A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Mindfulness Meditation, Cognitive Therapy, and Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Chronic Low Back Pain

Author:

Day Melissa A1,Ward L Charles1,Ehde Dawn M2,Thorn Beverly E3,Burns John4,Barnier Amanda56,Mattingley Jason B17,Jensen Mark P2

Affiliation:

1. School of Psychology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

2. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA

3. Department of Psychology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, USA

4. Department of Behavioral Sciences, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA

5. Department of Cognitive Science, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

6. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

7. Queensland Brain Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveThis pilot trial compared the feasibility, tolerability, acceptability, and effects of group-delivered mindfulness meditation (MM), cognitive therapy (CT), and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) for chronic low back pain (CLBP).SettingUniversity of Queensland Psychology Clinic.SubjectsParticipants were N = 69 (intent-to-treat [ITT] sample) adults with CLBP.DesignA pilot, assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial.MethodsParticipants were randomized to treatments. The primary outcome was pain interference; secondary outcomes were pain intensity, physical function, depression, and opioid medication use. The primary study end point was post-treatment; maintenance of gains was evaluated at three- and six-month follow-up.ResultsRatings of acceptability, and ratios of dropout and attendance showed that MBCT was acceptable, feasible, and well tolerated, with similar results found across conditions. For the ITT sample, large improvements in post-treatment scores for pain interference, pain intensity, physical function, and depression were found (P < 0.001), with no significant between-group differences. Analysis of the follow-up data (N = 43), however, revealed that MBCT participants improved significantly more than MM participants on pain interference, physical function, and depression. The CT group improved more than MM in physical function. The MBCT and CT groups did not differ significantly on any measures.ConclusionsThis is the first study to examine MBCT for CLBP management. The findings show that MBCT is a feasible, tolerable, acceptable, and potentially efficacious treatment option for CLBP. Further, MBCT, and possibly CT, could have sustained benefits that exceed MM on some important CLBP outcomes. A future definitive randomized controlled trial is needed to evaluate these treatments and their differences.

Funder

National Health and Medical Research Council

University of Queensland

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Clinical Neurology,General Medicine

Reference70 articles.

1. Chronic pain;Pfizer Australia;Health Rep,2011

2. Low back pain in Australian adults. Prevalence and associated disability;Walker;J Manipulative Physiol Ther,2004

3. The global burden of low back pain: Estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study;Hoy;Ann Rheum Dis,2014

4. The epidemiology of low back pain;Hoy;Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol,2010

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3