Pain education is a popular treatment approach for persistent pain that involves learning a variety of concepts about pain (ie, target concepts), which is thought to be an important part of recovery. Yet, little is known about what patients value learning about pain. A mixed-methods survey was conducted to identify pain concepts that were valued by people with persistent pain who improved after a pain science education intervention. An online survey was distributed to 123 people who were treated for persistent pain with a pain science education approach; responses of participants who self-identified as “improved” were analysed. Open-ended survey questions were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and close-ended questions were analysed for frequency of responses. Each question-type was analysed separately, before integration for complementarity. We analysed the data of 97 participants. We constructed 3 themes from the open-ended questions. Pain does not mean my body is damaged (theme 1) captured the importance of abandoning preexisting ideas that pain indicated damage. Thoughts, emotions and experiences affect pain (theme 2) captured the value of recognising multifactorial influences on pain. I can retrain my overprotective pain system (theme 3) captured the importance of conceptualising pain as a heightened protective response that could be lessened. Responses from close-ended questions confirmed that the target concepts represented by these themes are among those most valued, although divergence with the qualitative data suggests differences between patient and clinician language. These data offer patient-centred conceptualizations and language that could assist in further refining pain education interventions.

IMPORTANCEThe effects of altered neural processing, defined as altering neural networks responsible for perceptions of pain and function, on chronic pain remains unclear.OBJECTIVE To estimate the effect of a graded sensorimotor retraining intervention (RESOLVE) on pain intensity in people with chronic low back pain. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis parallel, 2-group, randomized clinical trial recruited participants with chronic (>3 months) nonspecific low back pain from primary care and community settings. A total of 276 adults were randomized (in a 1:1 ratio) to the intervention or sham procedure and attention control groups delivered by clinicians at a medical research institute in Sydney, Australia. The first participant was randomized on December 10, 2015, and the last was randomized on July 25, 2019. Follow-up was completed on February 3, 2020.INTERVENTIONS Participants randomized to the intervention group (n = 138) were asked to participate in 12 weekly clinical sessions and home training designed to educate them about and assist them with movement and physical activity while experiencing lower back pain. Participants randomized to the control group (n = 138) were asked to participate in 12 weekly clinical sessions and home training that required similar time as the intervention but did not focus on education, movement, and physical activity. The control group included sham laser and shortwave diathermy applied to the back and sham noninvasive brain stimulation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was pain intensity at 18 weeks, measured on an 11-point numerical rating scale (range, 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst pain imaginable]) for which the between-group minimum clinically important difference is 1.0 point. RESULTS Among 276 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 46 [14.3] years; 138 [50%] women), 261 (95%) completed follow-up at 18 weeks. The mean pain intensity was 5.6 at baseline and 3.1 at 18 weeks in the intervention group and 5.8 at baseline and 4.0 at 18 weeks in the control group, with an estimated between-group mean difference at 18 weeks of −1.0 point ([95% CI, −1.5 to −0.4]; P = .001), favoring the intervention group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this randomized clinical trial conducted at a single center among patients with chronic low back pain, graded sensorimotor retraining, compared with a sham procedure and attention control, significantly improved pain intensity at 18 weeks. The improvements in pain intensity were small, and further research is needed to understand the generalizability of the findings.

HighlightsReassurance is a frequently utilized yet poorly understood clinical skill.Emotional distress is an important driver of healthcare use.Diagnostic test results are not reassuring.Some attempts at reassurance can increase rather than decrease concern.Patient education is a promising way for clinicians to manage emotional distress.