Patients might require larger reductions in pain than has previously been reported in the literature as "meaningful" for them to consider treatment successful. Patients did not expect treatment to meet their criterion for success in the interference domain, suggesting patients' success criteria and treatment expectations might differ for some domains. The finding of patient subgroups has implications for treatment matching.

No abstract

STUDY DESIGN Quasi-experimental clinical trial. OBJECTIVES This study compared outcomes from graded exercise and graded exposure activity prescriptions for patients participating in a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program for chronic low back pain. Our primary purpose was to investigate whether pain and disability outcomes differed based on treatment received (graded exercise or graded exposure). Our secondary purpose was to investigate if changes in selected psychological factors were associated with pain and disability outcomes. BACKGROUND Behavioral interventions have been advocated for decreasing pain and disability from low back pain, yet relatively few comparative studies have been reported in the literature. METHODS Consecutive sample with chronic low back pain recruited over a 16-month period from an outpatient chronic pain clinic. Patients received physical therapy supplemented with either graded exercise (n = 15) or graded exposure (n = 18) principles. Graded exercise included general therapeutic activities and was progressed with a quota-based system. Graded exposure included specific activities that were feared due to back pain and was progressed with a hierarchical exposure paradigm. Psychological measures were pain-related fear (Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire, Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, Fear of Pain Questionnaire), pain catastrophizing (Coping Strategies Questionnaire), and depressive symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory). Primary outcome measures were pain intensity (visual analog scale) and self-report of disability (modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire). RESULTS Statistically significant improvements (P<.01) were observed for pain intensity and disability at discharge. The rate of improvement did not differ based on behavioral intervention received (P>.05 for these comparisons). Overall, 50% of patients met criterion for minimally important change for pain intensity, while 30% met this criterion for disability. Change in depressive symptoms was associated with change in pain intensity, while change in pain catastrophizing was associated with change in disability. CONCLUSIONS Physical therapy supplemented with graded exercise or graded exposure resulted in equivalent clinical outcomes for pain intensity and disability. The overall treatment effects were modest in this setting. Instead of being associated with a specific behavioral intervention, reductions in pain and disability were associated with reductions in depressive symptoms and pain catastrophizing, respectively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapy, level 2b–.

Objective. This study aimed to define patient-determined success criteria for treatment of chronic spine pain across four domains: pain, fatigue, emotional distress, and interference with daily activities.Patients. Seventy chronic spine pain patients were recruited from university-affiliated pain clinics.Design. The study design was longitudinal, with pretreatment and post-treatment assessments. Post-treatment assessment occurred approximately 2 months after treatment initiation.Outcome Measures. Participants completed the Patient-Centered Outcomes Questionnaire and Follow-Up Patient-Centered Outcomes Questionnaire.Results. At pretreatment, patient requirements for success were a 58% reduction in pain, 61% reduction in fatigue, 64% reduction in distress, and 66% reduction in interference. These criteria, derived using a direct-scaling approach, are more stringent than criteria developed using other methods. However, patients adjusted their success criteria over time by becoming less stringent, and they used these less stringent criteria to make global judgments of treatment success. Using a scale comparison approach, success criteria for pain were a raw change of 17.5 points (0-100 numerical rating scale) and percent change of 25%. Other criteria were 7.5 (11%) for fatigue, 5.0 (13%) for distress, and 9.5 (12%) for interference.Conclusions. Future research should validate these success criteria, particularly for the less studied domains of fatigue, distress, and interference, and investigate how these criteria evolve over the course of different treatments.

This study supported the neuromatrix theory of pain for patients with CLBP, as cognitive-evaluative factor contributed to pain perception, and cognitive-evaluative and sensory-discriminative factors uniquely contributed to an action program in response to chronic pain. Future research will determine if a predictive model consisting of fear-avoidance beliefs and temporal summation of evoked thermal pain has predictive validity for determining clinical outcome in rehabilitation or vocational settings.