Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; School of Psychology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
J Pain. 2023 Nov;24(11):2024-2039. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2023.06.011. Epub 2023 Jun 21.
Different psychological chronic pain treatments benefit some individuals more than others. Understanding the factors that are associated with treatment response-especially when those factors differ between treatments-may inform more effective patient-treatment matching. This study aimed to identify variables that moderate treatment response to 4 psychological pain interventions in a sample of adults with low back pain or chronic pain associated with multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, acquired amputation, or muscular dystrophy (N = 173). The current study presents the results from secondary exploratory analyses using data from a randomized controlled clinical trial which compared the effects of 4 sessions of cognitive therapy (CT), hypnosis focused on pain reduction (HYP), hypnosis focused on changing pain-related cognitions and beliefs (HYP-CT), and a pain education control condition (ED). The analyses tested the effects of 7 potential treatment moderators. Measures of primary (pain intensity) and secondary (pain interference, depression severity) outcome domains were administered before and after the pain treatments, and potential moderators (catastrophizing, hypnotizability, and electroencephalogram (EEG)-assessed oscillation power across five bandwidths) were assessed at pre-treatment. Moderator effects were tested fitting regression analyses to pre- to post-treatment changes in the three outcome variables. The study findings, while preliminary, support the premise that pre-treatment measures of hypnotizability and EEG brain activity predict who is more (or less) likely to respond to different psychological pain treatments. If additional research replicates the findings, it may be possible to better match patients to their more individually suitable treatment, ultimately improving pain treatment outcomes. PERSPECTIVE: Pre-treatment measures of hypnotizability and EEG-assessed brain activity predicted who was more (or less) likely to respond to different psychological pain treatments. If these findings are replicated in future studies, they could inform the development of patient-treatment matching algorithms.
不同的心理慢性疼痛治疗方法对某些个体的效果优于其他个体。了解与治疗反应相关的因素——尤其是当这些因素在不同的治疗方法之间存在差异时——可能会为更有效的患者与治疗匹配提供信息。本研究旨在确定变量,这些变量可以调节 4 种心理疼痛干预措施在患有慢性腰痛或与多发性硬化症、脊髓损伤、获得性截肢或肌肉萎缩相关的慢性疼痛的成年人样本中的治疗反应(N=173)。本研究使用一项随机对照临床试验的数据,对 4 节认知疗法(CT)、专注于减轻疼痛的催眠(HYP)、专注于改变与疼痛相关的认知和信念的催眠(HYP-CT)和疼痛教育对照组(ED)的效果进行了二次探索性分析,呈现了分析结果。分析测试了 7 种潜在治疗调节剂的效果。主要(疼痛强度)和次要(疼痛干扰、抑郁严重程度)结果领域的测量在疼痛治疗前后进行,潜在调节剂(灾难化、催眠易感性和脑电图(EEG)评估的五个带宽的振荡功率)在治疗前进行评估。通过回归分析测试了治疗前到治疗后三个结果变量变化的调节效应。虽然研究结果初步支持了以下前提,即治疗前的催眠易感性和 EEG 脑活动测量值可以预测谁更有可能(或不太可能)对不同的心理疼痛治疗方法做出反应。如果进一步的研究复制了这些发现,那么可能就有可能更好地将患者与更适合他们个体的治疗方法相匹配,从而最终改善疼痛治疗效果。观点:治疗前的催眠易感性和 EEG 评估的脑活动测量值预测了谁更有可能(或不太可能)对不同的心理疼痛治疗方法做出反应。如果这些发现在未来的研究中得到复制,它们可以为患者与治疗匹配算法的开发提供信息。