Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …
New at De Gruyter

Scandinavian Journal of Pain

Official Journal of the Scandinavian Association for the Study of Pain

Editor-in-Chief: Breivik, Harald

4 Issues per year


CiteScore 2017: 0.84

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.401
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.452

Online
ISSN
1877-8879
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Ahead of print

Does validation and alliance during the multimodal investigation affect patients’ acceptance of chronic pain? An experimental single case study

Mikael Svanberg
  • Corresponding author
  • Psychosomatic Medicine Clinic, Region of Västmanland, Karlsgatan 17 A, Västerås 722 14, Sweden
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Ann-Christin Johansson / Katja Boersma
  • Center for Health and Medical Psychology, Department of Law, Psychology and Social Work, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2018-10-30 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/sjpain-2018-0051

Abstract

Background and aims

Among chronic pain patients who are referred to participation in a multimodal rehabilitation program (MMRP), pain catastrophizing and dysfunctional pain coping is common. In many cases it may have driven the patient to a range of unsuccessful searches for biomedical explanations and pain relief. Often these efforts have left patients feeling disappointed, hopeless and misunderstood. The MMRP process can be preceded by a multimodal investigation (MMI) where an important effort is to validate the patient to create a good alliance and begin a process of change towards acceptance of the pain. However, whether the MMI has such therapeutic effect is unclear. Using a repeated single case experimental design, the purpose of this study was to investigate the therapeutic effect of MMI by studying changes in patients’ experience of validation, alliance, acceptance of pain, coping, catastrophizing, and depression before and during the MMI process.

Methods

Participants were six chronic pain patients with high levels of pain catastrophizing (>25 on the Pain Catastrophizing Scale) and risk for long term disability (>105 on the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire) who were subjected to MMI before planned MMRP. For each patient, weekly self-report measures of validation, alliance and acceptance of pain were obtained during a 5–10-weeks baseline, before the MMI started. Subsequently, these measures were also obtained during a 6–8 weeks MMI process in order to enable comparative analyses. Additionally, pain coping, depression and pain catastrophizing were measured using standardized questionnaires before and after the MMI.

Results

Irrespective of experiences of validation and alliance before MMI, all six patients felt validated and experienced a good alliance during MMI. Acceptance of pain improved only in one patient during MMI. None of the patients showed clinically relevant improvement in pain coping, depression or catastrophizing after the MMI.

Conclusions

The patients did not change their acceptance and pain coping strategies despite of good alliance and experience of validation during the MMI process. Even if the design of this study precludes generalization to chronic pain patients in general, the results suggest that MMI may not have a therapeutic effect.

Keywords: chronic pain; rehabilitation; multidisciplinary pain clinic; assessment; pain measurement

References

  • [1]

    Gatchel RJ, McGeary DD, McGeary CA, Lippe B. Interdisciplinary chronic pain management: past, present, and future. Am Psychol 2014;69:119–30.Google Scholar

  • [2]

    (SBU) Sbfmu. Metoder för behandling av långvarig smärta. En systematisk litteraturöversikt. SBU-rapport nr 177/1+2. 2006.Google Scholar

  • [3]

    (SBU) Sbfmu. En systematisk litteraturöversikt Partiell uppdatering och fördjupning av SBU-rapport nr 177/1+2; Maj 2010. SBU-rapport nr 198. 2010.Google Scholar

  • [4]

    Kamper SJ, Apeldoorn AT, Chiarotto A, Smeets RJEM, Ostelo RWJG, Guzman J, Van Tulder, MW. Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for chronic low back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;9:CD000963.Google Scholar

  • [5]

    Scascighini L, Toma V, Dober-Spielmann S, Sprott H. Multidisciplinary treatment for chronic pain: a systematic review of interventions and outcomes. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2008;47:670–8.Google Scholar

  • [6]

    Habib S, Morrissey S, Helmes E. Preparing for pain management: a pilot study to enhance engagement. J Pain 2005;6:48–54.Google Scholar

  • [7]

    Boersma K, Linton SJ. Expectancy, fear and pain in the prediction of chronic pain and disability: a prospective analysis. Eur J Pain (London, England) 2006;10:551–7.Google Scholar

  • [8]

    Eccleston C, Crombez G. Worry and chronic pain: a misdirected problem solving model. Pain 2007;132:233–6.Google Scholar

  • [9]

    De Vlieger P, Bussche EV, Eccleston C, Crombez G. Finding a solution to the problem of pain: conceptual formulation and the development of the pain solutions questionnaire (PaSol). Pain 2006;123:285–93.Google Scholar

  • [10]

    Kazdin AE. Single-case research designs: methods for clinical and applied settings. 2. ed. New York: Oxford University Press. xi, 452 p.Google Scholar

  • [11]

    Barlow DH. Single Case Experimental Designs, 2009.Google Scholar

  • [12]

    Sullivan M, Bishop S, Pivik J. The pain catastrophizing scale: development and validation. Psychol Assess 1995;7:524–32.Google Scholar

  • [13]

    Linton SJ, Boersma K. Early identification of patients at risk of developing a persistent back problem: the predictive validity of the Orebro musculoskeletal pain questionnaire. Clin J Pain 2003;19:80–6.Google Scholar

  • [14]

    Edlund SM, Wurm M, Hollandare F, Linton SJ, Fruzzetti AE, Tillfors M. Pain patients’ experiences of validation and invalidation from physicians before and after multimodal pain rehabilitation: Associations with pain, negative affectivity, and treatment outcome. Scand J Pain 2017;17:77–86.Google Scholar

  • [15]

    Horvath AO, Greenberg LS. Development and validation of the Working Alliance Inventory. J Couns Psychol 1989;36:223–33.Google Scholar

  • [16]

    McCracken LM, Vowles KE, Eccleston C. Acceptance of chronic pain: component analysis and a revised assessment method. Pain 2004;107:159–66.Google Scholar

  • [17]

    Linton SJ, Hallden K. Can we screen for problematic back pain? A screening questionnaire for predicting outcome in acute and subacute back pain. Clin J Pain 1998;14:209–15.Google Scholar

  • [18]

    Osman A, Barrios FX, Gutierrez PM, Kopper BA, Merrifield T, Grittmann L. The pain catastrophizing scale: further psychometric evaluation with adult samples. J Behav Med 2000;23:351–65.Google Scholar

  • [19]

    Tremblay I, Beaulieu Y, Bernier A, Crombez G, Laliberté S, Thibault P, Velly AM, Sullivan MJL. Pain catastrophizing scale for francophone adolescents: a preliminary validation. Pain Res Manag 2008;13:19–24.Google Scholar

  • [20]

    Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983;67:361–70.Google Scholar

  • [21]

    Lisspers J, Nygren A, Soderman E. Hospital anxiety and depression scale (HAD): some psychometric data for a Swedish sample. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1997;96:281–6.Google Scholar

  • [22]

    Johnston M, Pollard B, Hennessey P. Construct validation of the hospital anxiety and depression scale with clinical populations. J Psychosom Res 2000;48:579–84.Google Scholar

  • [23]

    Overholser J. Collaborative empiricism, guided discovery, and the socratic method: core processes for effective cognitive therapy. Clin Psychol Sci Pract 2011;18:62–6.Google Scholar

  • [24]

    Engel GL. The need for a new medical model: a challenge for biomedicine. Holistic Medicine 1989;4:37–53.Google Scholar

  • [25]

    Parker RI, Vannest K. An improved effect size for single-case research: nonoverlap of all pairs. Behav Ther 2009;40: 357–67.Google Scholar

  • [26]

    Jacobson NS, Truax P. Clinical significance: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. J Consult Clin Psychol 1991;59:12–9.Google Scholar

  • [27]

    Herrmann C. International experiences with the hospital anxiety and depression scale – a review of validation data and clinical results. J Psychosom Res 1997;42:17–41.Google Scholar

  • [28]

    Linton SJ, Nicholas MK, MacDonald S, Boersma K, Bergbom S, Maher C, Refshaugel K. The role of depression and catastrophizing in musculoskeletal pain. Eur J Pain (London, England) 2011;15:416–22.Google Scholar

  • [29]

    Svanberg M, Stalnacke BM, Enthoven P, Brodda-Jansen G, Gerdle B, Boersma K. Impact of emotional distress and pain-related fear on patients with chronic pain: subgroup analysis of patients referred to multimodal rehabilitation. J Rehabil Med 2017;49:354–61.Google Scholar

  • [30]

    Bergbom S, Boersma K, Overmeer T, Linton SJ. Relationship among pain catastrophizing, depressed mood, and outcomes across physical therapy treatments. Phys Ther 2011;91:754–64.Google Scholar

  • [31]

    Westman AE, Boersma K, Leppert J, Linton SJ. Fear-avoidance beliefs, catastrophizing, and distress: a longitudinal subgroup analysis on patients with musculoskeletal pain. Clin J Pain 2011;27:567–77.Google Scholar

  • [32]

    Boersma K, Linton SJ. Psychological processes underlying the development of a chronic pain problem: a prospective study of the relationship between profiles of psychological variables in the fear-avoidance model and disability. Clin J Pain 2006;22:160–6.Google Scholar

  • [33]

    Turner JA, Holtzman S, Mancl L. Mediators, moderators, and predictors of therapeutic change in cognitive-behavioral therapy for chronic pain. Pain 2007;127:276–86.Google Scholar

  • [34]

    Finn SE, Fischer CT, Handler L. Collaborative/therapeutic assessment: a casebook and guide. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2012.Google Scholar

  • [35]

    Ackerman SJ, Hilsenroth MJ, Baity MR, Blagys MD. Interaction of therapeutic process and alliance during psychological assessment. J Pers Assess 2000;75:82–109.Google Scholar

  • [36]

    Finn T. Information-gathering and therapeutic models of assessment: complementary paradigms. Psychol Assess 1997;9:374–85.Google Scholar

  • [37]

    Lachapelle DL, Lavoie S, Boudreau A. The meaning and process of pain acceptance. Perceptions of women living with arthritis and fibromyalgia. Pain Res Manag 2008;13:201–10.Google Scholar

  • [38]

    McCracken LM, Vowles KE. Acceptance and commitment therapy and mindfulness for chronic pain: model, process, and progress. Am Psychol 2014;69:178–87.Google Scholar

About the article

Received: 2018-03-09

Revised: 2018-08-14

Accepted: 2018-08-17

Published Online: 2018-10-30


Authors’ statements

Research funding: The research was funded by MS’ employer – Region of Västmanland.

Conflict of interest: There are no conflicts of interest.

Informed consent: The participants gave informed consent before participating.

Ethical approval: The study was approved by the Regional Ethical Board in Uppsala (D-nr 2012/305).


Citation Information: Scandinavian Journal of Pain, 20180051, ISSN (Online) 1877-8879, ISSN (Print) 1877-8860, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/sjpain-2018-0051.

Export Citation

©2018 Scandinavian Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston. All rights reserved..Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in