Joseph G Winger1, Katherine Ramos1,2,3,4,5, Sarah A Kelleher1, Tamara J Somers1, Karen E Steinhauser2,3,4,6, Laura S Porter1, Arif H Kamal4,7,8, William S Breitbart9, Francis J Keefe1. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 2. Center for the Study of Human Aging and Development, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 3. Center of Innovation to Accelerate Discovery and Practice Transformation (ADAPT) for Health Services Research and Development, Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 5. Geriatric, Research, Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 6. Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 7. Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University Health System, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 8. Duke Fuqua School of Business, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 9. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Abstract
Background: Pain from advanced cancer can greatly reduce patients' physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being. Objective: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of a behavioral pain management intervention, Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC). Design: This trial used a single-arm feasibility design. Setting/Subjects: Thirty participants with stage IV solid tumor cancer, moderate-to-severe pain, and clinically elevated distress were enrolled from a tertiary cancer center in the United States. The manualized protocol was delivered across four 45- to 60-minute videoconference sessions. Measurements: Feasibility and acceptability were assessed through accrual, session/assessment completion, intervention satisfaction, and coping skills usage. Participants completed validated measures of primary outcomes (i.e., pain severity, pain interference, and spiritual well-being) and secondary outcomes at baseline, post-intervention, and four-week follow-up. Results: Eighty-eight percent (38/43) of patients who completed screening met inclusion criteria, and 79% (30/38) consented and completed baseline assessment. Sixty-seven percent (20/30) of participants were female (mean age = 57). Most participants were White/Caucasian (77%; 23/30) or Black/African American (17%; 5/30) with at least some college education (90%; 27/30). Completion rates for intervention sessions and both post-intervention assessments were 90% (27/30), 87% (26/30), and 77% (23/30), respectively. At the post-intervention assessment, participants reported a high degree of intervention satisfaction (mean = 3.53/4.00; SD = 0.46), and 81% (21/26) reported weekly use of coping skills that they learned. Participants also showed improvement from baseline on all primary outcomes and nearly all secondary outcomes at both post-intervention assessments. Conclusions: MCPC demonstrated strong feasibility and acceptability. Findings warrant further evaluation of MCPC in a randomized controlled trial. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03207360.
Background: Pain from advanced cancer can greatly reduce patients' physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being. Objective: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of a behavioral pain management intervention, Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC). Design: This trial used a single-arm feasibility design. Setting/Subjects: Thirty participants with stage IV solid tumor cancer, moderate-to-severe pain, and clinically elevated distress were enrolled from a tertiary cancer center in the United States. The manualized protocol was delivered across four 45- to 60-minute videoconference sessions. Measurements: Feasibility and acceptability were assessed through accrual, session/assessment completion, intervention satisfaction, and coping skills usage. Participants completed validated measures of primary outcomes (i.e., pain severity, pain interference, and spiritual well-being) and secondary outcomes at baseline, post-intervention, and four-week follow-up. Results: Eighty-eight percent (38/43) of patients who completed screening met inclusion criteria, and 79% (30/38) consented and completed baseline assessment. Sixty-seven percent (20/30) of participants were female (mean age = 57). Most participants were White/Caucasian (77%; 23/30) or Black/African American (17%; 5/30) with at least some college education (90%; 27/30). Completion rates for intervention sessions and both post-intervention assessments were 90% (27/30), 87% (26/30), and 77% (23/30), respectively. At the post-intervention assessment, participants reported a high degree of intervention satisfaction (mean = 3.53/4.00; SD = 0.46), and 81% (21/26) reported weekly use of coping skills that they learned. Participants also showed improvement from baseline on all primary outcomes and nearly all secondary outcomes at both post-intervention assessments. Conclusions: MCPC demonstrated strong feasibility and acceptability. Findings warrant further evaluation of MCPC in a randomized controlled trial. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03207360.
Entities:
Keywords:
Pain Coping Skills Training; meaning in life; meaning-centered psychotherapy; pain management
Authors: Sherri Sheinfeld Gorin; Paul Krebs; Hoda Badr; Elizabeth Amy Janke; Heather S L Jim; Bonnie Spring; David C Mohr; Mark A Berendsen; Paul B Jacobsen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-01-17 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joseph G Winger; Sarah A Kelleher; Hannah M Fisher; Tamara J Somers; Gregory P Samsa Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2022-02-27 Impact factor: 5.576