Chronic pain is a pervasive condition that is complicated by economic, educational, and racial disparities. This study analyzes key factors associated with chronic pain within an understudied and underserved population. The sample is characterized by a triple disparity with respect to income, education/literacy, and racial barriers that substantially increase the vulnerability to the negative consequences of chronic pain. The study examined the pretreatment data of 290 participants enrolled in the Learning About My Pain trial, a randomized controlled comparative effectiveness trial of psychosocial interventions (B.E.T., Principal Investigator, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute Contract No. 941; clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01967342) for chronic pain. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses evaluated the relationships among sociodemographic (sex, age, race, poverty status, literacy, and education level) and psychological (depressive symptoms and pain catastrophizing) variables and pain interference, pain severity, and disability. The indirect effects of depressive symptoms and pain catastrophizing on the sociodemographic and pain variables were investigated using bootstrap resampling. Reversed mediation models were also examined. Results suggested that the experience of chronic pain within this low-income sample is better accounted for by psychological factors than sex, age, race, poverty status, literacy, and education level. Depressive symptoms and pain catastrophizing mediated the relationships between age and pain variables, whereas pain catastrophizing mediated the effects of primary literacy and poverty status. Some reversed models were equivalent to the hypothesized models, suggesting the possibility of bidirectionality. Although cross-sectional findings cannot establish causality, our results highlight the critical role psychological factors play in individuals with chronic pain and multiple health disparities.
Objectives: The goals of the study were to determine to what degree changes in pain-related cognition during cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) and pain education (EDU) represented treatment mechanisms and whether these cognitive changes worked to a larger extent to produce favorable outcomes in CBT than in EDU. Method: Reported here are secondary analyses of a randomized control trial (N = 290) comparing CBT, EDU, and treatment as usual for low-literacy, low-socioeconomic-status people with chronic pain. We excluded the treatment as usual condition from these analyses and included measures collected at a midtreatment epoch. Treatment was 10 weekly group sessions. Results: Linear mixed models revealed nonsignificant differences in pre- to mid- to posttreatment changes in pain catastrophizing and pain self-efficacy between CBT and EDU. The same was true for outcome measures. Cross-lagged analyses revealed significant relationships between pre- to midtreatment changes in catastrophizing and self-efficacy and mid- to posttreatment changes in outcomes. However, relationships between pre- to midtreatment changes in outcomes and mid- to posttreatment changes in catastrophizing and self-efficacy were also significant. Conclusions: Results suggest a complex set of mechanistic relationships. Instead of a unidirectional path from designated mechanism to designated outcome, our results suggest reciprocal influences whereby cognitive changes may beget outcome improvements and vice versa. Results also suggest that cognitive changes do not occur solely in a treatment that uses cognitive restructuring to foster such changes but may occur as a function of providing people with detailed information regarding the biopsychosocial nature of chronic pain.
Psychosocial treatments for chronic pain produce favorable outcomes. However, we still do not know precisely by what mechanisms or techniques these outcomes are wrought. In secondary analyses of a 10-week group intervention study comparing the effects of literacy-adapted cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) with literacy-adapted pain education (EDU) among patients with chronic pain, low-socioeconomic status, and low literacy, the Learning About My Pain trial, we examined whether pain catastrophizing was a mechanism specific to CBT. Participants (N = 168) completed mechanism and outcome measures weekly for the 10 weeks of group treatment. Analyses revealed that (1) pain catastrophizing was reduced similary across CBT and EDU; (2) lagged analyses indicated that previous week reductions in pain catastrophizing predicted next week reductions in pain intensity and pain interference; (3) cross-lagged analyses indicated that previous week reductions in pain intensity and interference predicted next week reductions in pain catastrophizing; and (4) the relationships between pain catastrophizing and pain intensity and interference were moderated by session progression such that these links were strong and significant in the first third of treatment, but weakened over time and became nonsignificant by the last third of treatment. Results suggest the existence of reciprocal influences whereby cognitive changes may produce outcome improvements and vice versa. At the same time, results from analyses of changes in slopes between pain catastrophizing and outcomes indicated that CBT and EDU were successful in decoupling pain catastrophizing and subsequent pain intensity and interference as treatment progressed. Results provide further insights into how psychosocial treatments for chronic pain may work.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.