� Daily home program including exercise & graded increase of physical activities

������� CBT principles such as goal setting, reinforcement used by physiotherapists

������� Discharge session to reinforce progress and plan for continued activity
2 2
3 2
4 2
5 1
6 1

 

 

Outcome Measures

 

At the baseline assessment, personal characteristics such as age, gender, level of education, compensation status, accident date and information about symptoms of whiplash will be collected. The following outcome measures will be assessed by a blind assessor at baseline, 10 weeks, 16 weeks, 6 months and 12 months post randomisation.

 

The Neck Disability Index (NDI) will be the primary outcome measure [21]. The NDI is a valid measure and reliable measure of neck pain related disability [21] and is recommended for use by the Bone and Joint Decade Neck Pain Task Force [7] and at the recent International Whiplash Summit [11, 16].

 

Secondary outcome measures include:

 

  1. Average pain intensity over last week (0-10 scale) [39]
  2. Average pain intensity over last 24 hours (0-10 scale) [39]
  3. Patient�s global impression of recovery (-5 to +5 scale) [39]
  4. Clinician administered PTSD scale 5 (CAPS 5) [40].
  5. The PTSD Checklist (PCL-5) [41]
  6. Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21) [42]
  7. Generic measure of health status (SF-12) [43]
  8. Patient-generated measure of disability (Patient-Specific Functional Scale) [44]
  9. Physical measures (cervical range of movement, pressure pain threshold, cold pain threshold)
  10. Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) [45]
  11. Pain Self Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) [46]
  12. Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK) [47]

 

Expectations of a beneficial treatment effect will be measured with the Credibility Expectancy Questionnaire (CEQ) [48] at the first and last week of each treatment. Working alliance as reported by the client and the therapist (psych or physio) will also be measured at the first and last week of each treatment using the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI) [49].

 

Monitoring of Treatment Sites

 

Treatment sites will be located in areas easily accessible by public transport. Attempts will be made to have both the psychology and exercise sessions held at the same site. Prior to commencement of the trial, psychologists and physiotherapists at each treatment site will be provided with the appropriate therapist protocol. Psychologists will be trained to implement the CBT program and the supported therapy by senior investigators at a one day workshops. Physiotherapists will be trained by senior investigators to implement the exercise program at a one day workshop.

 

Prior to starting the trial, the different treatment provider sites and therapists will be provided with a copy of the trial and treatment protocols. Both psychological therapies will be conducted according to a procedural manual. Therapists will be required to record each session as well as complete a checklist of adherence to the protocol. A random sample of these recordings and checklists will be evaluated and ongoing supervision provided by a psychologist on the research team. Physiotherapy exercises will be based on a previous exercise trial for chronic WAD [25]. An audit of the physiotherapy sessions will be conducted twice during the intervention by a senior investigator expert in this area. A handover will occur between psychologist and physiotherapist to maintain continuity of care.

 

Adverse Events

 

Apart from the usual ethics committee based provisions for reporting of adverse effects, practitioners will be requested to report any adverse event to the Chief Investigators. Also at the 16 week follow-up, information about adverse effects of treatment will be sought from all subjects using open-ended questioning. At 6 and 12 months follow-up, data relating to the number of recurrences of neck pain, and the number of health care contacts will also be collected.

 

Statistical Analysis

 

The study biostatistician will analyse the data in a blinded manner. All analyses will be conducted on an intention to treat basis. The primary and secondary outcomes measured at 10 weeks, 16 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months will be analysed using linear mixed and logistic regression models that will include their respective baseline scores as a covariate, subjects as a random effect and treatment conditions as fixed factors. Diagnostics will be used to examine assumptions, including homogeneity of variances. Effect sizes will be calculated for all measures with an effect size of 0.2 considered small, 0.5 medium and 0.8 large. Alpha will be set at 0.05. Any effect of site (Qld or Denmark) will be evaluated by including a site-by-treatment group-by-time interaction term to the mixed models analyses. Effect modification will only be assessed for the primary outcome of NDI.

 

Funding

 

  • The trial is funded by a NHMRC Project grant 1059310.
  • The Council of the Danish Victims Fund Project grant 14-910-00013

 

Potential Significance

 

This project addresses a problem of major importance to human health. Whiplash is an enormous health burden for both Australia and all countries where there are motor vehicles. Current conservative approaches to the management of chronic WAD have been shown to be only marginally effective. One reason for this may be due to the lack of attention of current practice to the psychological status of whiplash injured patients. This study will provide a definitive evaluation of the effects of adding trauma-focused CBT to exercise for individuals with chronic WAD and PTSD.

 

This study is likely to influence the clinical management of whiplash injury and will have immediate clinical applicability. Any intervention that may improve health outcomes for individuals with chronic whiplash will have far reaching effects in both Australia and internationally. Our study will also have implications for both health and insurance policy makers in their decision making regarding treatment options and funding. A search of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal on 2/3/13 revealed no planned or completed trial that would duplicate our work.

 

Conflict of Interest Declaration

 

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

 

Role of Psychosocial Stress in Recovery from Common Whiplash

 

Abstract

 

It is widely accepted that psychosocial factors are related to illness behaviour and there is some evidence that they may influence the rate of recovery from post-traumatic disorders. The abilities of psychosocial stress, somatic symptoms, and subjectively assessed cognitive impairment to predict delayed recovery from common whiplash were investigated in a follow-up study. 78 consecutive patients referred 7.2 (SD 4.5) days after they had sustained common whiplash in car accidents were assessed for psychosocial stress, negative affectivity, personality traits, somatic complaints, and cognitive impairment by semistructured interview and by several standardised tests. On examination 6 months later 57 patients were fully recovered and 21 had persisting symptoms. The groups’ scores for the independent variables assessed at the baseline examination were compared. Stepwise regression analysis showed that psychosocial factors, negative affectivity, and personality traits were not significant in predicting the outcome. However, initial neck pain intensity, injury-related cognitive impairment, and age were significant factors predicting illness behaviour. This study, which was based on a random sample and which considered many other possible predictive factors as well as psychosocial status, does not support previous findings that psychosocial factors predict illness behaviour in post-trauma patients.

 

Dr Jimenez White Coat

Dr. Alex Jimenez’s Insight

Being involved in an automobile accident can be a traumatic experience for anyone. From physical injuries and financial problems, to emotional distress, an auto accident can place a heavy burden on those individuals who’ve experienced it, especially if the auto accident injuries begin to take a toll on the mind. Many patients visit my chiropractic office with anxiety, irrational fears, depression and PTSD after being involved in an automobile accident. Learning to trust again to receive chiropractic care can be challenging, but through careful and effective spinal adjustments and manual manipulations, our staff can provide patients with the sense of safety they need to continue treatment and achieve overall health and wellness.

 

In conclusion,�automobile accidents can cause a variety of physical injuries and conditions, such as whiplash, back pain and headaches, as well as financial issues, however, auto accident injuries and complications can also lead to emotional distress. According to evidence-based research studies, like the one above, emotional distress has been connected to chronic pain symptoms. Fortunately, researchers have conducted numerous research studies to demonstrate how mindfulness interventions, like chiropractic care, can help reduce emotional distress and improve painful symptoms. Information referenced from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). The scope of our information is limited to chiropractic as well as to spinal injuries and conditions. To discuss the subject matter, please feel free to ask Dr. Jimenez or contact us at 915-850-0900 .

 

Curated by Dr. Alex Jimenez

 

Green-Call-Now-Button-24H-150x150-2-3.png

 

Additional Topics: Back Pain

 

According to statistics, approximately 80% of people will experience symptoms of back pain at least once throughout their lifetimes. Back pain is a common complaint which can result due to a variety of injuries and/or conditions. Often times, the natural degeneration of the spine with age can cause back pain. Herniated discs occur when the soft, gel-like center of an intervertebral disc pushes through a tear in its surrounding, outer ring of cartilage, compressing and irritating the nerve roots. Disc herniations most commonly occur along the lower back, or lumbar spine, but they may also occur along the cervical spine, or neck. The impingement of the nerves found in the low back due to injury and/or an aggravated condition can lead to symptoms of sciatica.

 

blog picture of cartoon paperboy big news

 

EXTRA IMPORTANT TOPIC: Managing Workplace Stress

 

 

MORE IMPORTANT TOPICS: EXTRA EXTRA: Car Accident Injury Treatment El Paso, TX Chiropractor

 

 

Blank
References
  1. Sterling, M., G. Jull, and J. Kenardy, Physical and psychological factors maintain long-term predictive capacity post-whiplash injury. Pain, 2006. 122(1-2): p. 102-108.
  2. Carroll, L.J.P., et al., Course and Prognostic Factors for Neck Pain in the General Population: Results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. Spine, 2008. 33(4S)(Supplement): p. S75-S82.
  3. Rebbeck, T., et al., A prospective cohort study of health outcomes following whiplash associated disorders in an Australian population. Injury Prevention, 2006. 12(2): p. 93-98.
  4. Sterling, M., J. Hendrikz, and J. Kenardy, Compensation claim lodgement and health outcome developmental trajectories following whiplash injury: A prospective study. PAIN, 2010. 150(1): p. 22-28.
  5. MAYOU, R. and B. BRYANT, Psychiatry of whiplash neck injury. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 2002. 180(5): p. 441-448.
  6. Kenardy, J., et al., Adults’ adjustment to minor and moderate injuries following road traffic crashes: Wave 1 findings., in Report to MAIC QLD. 2011.
  7. MAIC, Annual Report 2009-2010. 2010: Brisbane.
  8. Connelly, L.B. and R. Supangan, The economic costs of road traffic crashes: Australia, states and territories. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2006. 38(6): p. 1087-1093.
  9. Littleton, S.M., et al., The association of compensation on longer term health status for people with musculoskeletal injuries following road traffic crashes: Emergency department inception cohort study. Injury, 2011. 42(9): p. 927-933.
  10. Schmidt, D., Whiplash koster kassen. Livtag, 2012. 1.
  11. Siegmund, G.P., et al., The Anatomy and Biomechanics of Acute and Chronic Whiplash Injury. Traffic Injury Prevention, 2009. 10(2): p. 101-112.
  12. B�rsbo, B., M. Peolsson, and B. Gerdle, The complex interplay between pain intensity, depression, anxiety and catastrophising with respect to quality of life and disability. Disability and Rehabilitation, 2009. 31(19): p. 1605-1613.
  13. Sterling, M., et al., Physical and psychological factors predict outcome following whiplash injury. Pain, 2005. 114(1-2): p. 141-148.
  14. Schmitt, M.A.M.M.T., et al., Patients with Chronic Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Relationship Between Clinical and Psychological Factors and Functional Health Status. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 2009. 88(3): p. 231-238.
  15. Sullivan, M.J.L., et al., Catastrophizing, pain, and disability in patients with soft-tissue injuries. Pain, 1998. 77(3): p. 253-260.
  16. Nederhand, M.J., et al., Predictive value of fear avoidance in developing chronic neck pain disability: consequences for clinical decision making. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2004. 85(3): p. 496-501.
  17. Bunketorp-Kall, L.S., C. Andersson, and B. Asker, The impact of subacute whiplash-associated disorders on functional self-efficacy: a cohort study. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 2007. 30(3): p. 221-226.
  18. Buitenhuis, J., et al., Relationship between posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms and the course of whiplash complaints. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 2006. 61(5): p. 681-689.
  19. Sterling, M. and J. Kenardy, The relationship between sensory and sympathetic nervous system changes and posttraumatic stress reaction following whiplash injury�a prospective study. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 2006. 60(4): p. 387-393.
  20. Sullivan, M.J.L., et al., Pain, perceived injustice and the persistence of post-traumatic stress symptoms during the course of rehabilitation for whiplash injuries. PAIN, 2009. 145(3): p. 325-331.
  21. Sterling, M., et al., The development of psychological changes following whiplash injury. Pain, 2003. 106(3): p. 481-489.
  22. O’Donnell, M.L., et al., Posttraumatic disorders following injury: an empirical and methodological review. Clinical Psychology Review, 2003. 23(4): p. 587-603.
  23. Teasell, R., et al., A research synthesis of therapeutic interventions for whiplash-associated disorder (WAD): Part 4 – noninvasive interventions for chronic WAD. Pain Research & Management, 2010. 15(5): p. 313 – 322.
  24. Stewart, M.J., et al., Randomized controlled trial of exercise for chronic whiplash-associated disorders. Pain, 2007. 128(1�2): p. 59-68.
  25. Jull, G., et al., Does the presence of sensory hypersensitivity influence outcomes of physical rehabilitation for chronic whiplash? � A preliminary RCT. Pain, 2007. 129(1�2): p. 28-34.
  26. S�derlund, A. and P. Lindberg, Cognitive behavioural components in physiotherapy management of chronic whiplash associated disorders (WAD) – a randomised group study. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice, 2001. 17(4): p. 229-238.
  27. Wicksell, R.K., et al., Can Exposure and Acceptance Strategies Improve Functioning and Life Satisfaction in People with Chronic Pain and Whiplash?Associated Disorders (WAD)? A Randomized Controlled Trial. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 2008. 37(3): p. 169-182.
  28. Ostelo, R.W., et al., Behavioural treatment for chronic low-back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2005. 1(1).
  29. BISSON, J.I., et al., Psychological treatments for chronic post-traumatic stress disorder: Systematic review and meta-analysis. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 2007. 190(2): p. 97-104.
  30. NHMRC, Australian Guidelines for the Treatment of Adults with ASD and PTSD. 2007: Canberra.
  31. Jenewein, J., et al., Mutual influence of posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms and chronic pain among injured accident survivors: A longitudinal study. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 2009. 22(6): p. 540-548.
  32. Dunne, R.L.P., J.P.F. Kenardy, and M.P.M.B.G.D.M.P.F. Sterling, A Randomized Controlled Trial of Cognitive-behavioral Therapy for the Treatment of PTSD in the Context of Chronic Whiplash. Clinical Journal of Pain November/December, 2012. 28(9): p. 755-765.
  33. Macdermid, J., et al., Measurement Properties of the Neck Disability Index: A Systematic Review. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 2009. 39(5): p. 400-C12.
  34. Arnold, D.M.M.D.M., et al., The design and interpretation of pilot trials in clinical research in critical care. Critical Care Medicine Improving Clinical Trials in the Critically Ill: Proceedings of a Roundtable Conference in Brussels, Belgium, March 2008, 2009. 37(1): p. S69-S74.
  35. MAA. Guidelines for the management of whiplash associated disorders. 2007; Available from: www.maa.nsw.gov.au.
  36. Weathers, F.W., et al. The Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5). Interview available from the National Center for PTSD. 2013; Available from: www.ptsd.va.gov.
  37. Spitzer, W., et al., Scientific Monograph of Quebec Task Force on Whiplash Associated Disorders: redefining “Whiplash” and its management. Spine, 1995. 20(8S): p. 1-73.
  38. ACPMH, Australian guidelines for the treatment of adults with acute stress disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. 2007, Melbourne, VIC: Australian Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health.
  39. Pengel, L.H.M.M., K.M.P. Refshauge, and C.G.P. Maher, Responsiveness of Pain, Disability, and Physical Impairment Outcomes in Patients With Low Back Pain. Spine, 2004. 29(8): p. 879-883.
  40. Weathers, F.W., T.M. Keane, and J.R.T. Davidson, Clinician-administered PTSD scale: A review of the first ten years of research. Depression and Anxiety, 2001. 13(3): p. 132-156.
  41. Weathers, F., et al., The PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5). Scale available from the National Center for PTSD. www.? ptsd.? va.? gov, 2013.
  42. Lovibond, S. and P. Lovibond, Manual for the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales. 2nd ed. 1995, Sydney: Psychological Foundation.
  43. Ware, J., et al., User�s manual for the SF-12v2� Health Survey with a supplement documenting SF-12� Health Survey. 2002, Lincoln, Rhode Island: QualityMetric Incorporated
  44. Westaway, M., P. Stratford, and J. Binkley, The Patient-Specific Functional Scale: Validation of Its Use in Persons With Neck Dysfunction. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 1998. 27(5): p. 331-338.
  45. Sullivan, M.J.L., S.R. Bishop, and J. Pivik, The Pain Catastrophizing Scale: Development and validation. Psychological Assessment, 1995. 7(4): p. 524-532.
  46. Nicholas, M.K., The pain self-efficacy questionnaire: Taking pain into account. European Journal of Pain, 2007. 11(2): p. 153-163.
  47. Miller, R., S. Kori, and D. Todd, The Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia. Tampa, FL. Unpublished report, 1991.
  48. Devilly, G.J. and T.D. Borkovec, Psychometric properties of the credibility/expectancy questionnaire. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 2000. 31(2): p. 73-86.
  49. Horvath, A.O. and L.S. Greenberg, Development and validation of the Working Alliance Inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1989. 36(2): p. 223-233.
Close Accordion
Effectiveness of Mindfulness on Herniated Discs & Sciatica in El Paso, TX

Effectiveness of Mindfulness on Herniated Discs & Sciatica in El Paso, TX

by | Conditions Treated, Herniated Disc, Physical Rehabilitation, Randomized Controlled Trial, Spinal Decompression Treatments, Stress, Treatments

Chronic low back pain is the second most common cause of disability in the United States. Approximately 80 percent of the population will experience back pain at least once throughout their lifetime. The most prevalent causes of chronic low back pain include: herniated discs, sciatica, injuries from lifting heavy objects or any other non-specific spine injury. However, people will often react differently to their symptoms. These differing responses are due to people’s psychological attitudes and outlooks.

 

Chronic Low Back Pain and the Mind

 

Stress has been associated with increased pain but your own personal health beliefs and coping strategies can influence your own perception of pain as well. That’s because psychological vulnerabilities can alter your brain and intensify the pain. Additionally, the pain itself can rewire the brain.�When pain first occurs, it impacts the pain-sensitivity brain circuits. When pain becomes persistent, the associated brain activity switches from the pain circuits to circuits that process emotions. That’s why it’s believed that stress, anxiety and depression can cause as well as worsen chronic low back pain.

 

Managing the Scourge of Chronic Low Back Pain

 

Fortunately, several stress management methods and techniques can help improve chronic low back pain. Mindfulness is the most common treatment with the best supporting evidence towards improving and managing chronic pain.�A recent study demonstrated that mindfulness-based stress reduction, or MBSR, including mindfulness meditation and other mindfulness interventions, can help reduce back pain and enhance psychological control by increasing brain blood flow to the frontal lobe. Practicing mindfulness involves activating a brain relaxation pathway by intentionally ignoring mental “chatter” and focusing on your breathing.�Cognitive behavioral therapy, or CBT can also be helpful for chronic low back pain. Cognitive behavioral therapy can prevent an acute injury from progressing to chronic low back pain. Hypnosis may also help relieve chronic low back pain. However, CBT and hypnosis have weaker evidence to support their effectiveness on back pain.

 

Mind Over Matter

 

So while it may seem that chronic low back pain is all “in your head”, research studies have demonstrated that stress can influence painful symptoms.��Mind� includes �matter,� especially when you consider that the physical �matter� of the brain plays a major role in mindset changes. This is especially true when it comes to the brain-based changes related to low back pain. The purpose of the article below is to demonstrate the effectiveness of mindfulness meditation on chronic low back pain.

 

Effectiveness of Mindfulness Meditation on Pain and Quality of Life of Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain

 

Abstract

 

  • Background and aim: Recovery of patients with chronic low back pain (LBP) is depended on several physical and psychological factors. Therefore, the authors aimed to examine the efficacy of mindfulness based stress reduction (MBSR) as a mind-body intervention on quality of life and pain severity of female patients with nonspecific chronic LBP (NSCLBP).
  • Methods: Eighty-eight patients diagnosed as NSCLBP by physician and randomly assigned to experimental (MBSR+ usual medical care) and the control group (usual medical care only). The subjects assessed in 3 times frames; before, after and 4 weeks after intervention by Mac Gil pain and standard brief quality of life scales. Data obtained from the final sample analyzed by ANCOVA using SPSS software.
  • Results: The findings showed MBSR was effective in reduction of pain severity and the patients who practiced 8 sessions meditation reported significantly lower pain than patients who only received usual medical care. There was a significant effect of the between subject factor group (F [1, 45] = 16.45, P < 0.001) and (F [1, 45] = 21.51, P < 0.001) for physical quality of life and (F [1, 45] = 13.80, P < 0.001) and (F [1, 45] = 25.07, P < 0.001) mental quality of life respectively.
  • Conclusion: MBSR as a mind-body therapy including body scan, sitting and walking meditation was effective intervention on reduction of pain severity and improvement of physical and mental quality of life of female patients with NSCLBP.
  • Keywords: Chronic low back pain, mindfulness based stress reduction, pain, quality of life, SF-12

 

Introduction

 

In nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) the pain is not related to conditions such as fractures, spondylitis, direct trauma, or neoplastic, infectious, vascular, metabolic, or endocrine-related although it is a cause of limitation in daily activities due to actual pain or fear of pain.[1] Unfortunately, the majority of LBP patients (80�90%) suffers from nonspecific LBP which leads to considerable pain-related disability and limitation in daily activities.[1,2] Chronic LBP is not only prevalent, but is also a source of great physical disability, role impairment, and diminished psychological well-being and quality of life.[1]

 

Prior to the current accepted biopsychosocial model, the biomedical model dominated all illness conceptualizations for almost 300 years and still dominates in the popular imagination. First proposed by Engel (1977) the biopsychosocial model acknowledges biological processes but also highlights the importance of experiential and psychological factors in pain. The famous gate control theory of pain[3] also proposed that the brain plays a dynamic role in pain perception as opposed to being a passive recipient of pain signals. They suggested psychological factors can inhibit or enhance sensory flow of pain signals and thus influence the way brain ultimately responds to painful stimulation.[4] If mind processes can change the way the brain processes pain then this holds tremendous potential for psychological intervention to produce reduced pain signals from the brain.

 

Kabat-Zinn’s et al. (1986) described the process of pain reduction in his paper on mindfulness and meditation. The process of pain reduction occurred by �an attitude of detached observation toward a sensation when it becomes prominent in the field of awareness and to observe with similar detachment the accompanying but independent cognitive processes which lead to evaluation and labeling of the sensation as painful, as hurt.� Thus, by �uncoupling� the physical sensation, from the emotional and cognitive experience of pain, the patient is able to reduce the pain.[5] The patients� descriptions of distraction from pain, identifying maladaptive coping strategies toward pain and heightened awareness of pain sensation leading to behavioral changes are examples of how pain is unassociated with emotion, cognition, and sensation [Figure 1]. Therefore recently these theories attracted several researchers who are working on pain.

 

Figure 1 Consort Diagram

Figure 1: Consort diagram.

 

Mindfulness meditation has roots in Buddhist Vipassana philosophy and practice and has been independently adopted within clinical psychology in Western societies.[6,7,8,9] Recently in Netherlands Veehof et al. conducted a systematic review of controlled and noncontrolled studies on effectiveness of acceptance-based interventions such as mindfulness-based stress reduction program, acceptance and commitment therapy for chronic pain. Primary outcomes measured were pain intensity and depression. Secondary outcomes measured were anxiety, physical well-being and quality of life.[10] Twenty-two studies randomized controlled studies clinical controlled studies without randomization and noncontrolled studies were included totaling 1235 patients with chronic pain. An effect size on pain of (0.37) was found in the controlled studies. The effect on depression was (0.32). The authors concluded that ACT and mindfulness interventions had similar effects to other cognitive-behavioral therapy interventions and that these types of interventions may be a useful alternative or adjunct to current therapies. Chiesa and Serretti also conducted another systematic review on 10 mindfulness interventions.[11] The main findings were that these interventions produced small nonspecific effects in terms of reducing chronic pain and symptoms of depression. When compared to active control groups (support and education) no additional significant effects were noted.

 

In summary, there is a need for further studies into the specific effects of mindfulness studies on chronic pain. Regarding as the researcher knowledge efficacy of mindfulness has not been explored on quality of life of chronic pain patients in Iran. The authors aimed to examine the impact of mindfulness based stress reduction (MBSR) protocol designed for pain management on quality of life and pain of a homogeneous sample of females with nonspecific chronic LBP (NSCLBP) in comparison of the usual medical care group.

 

Methods

 

Sampling

 

Out of initial female samples aged 30�45 (n = 155) who diagnosed as chronic NSLBP by physicians in physiotherapy centers of Ardebil-Iran at least 6 months before. Only 88 met inclusion criteria and gave consent to participate in the research program. Patients were randomly assigned in small groups to receive MBSR plus medical usual care (experimental group) and medical usual care (control group). Some patients dropped during and after the treatment. The final sample of the study comprised of 48 females.

 

Inclusion Criteria

 

  • Age 30�45 years
  • Being under medical treatments like physiotherapy and medicine
  • Medical problem-history of NSCLBP and persisting pain for at least 6 months
  • Language – Persian
  • Gender – female
  • Qualification – educated at least up to high school
  • Consent and willingness to alternative and complementary therapies for pain management.

 

Exclusion Criteria

 

  • History of spine surgery
  • Combination with other chronic disease
  • Psychotherapy in the last 2 years excluded
  • Unavailability in next 3 months.

 

The proposal of study approved by the scientific committee of �Panjab University,� psychology department and all patients signed consent to participate in the present study. The study approved in India (in the university which researcher done her PhD), but conducted in Iran because researcher is from Iran originally and there was language and culture difference problem. Approval from Institutional Ethics Committee of physiotherapy center of Ardebil was obtained in Iran also to carry out the research.

 

Design

 

The study made use of the pre-post quasi time series experimental design to assess the efficacy of MBSR in 3 times frames (before-after-4 weeks after the program). A MBSR program administered one session per week for explaining techniques, practice, and feedback and share their experience for 8 weeks beside 30�45 min� daily home practice [Table 1]. The intervention was conducted in three groups included 7�9 participants in each group. The process of framing the program was based on the quid lines provided by Kabat-Zinn, Morone (2008a, 2008b and 2007)[6,12,13,14] and some adaptation done for the patients involved in the study. The control group was not offered any type of intervention in the research project. Consequently, they underwent the normal routines in healthcare including physiotherapy and medicine.

 

Table 1 Content of MBSR Sessions

Table 1: Content of MBSR sessions.

 

Intervention

 

The sessions conducted in a private physiatrist clinic near to physiotherapy centers. Sessions took 8 weeks, and each session lasted for 90 min. Meditation transformed the patients� awareness through the techniques of breathing and mindfulness. The intervention was conducted in small groups included 7�9 participants in each group. Table 1 for details of session’s content which prepared according books and previous studies.[6,12,13,14]

 

Assessments

 

The questionnaire completed by patients before the intervention, after intervention and 4 weeks after the interventions. The receptor of physiotherapy centers conducted the assessment. The receptors trained before conducting the assessment, and they were blind for the hypothesis of the study. The following are used for assessment of participants:

 

McGill Pain Questionnaire

 

The main component of this scale consists of 15 descriptive adjectives, 11 sensory including: Throbbing, Shooting, Stabbing, Sharp, Cramping, Gnawing, Hot-burning, Aching, Heavy, Tender, Splitting, and four affective including: Tiring-exhausting, Sickening, Fearful, Punishing-cruel, which are rated by the patients according to their severity on a four point scale (0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe), yielding three scores. The sensory and affective scores are calculated by adding sensory and affective item values separately, and the total score is the sum of the two above-mentioned scores. In this study, we just used pain rating index with total scores. Adelmanesh et al.,[15] translated and validated Iran version of this questionnaire.

 

Quality of Life (SF-12)

 

The quality of life assessed by the validated SF-12 Health Survey.[16] It was developed as a shorter, quicker-to-complete alternative to the SF-36v2 Health Survey and measures the same eight health constructs. The constructs are: Physical functioning; role physical; bodily pain; general health; vitality; social functioning; role emotional; and mental health. Items have five response choices (for example: All of the time, most of the time, some of the time, a little of the time, none of the time), apart from two questions for which there are three response choices (for the physical functioning domain). Four items are reverse scored. Summed raw scores in the eight domains are transformed to convert the lowest possible score to zero and the highest possible score to 100. Higher scores represent better health and well-being. The standard form SF-12 uses a time frame of the past 4 weeks.[16]

 

The Iranian version of SF-12 in Montazeri et al. (2011) study showed satisfactory internal consistency for both summary measures, that are the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and the Mental Component Summary (MCS); Cronbach’s ? for PCS-12 and MCS-12 was 0.73 and 0.72, respectively. The known – group comparison showed that the SF-12 discriminated well between men and women and those who differed in age and educational status (P < 0.001) 2.5.[17]

 

Statistical Analysis

 

The SPSS 20 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp) was used to analysis of data. For descriptive analysis mean, standard deviation (SD) used. For performing ANCOVA, the pretest scores were used as covariates.

 

Results

 

The mean age was 40.3, SD = 8.2. 45% of females were working and the rest were a house wife. 38% had two children, 55% one child and the rest did have children. All were married and from middle-income families. 9.8% of patients reported very low physical quality of life, and the rest were low (54.8%) and moderate (36.4%). This was 12.4%, 40% and 47.6% very low, low and medium levels of mental quality of life in patients participated in our study (n = 48). The mean and SD of patients in MBSR and control group showed a decrease in pain and increase in mental and physical quality of life [Table 2].

 

Table 2 Mean and SD of Patients

Table 2: Mean and SD of patients in pain, mental and physical quality of life in baseline, after intervention and 4 weeks after intervention.

 

Comparative Results

 

Pain. The results indicated that after adjusting for pretest scores, there was a significant effect of the between subject factor group (F [1, 45] =110.4, P < 0.001) and (F [1, 45] =115.8, P < 0.001). Adjusted post-test scores suggest that the intervention had an effect on increasing the pain scores of the NSCLBP patients who received the MBSR as compared to those who were in the control group and did not receive any mind-body therapy [Table 3].

 

Table 3 The Result of Comparison of Pain and Quality of Life

Table 3: The result of comparison of pain and quality of life of MBSR and control group after intervention (time 1) and 4 weeks after intervention (time 2).

 

Quality of life. The results shows that after adjusting for pretest scores, there was a significant effect of the between subject factor group (F [1, 45] =16.45, P < 0.001) and (F [1, 45] =21.51, P < 0.001). Adjusted post-test scores suggest that the intervention had an effect on increasing the physical quality of life scores of the NSCLBP patients who received the MBSR as compared to those who were in the control group and did not receive any mind-body therapy [Table 3].

 

The results also showed that after adjusting for pretest scores, there was a significant effect of the between subject factor group (F [1, 45] =13.80, P < 0.001) and (F [1, 45] =25.07, P < 0.001). Adjusted post-test scores suggest that the intervention had an effect on increasing the mental quality of life scores of the NSCLBP patients who received the MBSR as compared to those who were in the control group and did not receive any psychological therapy [Table 3].

 

Dr Jimenez White Coat

Dr. Alex Jimenez’s Insight

Mindfulness is the psychological process which involves�activating a brain relaxation pathway by intentionally ignoring mental “chatter”, bringing one’s attention to experiences occurring in the present moment and focusing on your breathing. Mindfulness can commonly be achieved through the practice of meditation and stress management methods and techniques. According to research studies, mindfulness is an effective treatment option which can help decrease chronic low back pain. Researchers have previously compared mindfulness-based stress reduction, or MBSR, with cognitive behavioral therapy to determine whether these mindfulness interventions could improve chronic low back pain. The following article was also conducted to determine if mindfulness meditation is an effective treatment option for chronic low back pain. The results of both research studies were promising, demonstrating that mindfulness can be more effective for chronic low back pain than traditional treatment options as well as the use of drugs and/or medication.

 

Discussion

 

The results showed that the experimental group who were subjected to the MBSR showed a significant improvement in their overall pain severity, physical and mental quality of life scores due to the training received as compared to the control group who received only usual medical care. The program reduced pain perception and enhanced both physical and mental quality of life and impacted on the experimental group clearly in comparison of the usual medical care. Baranoff et al., 2013,[18] Nykl�cek and Kuijpers, 2008,[19] and Morone (2) et al., 2008[20] reported the same results.

 

Kabat-Zinn et al. believed the process of pain reduction occurred by �uncoupling� the physical sensation, from the emotional and cognitive experience of pain, the patient is able to reduce the pain.[21] In the current study, the participants uncoupled the different components of the experience of pain. Breathing exercise distract their mind from pain to breathing and mindful living made them aware about maladaptive coping strategies.

 

In the first session, information given about the fundamentals of mindfulness, describing the mindfulness supporting attitudes included being nonjudgmental toward thought, emotions or sensations as they arise, patience, nonstriving, compassion, acceptance and curiosity gave them a wisdom and believe that they are suffering from painful thoughts more than the pain itself.

 

Furthermore, during body scan practice they learned to see their real body conditions, as it truly was, without trying to change the reality. Accepting their chronic illness condition helped them see the other possible abilities in their social and emotional roles. In fact the body scan practice helped them change the relationship with their body and pain. Through direct experience in body scan, one realizes the interconnection between the state of the mind and the body, and thereby increases patients� self-control over their life. Mindful living techniques also improved their quality of life by teaching them to pay more attention to their daily life necessities, which led to the experience of subtle positive emotions, like peace and joy, self-esteem and confidence. Furthermore, they appreciated positive things. Once they learned to see the persistent pain objectively and observe other sensations in their body, they applied the same principles through mindful living techniques in their everyday life. As a result, they learned how to manage their health and began to engage in their duties mindfully.

 

A number of research studies such as Plews-Ogan et al.,[22] Grossman et al.,[23] and Sephton et al., (2007)[24] showed effectiveness of mindfulness meditation program on quality of life of patients with chronic pain conditions.

 

Conclusion

 

All together the result of this study and previous studies highlighted the effectiveness of complementary and alternative treatment for patients with chronic LBP. Regarding the considerable role of quality of life in professional and personal life designing the effective psychotherapies especially for enhancement of quality of life of patients with chronic LBP strongly suggested by the authors.

 

This study involved with several limitations such as ununiformed usual care received by patients. The provided physiotherapy sessions or methods and medicine prescribed by different physicians in slightly different manner. Although some patients commonly dose not completed physiotherapy sessions. The sample size was small and it was only limited to three centers. This is suggested for future researchers to conduct study with considering physiologic variables such as MRI, NMR and neurologic signals to test the efficacy of MBSR to decrease pain sufferer.

 

In conclusion, more evidence-based larger scale researches with longer-term follow-up need to be done to increase the therapeutic weight and value of MBSR as a part of complementary alternative medicine being preventive and rehabilitation method among CLBP patients.

 

Acknowledgement

 

We are thankful from patients who were corporate with us. Dr. Afzalifard and staff of physiotherapy centers of Ardebil.

 

Footnotes

 

  • Source of support: Nil.
  • Conflict of interest: None declared.

 

In conclusion,�mindfulness�is the most prevalent treatment with the best supporting evidence towards improving and managing chronic low back pain. Mindfulness interventions, such as mindfulness-based stress reduction and cognitive behavioral therapy, have demonstrated to be effective for chronic low back pain. Furthermore, mindfulness meditation was also demonstrated to effectively help improve as well as manage chronic low back pain caused by stress. However, further research studies are still required to determine a solid outcome measure for mindfulness interventions and chronic pain. Information referenced from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). The scope of our information is limited to chiropractic as well as to spinal injuries and conditions. To discuss the subject matter, please feel free to ask Dr. Jimenez or contact us at 915-850-0900 .

 

Curated by Dr. Alex Jimenez

 

Green-Call-Now-Button-24H-150x150-2-3.png

 

Additional Topics: Back Pain

 

According to statistics, approximately 80% of people will experience symptoms of back pain at least once throughout their lifetimes. Back pain is a common complaint which can result due to a variety of injuries and/or conditions. Often times, the natural degeneration of the spine with age can cause back pain. Herniated discs occur when the soft, gel-like center of an intervertebral disc pushes through a tear in its surrounding, outer ring of cartilage, compressing and irritating the nerve roots. Disc herniations most commonly occur along the lower back, or lumbar spine, but they may also occur along the cervical spine, or neck. The impingement of the nerves found in the low back due to injury and/or an aggravated condition can lead to symptoms of sciatica.

 

blog picture of cartoon paperboy big news

 

EXTRA IMPORTANT TOPIC: Managing Workplace Stress

 

 

MORE IMPORTANT TOPICS: EXTRA EXTRA: Choosing Chiropractic? | Familia Dominguez | Patients | El Paso, TX Chiropractor

 

Blank
References
1.�Waddell G. London, England: Churchill Livingstone; 1998. The Back Pain Revolution.
2.�Kovacs FM, Abraira V, Zamora J, Fern�ndez C. Spanish Back Pain Research Network. The transition from acute to subacute and chronic low back pain: A study based on determinants of quality of life and prediction of chronic disability.�Spine (Phila Pa 1976)�2005;30:1786�92.�[PubMed]
3.�Melzack R, Wall PD. Pain mechanisms: A new theory.�Science.�1965;150:971�9.�[PubMed]
4.�Beverly ET. USA: The Guilford Press; 2010. Cognitive Therapy for Chronic Pain: A Step-by-Step Guide.
5.�Kabat-Zinn J, Lipworth L, Burney R, Sellers W. Four-Year Follow-up of a meditation-based program for the self-regulation of chronic pain: Treatment outcomes and compliance.�Clin J Pain.�1986;2:159�73.
6.�Wetherell JL, Afari N, Rutledge T, Sorrell JT, Stoddard JA, Petkus AJ, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of acceptance and commitment therapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy for chronic pain.�Pain.�2011;152:2098�107.�[PubMed]
7.�Baer RA. Mindfulness training as a clinical intervention: A conceptual and empirical review.�Clin Psychol Sci Pract.�2003;10:125�43.
8.�Kabat-Zinn J. An outpatient program in behavioral medicine for chronic pain patients based on the practice of mindfulness meditation: Theoretical considerations and preliminary results.�Gen Hosp Psychiatry.�1982;4:33�47.�[PubMed]
9.�Glombiewski JA, Hartwich-Tersek J, Rief W. Two psychological interventions are effective in severely disabled, chronic back pain patients: A randomised controlled trial.�Int J Behav Med.�2010;17:97�107.[PubMed]
10.�Veehof MM, Oskam MJ, Schreurs KM, Bohlmeijer ET. Acceptance-based interventions for the treatment of chronic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.�Pain.�2011;152:533�42.�[PubMed]
11.�Chiesa A, Serretti A. Mindfulness-based interventions for chronic pain: A systematic review of the evidence.�J Altern Complement Med.�2011;17:83�93.�[PubMed]
12.�Morone NE, Greco CM, Weiner DK. Mindfulness meditation for the treatment of chronic low back pain in older adults: A randomized controlled pilot study.�Pain.�2008;134:310�9.�[PMC free article][PubMed]
13.�Kabat-Zinn J. New York: Dell Publishing; 1990. Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain and Illness.
14.�Morone NE, Greco CM. Mind-body interventions for chronic pain in older adults: A structured review.�Pain Med.�2007;8:359�75.�[PubMed]
15.�Adelmanesh F, Arvantaj A, Rashki H, Ketabchi S, Montazeri A, Raissi G. Results from the translation and adaptation of the Iranian Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (I-SF-MPQ): Preliminary evidence of its reliability, construct validity and sensitivity in an Iranian pain population.�Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol.�2011;3:27.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
16.�Ware JE, Jr, Kosinski M, Turner-Bowker DM, Gandek B. Lincoln, RI: Quality Metric Incorporated; 2002. How to Score Version 2 of the SF-12� Health Survey (With a Supplement Documenting Version 1)
17.�Montazeri A, Vahdaninia M, Mousavi SJ, Omidvari S. The Iranian version of 12-item short form health survey (SF-12): A population-based validation study from Tehran, Iran.�Health Qual Life Outcomes.�2011;9:12.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
18.�Baranoff J, Hanrahan SJ, Kapur D, Connor JP. Acceptance as a process variable in relation to catastrophizing in multidisciplinary pain treatment.�Eur J Pain.�2013;17:101�10.�[PubMed]
19.�Nykl�cek I, Kuijpers KF. Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction intervention on psychological well-being and quality of life: Is increased mindfulness indeed the mechanism?�Ann Behav Med.�2008;35:331�40.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
20.�Morone NE, Lynch CS, Greco CM, Tindle HA, Weiner DK. �I felt like a new person.� the effects of mindfulness meditation on older adults with chronic pain: Qualitative narrative analysis of diary entries.�J Pain.�2008;9:8 41�8.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
21.�Kabat-Zinn J, Lipworth L, Burney R. The clinical use of mindfulness meditation for the self-regulation of chronic pain.�J Behav Med.�1985;8:163�90.�[PubMed]
22.�Plews-Ogan M, Owens JE, Goodman M, Wolfe P, Schorling J. A pilot study evaluating mindfulness-based stress reduction and massage for the management of chronic pain.�J Gen Intern Med.�2005;20:1136�8.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
23.�Grossman P, Niemann L, Schmidt S, Walach H. Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits. A meta-analysis.�J Psychosom Res.�2004;57:35�43.�[PubMed]
24.�Sephton SE, Salmon P, Weissbecker I, Ulmer C, Floyd A, Hoover K, et al. Mindfulness meditation alleviates depressive symptoms in women with fibromyalgia: Results of a randomized clinical trial.�Arthritis Rheum.�2007;57:77�85.�[PubMed]
Close Accordion
Effects of Stress Management Treatment for Low Back Pain in El Paso, TX

Effects of Stress Management Treatment for Low Back Pain in El Paso, TX

by | Chiropractic, Physical Rehabilitation, Randomized Controlled Trial, Stress, Treatments

Chiropractic care is a well-known alternative treatment option commonly used for a variety of injuries and/or conditions, including low back pain and sciatica. Of course, not all pain is physical nor does it always have a physical cause. Stress, anxiety and depression affects millions of people each year. While many patients require prescription drug therapy to treat their mental health issues, others may be able to control and treat they symptoms with a holistic approach. Chiropractic care is an effective stress management treatment which can help reduce symptoms associated with stress, such as low back pain and sciatica.

 

How Does Stress Affect the Body?

 

There are 3 major categories of stress: bodily, environmental and emotional.

 

  • Bodily stress: Caused by lack of sleep, disease, trauma or injury, and an improper nutrition.
  • Environmental stress: Caused by loud noises (sudden or sustained), pollution and world events, such as war and politics.
  • Emotional stress: Caused by a variety of life events, such as moving homes, starting a new job and regular personal interactions. In contrast to the other two categories of stress, however, people can have some control over their emotional stress. Such can depend on the individual’s own attitude.

 

Stress can affect the human body in a variety of ways, both positively and negatively, physically and emotionally. Although short-term stress can be helpful, long-term stress can cause many cumulative health issues on both the mind and body. Stress activates the “fight or flight” response, a defense mechanism triggered by the sympathetic nervous system to prepare the body for perceived danger by increasing heart rate and breathing as well as the senses, by way of instance, eyesight can become more acute. Once the stressor goes away, the central nervous system relays the message to the body and the vitals return to normal.

 

In several instances, the central nervous system can fail to relay the signal to the body when it is time to return to its relaxed state. Many people also experience persistent, recurrent stress, referred to as chronic stress. Either occurrence takes a toll on the human body. This type of stress can often lead to pain, anxiety, irritability and depression.

 

Managing Your Stress

 

Chronic stress can cause painful symptoms, such as low back pain and sciatica, which can then cause more stress. Pain generally contributes to mood issues, such as anxiety and depression, clouded thought processes, and an inability to concentrate. Individuals with chronic stress who experience painful symptoms may feel unable to perform and engage in regular activities.

 

Stress management treatment can help people improve as well as manage their chronic stress and its associated symptoms. Chiropractic care can help reduce pain and muscle tension, further decreasing stress. The central nervous system can also benefit from the effects of chiropractic treatment. The central nervous system, or CNS, helps regulate mood, as well as full-body health and wellness, meaning that a balanced central nervous system can help enhance overall well-being.

 

Benefits of Chiropractic Care

 

Chiropractic care is a holistic treatment approach, designed to return the body to the original state it needs to maintain the muscles and joints functioning properly. Chronic stress can cause muscle tension along the back, which can eventually lead to spinal misalignments. A misalignment of the spine, or a subluxation, can contribute to a variety of symptoms, including nausea and vomiting, headaches and migraines, stress and digestive issues. A chiropractor utilized spinal adjustments and manual manipulations to release pressure and decrease the inflammation around the spine to improve nerve function and allow the body to heal itself naturally. Alleviating pain can ultimately help decrease stress and enhance overall health and wellness. Chiropractic care can also include massage as well as counseling to help control stress, anxiety and depression.

 

A Holistic Care Approach

 

Most chiropractors will utilize other treatment methods and techniques, such as physical therapy, exercise, and nutrition advice, to further increase the stress management effects of chiropractic care. These lifestyle changes affect every area of your well-being. Furthermore, the purpose of the article below is to demonstrate the effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction compared to cognitive-behavioral therapy and usual care on stress with associated symptoms of chronic low back pain and sciatica.

 

Effects of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction vs Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy and Usual Care on Back Pain and Functional Limitations among Adults with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial

 

Abstract

 

Importance

 

Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) has not been rigorously evaluated for young and middle-aged adults with chronic low back pain.

 

Objective

 

To evaluate the effectiveness for chronic low back pain of MBSR versus usual care (UC) and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT).

 

Design, Setting, and Participants

 

Randomized, interviewer-blind, controlled trial in integrated healthcare system in Washington State of 342 adults aged 20�70 years with CLBP enrolled between September 2012 and April 2014 and randomly assigned to MBSR (n = 116), CBT (n = 113), or UC (n = 113).

 

Interventions

 

CBT (training to change pain-related thoughts and behaviors) and MBSR (training in mindfulness meditation and yoga) were delivered in 8 weekly 2-hour groups. UC included whatever care participants received.

 

Main Outcomes and Measures

 

Co-primary outcomes were the percentages of participants with clinically meaningful (?30%) improvement from baseline in functional limitations (modified Roland Disability Questionnaire [RDQ]; range 0 to 23) and in self-reported back pain bothersomeness (0 to 10 scale) at 26 weeks. Outcomes were also assessed at 4, 8, and 52 weeks.

 

Results

 

Among 342 randomized participants (mean age, 49 (range, 20�70); 225 (66%) women; mean duration of back pain, 7.3 years (range 3 months to 50 years), <60% attended 6 or more of the 8 sessions, 294 (86.0%) completed the study at 26 weeks and 290 (84.8%) completed the study 52weeks. In intent-to-treat analyses, at 26 weeks, the percentage of participants with clinically meaningful improvement on the RDQ was higher for MBSR (61%) and CBT (58%) than for UC (44%) (overall P = 0.04; MBSR versus UC: RR [95% CI] = 1.37 [1.06 to 1.77]; MBSR versus CBT: 0.95 [0.77 to 1.18]; CBT versus UC: 1.31 [1.01 to 1.69]. The percentage of participants with clinically meaningful improvement in pain bothersomeness was 44% in MBSR and 45% in CBT, versus 27% in UC (overall P = 0.01; MBSR versus UC: 1.64 [1.15 to 2.34]; MBSR versus CBT: 1.03 [0.78 to 1.36]; CBT versus UC: 1.69 [1.18 to 2.41]). Findings for MBSR persisted with little change at 52 weeks for both primary outcomes.

 

Conclusions and Relevance

 

Among adults with chronic low back pain, treatment with MBSR and CBT, compared with UC, resulted in greater improvement in back pain and functional limitations at 26 weeks, with no significant differences in outcomes between MBSR and CBT. These findings suggest that MBSR may be an effective treatment option for patients with chronic low back pain.

 

Introduction

 

Low back pain is a leading cause of disability in the U.S. [1]. Despite numerous treatment options and greatly increased medical care resources devoted to this problem, the functional status of persons with back pain in the U.S. has deteriorated [2, 3]. There is need for treatments with demonstrated effectiveness that are low-risk and have potential for widespread availability.

 

Psychosocial factors play important roles in pain and associated physical and psychosocial disability [4]. In fact, 4 of the 8 non-pharmacologic treatments recommended for persistent back pain include �mind-body� components [4]. One of these, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), has demonstrated effectiveness for various chronic pain conditions [5�8] and is widely recommended for patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). However, patient access to CBT is limited. Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) [9], another �mind-body� approach, focuses on increasing awareness and acceptance of moment-to-moment experiences, including physical discomfort and difficult emotions. MBSR is becoming increasingly popular and available in the U.S. Thus, if demonstrated beneficial for CLBP, MBSR could offer another psychosocial treatment option for the large number of Americans with this condition. MBSR and other mindfulness-based interventions have been found helpful for a range of conditions, including chronic pain [10�12]. However, only one large randomized clinical trial (RCT) has evaluated MBSR for CLBP [13], and that trial was limited to older adults.

 

This RCT compared MBSR with CBT and usual care (UC). We hypothesized that adults with CLBP randomized to MBSR would show greater short- and long-term improvement in back pain-related functional limitations, back pain bothersomeness, and other outcomes, as compared with those randomized to UC. We also hypothesized that MBSR would be superior to CBT because it includes yoga, which has been found effective for CLBP [14].

 

Methods

 

Study Design, Setting, and Participants

 

We previously published the Mind-Body Approaches to Pain (MAP) trial protocol [15]. The primary source of participants was Group Health (GH), a large integrated healthcare system in Washington State. Letters describing the trial and inviting participation were mailed to GH members who met the electronic medical record (EMR) inclusion/exclusion criteria, and to random samples of residents in communities served by GH. Individuals who responded to the invitations were screened and enrolled by telephone (Figure 1). Potential participants were told that they would be randomized to one of �two different widely-used pain self-management programs that have been found helpful for reducing pain and making it easier to carry out daily activities� or to continued usual care plus $50. Those assigned to MBSR or CBT were not informed of their treatment allocation until they attended the first session. We recruited participants from 6 cities in 10 separate waves.

 

Figure 1 Flow of Participants Through Trial

Figure 1: Flow of participants through trial comparing mindfulness-based stress reduction with cognitive-behavioral therapy and usual care for chronic low back pain.

 

We recruited individuals 20 to 70 years of age with non-specific low back pain persisting at least 3 months. Persons with back pain associated with a specific diagnosis (e.g., spinal stenosis), with compensation or litigation issues, who would have difficulty participating (e.g., unable to speak English, unable to attend classes at the scheduled time and location), or who rated pain bothersomeness <4 and/or pain interference with activities <3 on 0�10 scales were excluded. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were assessed using EMR data for the previous year (for GH enrollees) and screening interviews. Participants were enrolled between September 2012 and April 2014. Due to slow enrollment, after 99 participants were enrolled, we stopped excluding persons 64�70 years old, GH members without recent visits for back pain, and patients with sciatica. The trial protocol was approved by the GH Human Subjects Review Committee. All participants gave informed consent.

 

Randomization

 

Immediately after providing consent and completing the baseline assessment, participants were randomized in equal proportions to MBSR, CBT, or UC. Randomization was stratified by the baseline score (?12 versus ?13, 0�23 scale) of one of the primary outcome measures, the modified Roland Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) [16]. Participants were randomized within these strata in blocks of 3, 6, or 9. The stratified randomization sequence was generated by the study biostatistician using R statistical software [17], and the sequence was stored in the study recruitment database and concealed from study staff until randomization.

 

Interventions

 

All participants received any medical care they would normally receive. Those randomized to UC received $50 but no MBSR training or CBT as part of the study and were free to seek whatever treatment, if any, they desired.

 

The interventions were comparable in format (group), duration (2 hours/week for 8 weeks, although the MBSR program also included an optional 6-hour retreat), frequency (weekly), and number of participants per group [See reference 15 for intervention details]. Each intervention was delivered according to a manualized protocol in which all instructors were trained. Participants in both interventions were given workbooks, audio CDs, and instructions for home practice (e.g., meditation, body scan, and yoga in MBSR; relaxation and imagery in CBT). MBSR was delivered by 8 instructors with 5 to 29 years of MBSR experience. Six of the instructors had received training from the Center for Mindfulness at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. CBT was delivered by 4 licensed Ph.D.-level psychologists experienced in group and individual CBT for chronic pain. Checklists of treatment protocol components were completed by a research assistant at each session and reviewed weekly by a study investigator to ensure all treatment components were delivered. In addition, sessions were audio-recorded and a study investigator monitored instructors� adherence to the protocol in person or via audio-recording for at least one session per group.

 

MBSR was modelled closely after the original MBSR program [9], with adaptation of the 2009 MBSR instructor�s manual [18] by a senior MBSR instructor. The MBSR program does not focus specifically on a particular condition such as pain. All classes included didactic content and mindfulness practice (body scan, yoga, meditation [attention to thoughts, emotions, and sensations in the present moment without trying to change them, sitting meditation with awareness of breathing, walking meditation]). The CBT protocol included CBT techniques most commonly applied and studied for CLBP [8, 19�22]. The intervention included (1) education about chronic pain, relationships between thoughts and emotional and physical reactions, sleep hygiene, relapse prevention, and maintenance of gains; and (2) instruction and practice in changing dysfunctional thoughts, setting and working towards behavioral goals, relaxation skills (abdominal breathing, progressive muscle relaxation, guided imagery), activity pacing, and pain coping strategies. Between-session activities included reading chapters of The Pain Survival Guide [21]. Mindfulness, meditation, and yoga techniques were proscribed in CBT; methods to challenge dysfunctional thoughts were proscribed in MBSR.

 

Follow-Up

 

Trained interviewers masked to treatment group collected data by telephone at baseline (before randomization) and 4 (mid-treatment), 8 (post-treatment), 26 (primary endpoint), and 52 weeks post-randomization. Participants were compensated $20 for each interview.

 

Measures

 

Sociodemographic and back pain information was obtained at baseline (Table 1). All primary outcome measures were administered at each time-point; secondary outcomes were assessed at all time-points except 4 weeks.

 

Table 1 Baseline Characteristics of Participants

Table 1: Baseline characteristics of participants by treatment group.

 

Co�primary Outcomes

 

Back pain-related functional limitation was assessed by the RDQ [16], modified to 23 (versus the original 24) items and to ask about the past week rather than today only. Higher scores (range 0�23) indicate greater functional limitation. The original RDQ has demonstrated reliability, validity, and sensitivity to clinical change [23]. Back pain bothersomeness in the past week was measured by a 0�10 scale (0 = �not at all bothersome,� 10 = �extremely bothersome�). Our primary analyses examined the percentages of participants with clinically meaningful improvement (?30% improvement from baseline) [24] on each measure. Secondary analyses compared the adjusted mean change from baseline between groups.

 

Secondary Outcomes

 

Depressive symptoms were assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8; range, 0�24; higher scores indicate greater severity) [25]. Anxiety was measured using the 2-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-2; range, 0�6; higher scores indicate greater severity) [26]. Characteristic pain intensity was assessed as the mean of three 0�10 ratings (current back pain and worst and average back pain in the previous month; range, 0�10; higher scores indicate greater intensity) from the Graded Chronic Pain Scale [27]. The Patient Global Impression of Change scale [28] asked participants to rate their improvement in pain on a 7-point scale (�completely gone, much better, somewhat better, a little better, about the same, a little worse, and much worse�). Physical and mental general health status were assessed with the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) (0�100 scale; lower scores indicate poorer health status) [29]. Participants were also asked about their use of medications and exercise for back pain during the previous week.

 

Adverse Experiences

 

Adverse experiences were identified during intervention sessions and by follow-up interview questions about significant discomfort, pain, or harm caused by the intervention.

 

Sample Size

 

A sample size of 264 participants (88 in each group) was chosen to provide adequate power to detect meaningful differences between MBSR and CBT and UC at 26 weeks. Sample size calculations were based on the outcome of clinically meaningful improvement (?30% from baseline) on the RDQ [24]. Estimates of clinically meaningful improvement in the intervention and UC groups were based on unpublished analyses of data from our previous trial of massage for CLBP in a similar population [30]. This sample size provided adequate power for both co-primary outcomes. The planned sample size provided 90% power to detect a 25% difference between MBSR and UC in the proportion with meaningful improvement on the RDQ, and ?80% power to detect a 20% difference between MBSR and CBT, assuming 30% of UC participants and 55% of CBT participants showed meaningful improvement. For meaningful improvement in pain bothersomeness, the planned sample size provided ?80% power to detect a 21.8% difference between MBSR and UC, and a 16.7% difference between MBSR and CBT, assuming 47.5% in UC and 69.3% in CBT showed meaningful improvement.

 

Allowing for an 11% loss to follow-up, we planned to recruit 297 participants (99 per group). Because observed follow-up rates were lower than expected, an additional wave was recruited. A total of 342 participants were randomized to achieve a target sample size of 264 with complete outcome data at 26 weeks.

 

Statistical Analysis

 

Following the pre-specified analysis plan [15], differences among the three groups on each primary outcome were assessed by fitting a regression model that included outcome measures from all four time-points after baseline (4, 8, 26, and 52 weeks). A separate model was fit for each co-primary outcome (RDQ and bothersomeness). Indicators for time-point, randomization group, and the interactions between these variables were included in each model to estimate intervention effects at each time-point. Models were fit using generalized estimating equations (GEE) [31], which accounted for possible correlation within individuals. For binary primary outcomes, we used a modified Poisson regression model with a log link and robust sandwich variance estimator [32] to estimate relative risks. For continuous measures, we used linear regression models to estimate mean change from baseline. Models adjusted for age, sex, education, pain duration (<1 year versus ?1 year since experiencing a week without back pain), and the baseline score on the outcome measure. Evaluation of secondary outcomes followed a similar analytic approach, although models did not include 4-week scores because secondary outcomes were not assessed at 4 weeks.

 

We evaluated the statistical significance of intervention effects at each time-point separately. We decided a priori to consider MBSR successful only if group differences were significant at the 26-week primary endpoint. To protect against multiple comparisons, we used the Fisher protected least-significant difference approach [33], which requires that pairwise treatment comparisons are made only if the overall omnibus test is statistically significant.

 

Because our observed follow-up rates differed across intervention groups and were lower than anticipated (Figure 1), we used an imputation method for non-ignorable nonresponse as our primary analysis to account for possible non-response bias. The imputation method used a pattern mixture model framework using a 2-step GEE approach [34]. The first step estimated the GEE model previously outlined with observed outcome data adjusting for covariates, but further adjusting for patterns of non-response. We included the following missing pattern indicator variables: missing one outcome, missing one outcome and assigned CBT, missing one outcome and assigned MBSR, and missing ?2 outcomes (no further interaction with group was included because very few UC participants missed ?2 follow-up time-points). The second step estimated the GEE model previously outlined, but included imputed outcomes from step 1 for those with missing follow-up times. We adjusted the variance estimates to account for using imputed outcome measures for unobserved outcomes.

 

All analyses followed an intention-to-treat approach. Participants were included in the analysis by randomization assignment, regardless of level of intervention participation. All tests and confidence intervals were 2-sided and statistical significance was defined as a P-value ? 0.05. All analyses were performed using the statistical package R version 3.0.2 [17].

 

Results

 

Figure 1 depicts participant flow through the study. Among 1,767 individuals expressing interest in study participation and screened for eligibility, 342 were enrolled and randomized. The main reasons for exclusion were inability to attend treatment sessions, pain lasting <3 months, and minimal pain bothersomeness or interference with activities. All but 7 participants were recruited from GH. Almost 90% of participants randomized to MBSR and CBT attended at least 1 session, but only 51% in MBSR and 57% in CBT attended at least 6 sessions. Only 26% of those randomized to MBSR attended the 6-hour retreat. Overall follow-up response rates ranged from 89.2% at 4 weeks to 84.8% at 52 weeks, and were higher in the UC group.

 

At baseline, treatment groups were similar in sociodemographic and pain characteristics except for more women in UC and fewer college graduates in MBSR (Table 1). Over 75% reported at least one year since a week without back pain and most reported pain on at least 160 of the previous 180 days. The mean RDQ score (11.4) and pain bothersomeness rating (6.0) indicated moderate levels of severity. Eleven percent reported using opioids for their pain in the past week. Seventeen percent had at least moderate levels of depression (PHQ-8 scores ?10) and 18% had at least moderate levels of anxiety (GAD-2 scores ?3).

 

Co-Primary Outcomes

 

At the 26-week primary endpoint, the groups differed significantly (P = 0.04) in percent with clinically meaningful improvement on the RDQ (MBSR 61%, UC 44%, CBT 58%; Table 2a). Participants randomized to MBSR were more likely than those randomized to UC to show meaningful improvement on the RDQ (RR = 1.37; 95% CI, 1.06�1.77), but did not differ significantly from those randomized to CBT. The overall difference among groups in clinically meaningful improvement in pain bothersomeness at 26 weeks was also statistically significant (MBSR 44%, UC 27%, CBT 45%; P = 0.01). Participants randomized to MBSR were more likely to show meaningful improvement when compared with UC (RR = 1.64; 95% CI, 1.15�2.34), but not when compared with CBT (RR = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.78�1.36). The significant differences between MBSR and UC, and non-significant differences between MBSR and CBT, in percent with meaningful function and pain improvement persisted at 52 weeks, with relative risks similar to those at 26 weeks (Table 2a). CBT was superior to UC for both primary outcomes at 26, but not 52, weeks. Treatment effects were not apparent before end of treatment (8 weeks). Generally similar results were found when the primary outcomes were analyzed as continuous variables, although more differences were statistically significant at 8 weeks and the CBT group improved more than the UC group at 52 weeks (Table 2b).

 

Table 2A Co-Primary Outcomes

Table 2A: Co-primary outcomes: Percentage of participants with clinically meaningful improvement in chronic low back pain by treatment group and relative risks comparing treatment groups (Adjusted Imputed Analyses).

 

Table 2B Co-Primary Outcomes

Table 2B: Co-primary outcomes: Mean (95% CI) change in chronic low back pain by treatment group and mean (95% CI) differences between treatment groups (Adjusted Imputed Analyses).

 

Secondary Outcomes

 

Mental health outcomes (depression, anxiety, SF-12 Mental Component) differed significantly across groups at 8 and 26, but not 52, weeks (Table 3). Among these measures and time-points, participants randomized to MBSR improved more than those randomized to UC only on the depression and SF-12 Mental Component measures at 8 weeks. Participants randomized to CBT improved more than those randomized to MBSR on depression at 8 weeks and anxiety at 26 weeks, and more than the UC group at 8 and 26 weeks on all three measures.

 

Table 3 Secondary Outcomes

Table 3: Secondary outcomes by treatment group and between-group comparisons (Adjusted Imputed Analyses).

 

The groups differed significantly in improvement in characteristic pain intensity at all three time-points, with greater improvement in MBSR and CBT than in UC and no significant difference between MBSR and CBT. No overall differences in treatment effects were observed for the SF-12 Physical Component score or self-reported use of medications for back pain. Groups differed at 26 and 52 weeks in self-reported global improvement, with both the MBSR and CBT groups reporting greater improvement than the UC group, but not differing significantly from each other.

 

Adverse Experiences

 

Thirty of the 103 (29%) participants attending at least 1 MBSR session reported an adverse experience (mostly temporarily increased pain with yoga). Ten of the 100 (10%) participants who attended at least one CBT session reported an adverse experience (mostly temporarily increased pain with progressive muscle relaxation). No serious adverse events were reported.

 

Dr Jimenez White Coat

Dr. Alex Jimenez’s Insight

Stress management treatment includes a combination of stress management methods and techniques as well as lifestyle changes to help improve and manage stress and its associated symptoms. Because every person responds to stress in a wide variety of ways, treatment for stress will often vary greatly depending on the specific symptoms the individual is experiencing and according to their grade of severity. Chiropractic care is an effective stress management treatment which helps reduce chronic stress and its associated symptoms by reducing pain and muscle tension on the structures surrounding the spine. A spinal misalignment, or subluxation, can create stress and other symptoms, such as low back pain and sciatica. Furthermore, the results of the article above demonstrated that mindfulness-based stress reduction, or MBSR, is an effective stress management treatment for adults with chronic low back pain.

 

Discussion

 

Among adults with CLBP, both MBSR and CBT resulted in greater improvement in back pain and functional limitations at 26 and 52 weeks, as compared with UC. There were no meaningful differences in outcomes between MBSR and CBT. The effects were moderate in size, which has been typical of evidence-based treatments recommended for CLBP [4]. These benefits are remarkable given that only 51% of those randomized to MBSR and 57% of those randomized to CBT attended ?6 of the 8 sessions.

 

Our findings are consistent with the conclusions of a 2011 systematic review [35] that �acceptance-based� interventions such as MBSR have beneficial effects on the physical and mental health of patients with chronic pain, comparable to those of CBT. They are only partially consistent with the only other large RCT of MBSR for CLBP [13], which found that MBSR, as compared with a time- and attention-matched health education control group, provided benefits for function at post-treatment (but not at 6-month follow-up) and for average pain at 6-month follow-up (but not post-treatment). Several differences between our trial and theirs (which was limited to adults ?65 years and had a different comparison condition) could be responsible for differences in findings.

 

Although our trial lacked a condition controlling for nonspecific effects of instructor attention and group participation, CBT and MBSR have been shown to be more effective than control and active interventions for pain conditions. In addition to the trial of older adults with CLBP [14] that found MBSR to be more effective than a health education control condition, a recent systematic review of CBT for nonspecific low back pain found CBT to be more effective than guideline-based active treatments in improving pain and disability at short- and long-term follow-ups [7]. Further research is needed to identify moderators and mediators of the effects of MBSR on function and pain, evaluate benefits of MBSR beyond one year, and determine its cost-effectiveness. Research is also needed to identify reasons for session non-attendance and ways to increase attendance, and to determine the minimum number of sessions required.

 

Our finding of increased effectiveness of MBSR at 26�52 weeks relative to post-treatment for both primary outcomes contrasts with findings of our previous studies of acupuncture, massage, and yoga conducted in the same population as the current trial [30, 36, 37]. In those studies, treatment effects decreased between the end of treatment (8 to 12 weeks) and long-term follow-up (26 to 52 weeks). Long-lasting effects of CBT for CLBP have been reported [7, 38, 39]. This suggests that mind-body treatments such as MBSR and CBT may provide patients with long-lasting skills effective for managing pain.

 

There were more differences between CBT and UC than between MBSR and UC on measures of psychological distress. CBT was superior to MBSR on the depression measure at 8 weeks, but the mean difference between groups was small. Because our sample was not very distressed at baseline, further research is needed to compare MBSR to CBT in a more distressed patient population.

 

Limitations of this study must be acknowledged. Study participants were enrolled in a single healthcare system and generally highly educated. The generalizability of findings to other settings and populations is unknown. About 20% of participants randomized to MBSR and CBT were lost to follow-up. We attempted to correct for bias from missing data in our analyses by using imputation methods. Finally, the generalizability of our findings to CBT delivered in an individual rather than group format is unknown; CBT may be more effective when delivered individually [40]. Study strengths include a large sample with adequate statistical power to detect clinically meaningful effects, close matching of the MBSR and CBT interventions in format, and long-term follow-up.

 

Conclusions

 

Among adults with chronic low back pain, treatment with MBSR and CBT, compared with UC, resulted in greater improvement in back pain and functional limitations at 26 weeks, with no significant differences in outcomes between MBSR and CBT. These findings suggest that MBSR may be an effective treatment option for patients with chronic low back pain.

 

Acknowledgments

 

Funding/Support: Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Center for Complementary & Integrative Health of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01AT006226. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

 

Role of sponsor: The study funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

 

Footnotes

 

Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4914381/

 

Contributor Information

 

  • Daniel C. Cherkin, Group Health Research Institute; Departments of Health Services and Family Medicine, University of Washington.
  • Karen J. Sherman, Group Health Research Institute; Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington.
  • Benjamin H. Balderson, Group Health Research Institute, University of Washington.
  • Andrea J. Cook, Group Health Research Institute; Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington.
  • Melissa L. Anderson, Group Health Research Institute, University of Washington.
  • Rene J. Hawkes, Group Health Research Institute, University of Washington.
  • Kelly E. Hansen, Group Health Research Institute, University of Washington.
  • Judith A. Turner, Departments of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences and Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington.

 

In conclusion,�chiropractic care is recognized as an effective stress management treatment for low back pain and sciatica. Because chronic stress can cause a variety of health issues over time, improving as well as managing stress accordingly is essential towards achieving overall health and wellness. Additionally, as demonstrated in the article above comparing the effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction with cognitive-behavioral therapy and usual care for stress with associated chronic low back pain, mindfulness-based stress reduction, or MBSR, is effective as a stress management treatment. Information referenced from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). The scope of our information is limited to chiropractic as well as to spinal injuries and conditions. To discuss the subject matter, please feel free to ask Dr. Jimenez or contact us at 915-850-0900 .

 

Curated by Dr. Alex Jimenez

 

Green-Call-Now-Button-24H-150x150-2-3.png

 

Additional Topics: Back Pain

 

According to statistics, approximately 80% of people will experience symptoms of back pain at least once throughout their lifetimes. Back pain is a common complaint which can result due to a variety of injuries and/or conditions. Often times, the natural degeneration of the spine with age can cause back pain. Herniated discs occur when the soft, gel-like center of an intervertebral disc pushes through a tear in its surrounding, outer ring of cartilage, compressing and irritating the nerve roots. Disc herniations most commonly occur along the lower back, or lumbar spine, but they may also occur along the cervical spine, or neck. The impingement of the nerves found in the low back due to injury and/or an aggravated condition can lead to symptoms of sciatica.

 

blog picture of cartoon paperboy big news

 

EXTRA IMPORTANT TOPIC: Managing Workplace Stress

 

 

MORE IMPORTANT TOPICS: EXTRA EXTRA: Choosing Chiropractic? | Familia Dominguez | Patients | El Paso, TX Chiropractor

 

Blank
References
1.�US Burden of Disease Collaborators. The State of US Health, 1990�2010: Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors.�JAMA.�2013;310(6):591�606. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.138051.�[PMC free article][PubMed]�[Cross Ref]
2.�Martin BI, Deyo RA, Mirza SK, et al. Expenditures and health status among adults with back and neck problems.�JAMA.�2008;299:656�664.�A published erratum appears in�JAMA�2008;299:2630.�[PubMed]
3.�Mafi JN, McCarthy EP, Davis RB, Landon BE. Worsening trends in the management and treatment of back Pain.�JAMA Intern Med.�2013;173(17):1573�1581. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.8992.[PMC free article]�[PubMed]�[Cross Ref]
4.�Chou R, Qaseem A, Snow V, et al. Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee of the American College of Physicians; American College of Physicians; American Pain Society Low Back Pain Guidelines Panel Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society.�Ann Intern Med.�2007;147:478�491.�[PubMed]
5.�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.�[PubMed]
6.�Henschke N, Ostelo RW, van Tulder MW, et al. Behavioural treatment for chronic low-back pain.�Cochrane Database Syst Rev.�2010;7:CD002014.�[PubMed]
7.�Richmond H, Hall AM, Copsey B, Hansen Z, Williamson E, Hoxey-Thomas N, Cooper Z, Lamb SE. The effectiveness of cognitive behavioural treatment for non-specific low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.�PLoS ONE.�2015;10(8):e0134192.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
8.�Ehde DM, Dillworth TM, Turner JA. Cognitive-behavioral therapy for individuals with chronic pain: Efficacy, innovations, and directions for research.�Am Psychol.�2014;69:153�166.�[PubMed]
9.�Kabat-Zinn J.�Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness.�New York: Random House; 2005.
10.�Reinier K, Tibi L, Lipsitz JD. Do mindfulness-based interventions reduce pain intensity? A critical review of the literature.�Pain Med.�2013;14:230�242.�[PubMed]
11.�Fjorback LO, Arendt M, Ornb�l E, Fink P, Walach H. Mindfulness-based stress reduction and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.�Acta Psychiatr Scand.�2011;124:102�119.�[PubMed]
12.�Cramer H, Haller H, Lauche R, Dobos G. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for low back pain: a systematic review.�BMC Complement Altern Med.�2012;12:162.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
13.�Morone NE, Greco CM, Moore CG, Rollman BL, Lane B, Morrow LA, Glynn NW, Weiner DK. A mind-body program for older adults with chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial.�JAMA Intern Med.�In press.�[PubMed]
14.�Cramer H, Lauche R, Haller H, Dobos G. A systematic review and meta-analysis of yoga for low back pain.�Clin J Pain.�2013;29(5):450�60. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e31825e1492.�[PubMed]�[Cross Ref]
15.�Cherkin DC, Sherman KJ, Balderson BH, et al. Comparison of complementary and alternative medicine with conventional mind-body therapies for chronic back pain: protocol for the Mind-body Approaches to Pain (MAP) randomized controlled trial.�Trials.�2014;15:211. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-211.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]�[Cross Ref]
16.�Patrick DL, Deyo RA, Atlas SJ, Singer DE, Chapin A, Keller RB. Assessing health-related quality of life in patients with sciatica.�Spine (Phila Pa 1976)�1995;20:1899�1908.�[PubMed]
17.�R Core Team.�R: A language and environment for statistical computing.�Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2013.�www.R-project.org/
18.�Blacker M, Meleo-Meyer F, Kabat-Zinn J, Santorelli SF.�Stress Reduction Clinic Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) Curriculum Guide.�Worcester, MA: Center for Mindfulness in Medicine, Health Care, and Society, Division of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School; 2009.
19.�Turner JA, Romano JM. Cognitive-behavioral therapy for chronic pain. In: Loeser JD, Butler SH, Chapman CR, Turk DC, editors.�Bonica�s Management of Pain.�3rd. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2001. pp. 1751�1758.
20.�Lamb SE, Hansen Z, Lall R, et al. Back Skills Training Trial investigators: Group cognitive behavioural treatment for low-back pain in primary care: a randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis.�Lancet.�2010;375:916�923.�[PubMed]
21.�Turk DC, Winter F.�The Pain Survival Guide: How to Reclaim Your Life.�Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2005.
22.�Otis JD.�Managing Chronic Pain: A Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy Approach (Therapist Guide)�New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2007.
23.�Roland M, Fairbank J. The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire.�Spine (Phila Pa 1976)�2000;25:3115�3124.�A published erratum appears in�Spine (Phila Pa 1976)�2001;26:847.�[PubMed]
24.�Ostelo RW, Deyo RA, Stratford P, et al. Interpreting change scores for pain and functional status in low back pain: towards international consensus regarding minimal important change.�Spine (Phila Pa 1976)�2008;33:90�94.�[PubMed]
25.�Kroenke K, Strine TW, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Berry JT, Mokdad AH. The PHQ-8 as a measure of current depression in the general population.�J Affect Disord.�2009;114:163�173.�[PubMed]
26.�Skapinakis P. The 2-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale had high sensitivity and specificity for detecting GAD in primary care.�Evid Based Med.�2007;12:149.�[PubMed]
27.�Von Korff M. Assessment of Chronic Pain in Epidemiological and Health Services Research. In: Turk DC, Melzack R, editors.�Empirical Bases and New Directions in Handbook of Pain Assessment.�3rd. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2011. pp. 455�473.
28.�Guy W, National Institute of Mental Health (US). Psychopharmacology Research Branch. Early Clinical Drug Evaluation Program .�ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology.�Rockville, MD: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, National Institute of Mental Health, Psychopharmacology Research Branch, Division of Extramural Research Programs; 1976. Revised 1976.
29.�Ware J, Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity.�Med Care.�1996;34:220�233.�[PubMed]
30.�Cherkin DC, Sherman KJ, Kahn J, et al. A comparison of the effects of 2 types of massage and usual care on chronic low back pain: a randomized, controlled trial.�Ann Intern Med.�2011;155:1�9.[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
31.�Liang KY, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models.�Biometrika.�1986;73(1):13�22.
32.�Zou G. A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data.�Am J Epidemiol.�2004;159:702�706.�[PubMed]
33.�Levin J, Serlin R, Seaman M. A controlled, powerful multiple-comparison strategy for several situations.�Psychol Bull.�1994;115:153�159.
34.�Wang M, Fitzmaurice GM. A simple imputation method for longitudinal studies with non-ignorable non-responses.�Biom J.�2006;48:302�318.�[PubMed]
35.�Veehof MM, Oskam MJ, Schreurs KM, Bohlmeijer ET. Acceptance-based interventions for the treatment of chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.�Pain.�2011;152(3):533�42. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.11.002.�[PubMed]�[Cross Ref]
36.�Cherkin DC, Sherman KJ, Avins AL, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing acupuncture, simulated acupuncture, and usual care for chronic low back pain.�Arch Intern Med.�2009;169:858�866.[PMC free article]�[PubMed]
37.�Sherman KJ, Cherkin DC, Wellman RD, et al. A randomized trial comparing yoga, stretching, and a self-care book for chronic low back pain.�Arch Intern Med.�2011;171(22):2019�26. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.524.�[PMC free article]�[PubMed]�[Cross Ref]
38.�Lamb SE, Mistry D, Lall R, et al. Back Skills Training Trial Group Group cognitive behavioural interventions for low back pain in primary care: extended follow-up of the Back Skills Training Trial (ISRCTN54717854)�Pain.�2012;153(2):494�501. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2011.11.016.�[PubMed]�[Cross Ref]
39.�Von Korff M, Balderson BH, Saunders K, et al. A trial of an activating intervention for chronic back pain in primary care and physical therapy settings.�Pain.�2005;113(3):323�30.�[PubMed]
40.�Moreno S, Gili M, Magall�n R, et al. Effectiveness of group versus individual cognitive-behavioral therapy in patients with abridged somatization disorder: a randomized controlled trial.�Psychosom Med.�2013;75(6):600�608.�[PubMed]
Close Accordion