Literature DB >> 18427229

Treatment expectancy and credibility are associated with the outcome of both physical and cognitive-behavioral treatment in chronic low back pain.

Rob J E M Smeets1, Saskia Beelen, Mariëlle E J B Goossens, Erik G W Schouten, J André Knottnerus, Johan W S Vlaeyen.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Patients' initial beliefs about the success of a given pain treatment are shown to affect final treatment outcome. The Credibility/Expectancy Questionnaire (CEQ) has recently been developed as measure of treatment credibility and expectancy.
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were (1) to investigate the factor structure of the CEQ in a sample of chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients by means of a confirmatory factor analysis, (2) to examine the association between treatment credibility and expectancy and patient characteristics, and (3) to assess whether treatment expectancy and credibility are associated with the outcome of rehabilitation treatment.
METHODS: CLBP patients (n=167) were randomized to either active physical therapy (n=51), cognitive-behavioral therapy (n=57), or a combination therapy (n=59), and completed the CEQ after a careful explanation of the treatment rationale.
RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis supported the 2-factor structure (credibility/expectancy) of the CEQ. Lower credibility was associated with higher pain-related fear and lower internal control of pain, and lower expectancy with higher levels of pain-related fear and no radiating pain. Multiple linear regression analyses revealed that after controlling for age, sex, treatment center, pain-intensity at baseline, duration of disability, and irrespective of the treatment offered, expectancy was significantly associated with disability and satisfaction. Credibility was significantly associated with patient-specific symptoms and satisfaction. For global perceived effect, treatment expectancy was predictive in active physical therapy only, and treatment credibility was a significant predictor in combination therapy only. DISCUSSION: Although the associations found were low to modest, these results underscore the importance of expectancy and credibility for the outcome of different active interventions for CLBP and might contribute to the development of more effective treatments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18427229     DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e318164aa75

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin J Pain        ISSN: 0749-8047            Impact factor:   3.442


  83 in total

1.  Treatment expectations and preferences as predictors of outcome of acupuncture for chronic back pain.

Authors:  Karen J Sherman; Daniel C Cherkin; Laura Ichikawa; Andrew L Avins; Kristin Delaney; William E Barlow; Partap S Khalsa; Richard A Deyo
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-07-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 2.  How is recovery from low back pain measured? A systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Steven J Kamper; Tasha R Stanton; Christopher M Williams; Christopher G Maher; Julia M Hush
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Individual expectation: an overlooked, but pertinent, factor in the treatment of individuals experiencing musculoskeletal pain.

Authors:  Joel E Bialosky; Mark D Bishop; Joshua A Cleland
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2010-06-30

4.  Exploring expectations for upper-extremity motor treatment in people after stroke: a secondary analysis.

Authors:  Eliza M Prager; Rebecca L Birkenmeier; Catherine E Lang
Journal:  Am J Occup Ther       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug

5.  Relapse prevention in major depressive disorder: Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy versus an active control condition.

Authors:  Amanda J Shallcross; James J Gross; Pallavi D Visvanathan; Niketa Kumar; Amy Palfrey; Brett Q Ford; Sona Dimidjian; Stephen Shirk; Jill Holm-Denoma; Kari M Goode; Erica Cox; William Chaplin; Iris B Mauss
Journal:  J Consult Clin Psychol       Date:  2015-08-10

6.  Individual recovery expectations and prognosis of outcomes in non-specific low back pain: prognostic factor review.

Authors:  Jill A Hayden; Maria N Wilson; Richard D Riley; Ross Iles; Tamar Pincus; Rachel Ogilvie
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-11-25

Review 7.  [Multimodal pain therapy. Current situation].

Authors:  U Kaiser; R Sabatowski; S C Azad
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 1.107

8.  Feasibility of a cognitive strategy training intervention for people with Parkinson's disease.

Authors:  Erin R Foster; Daniel Spence; Joan Toglia
Journal:  Disabil Rehabil       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 3.033

9.  A randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of yoga with an active control on ambulatory blood pressure in individuals with prehypertension and stage 1 hypertension.

Authors:  Marshall Hagins; Andrew Rundle; Nathan S Consedine; Sat Bir S Khalsa
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2014-01-04       Impact factor: 3.738

10.  Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Affective Symptoms and Functioning in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Pilot Double-Blinded, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Timothy Y Mariano; Frederick W Burgess; Marguerite Bowker; Jason Kirschner; Mascha Van't Wout-Frank; Richard N Jones; Christopher W Halladay; Michael Stein; Benjamin D Greenberg
Journal:  Pain Med       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 3.750

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.