Self-management interventions for chronic pain - Future Medicine

92 downloads 0 Views 1MB Size Report
2School of Nursing, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 300 Prince Philip Drive, St John's, NL, A1B 3V6, Canada ... Self-management interventions (SMIs) teach the skills required for day-to-day management of chronic ..... Social workers.
REVIEW For reprint orders, please contact: [email protected]

Self-management interventions for chronic pain

Practice Points

Elizabeth G Mann1, Sandra LeFort*2 & Elizabeth G VanDenKerkhof1,3 „„ Self-management interventions (SMIs) teach the skills required for day-to-day management of chronic

pain conditions and may be based on the Stanford model, acceptance and commitment therapy, or cognitive–behavioral therapy. „„ SMIs target self-efficacy and include peer role modeling, practicing skills, feedback and support, and/or

addressing emotions. „„ SMIs delivered in group sessions include the benefit(s) of the group dynamic while being cost effective,

and online interventions can be used to reach immobile or rural groups. „„ SMIs are effective in reducing pain and improving mental health and health-related quality of life in

chronic pain groups. „„ SMIs combined with antidepressant pharmacotherapy are more effective in reducing depression than

either modality alone. „„ Individuals must accept the chronic nature of their pain before they are ready to listen to

self-management teaching. „„ Self-management teaching needs to be tailored to individual functional abilities, include regular support

and encouragement, and be consistent between clinicians. „„ Individuals encounter both barriers to, and facilitators of, self-management that need to be first assessed

and then addressed by either healthcare providers or SMIs to help individuals succeed. „„ The Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire can be a useful tool to help identify who is ready to

self-manage their pain.

SUMMARY Individuals living with chronic pain face daily challenges of managing symptoms, modifying roles and responsibilities, and coping with the negative emotional consequences of pain. Self-management interventions teach a variety of strategies to meet School of Nursing, Queen’s University, Cataraqui Building, 92 Barrie Street, Kingston, ON, K7L 3N6, Canada School of Nursing, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 300 Prince Philip Drive, St John’s, NL, A1B 3V6, Canada 3 Deptartment of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medicine, Queen’s University, Kingston General Hospital, 76 Stuart St, Kingston, ON, K7L 2V7, Canada *Author for correspondence: Tel.: +1 709 777 2232; [email protected] 1 2

10.2217/PMT.13.9 © Elizabeth G Mann, Sandra LeFort & Elizabeth G VanDenKerkhof

Pain Manage. (2013) 3(3), 211–222

part of

ISSN 1758-1869

211

Review  Mann, LeFort & VanDenKerkhof these challenges and build participants’ self-efficacy for their use. These interventions have been delivered in individual, group and online formats for a variety of different pain conditions. The evidence supports the efficacy of self-management interventions in improving pain, mental health and health-related quality of life outcomes. Acceptance of the chronic nature of their pain is a necessary step before individuals are ready to self-manage. Clinicians can play a critical role in supporting self-management through answering questions, providing advice, addressing barriers and facilitators, and encouraging self-management efforts. Chronic pain presents a worldwide challenge due to its high prevalence and cost. Recent inter­national prevalence studies suggest that 11–45% of community-dwelling individuals report chronic pain often experienced at multiple body sites [1–8]. Chronic pain is associated with psychosocial distress and physical disability [9], and multiple interventions are often needed to achieve significant pain relief [10]. When compared with other devastating conditions such as cancer, chronic pain results in significantly worse ­health-related quality of life and healthcare costs [11,12]. Chronic pain, like all chronic conditions, requires day-to-day management by the affected individual. Lorig and Holman, leaders in the field for the past three decades, have delineated the key tasks involved in the self-management of a chronic condition to enhance quality of life. These tasks include managing medical interventions such as using medication appropriately and building partnerships with their healthcare providers (HCPs); using cognitive and behavioral strategies to manage symptoms; modi­f ying family, social and work roles, and responsibilities to maintain some normalcy in life; and dealing with the emotional consequences of a chronic condition. Daily challenges will be different for each individual and may change over time, thus transferable skills such as problem solving, decision-making, resource identification and communication skills for p­artnering with HCPs are invaluable [13]. Self-management also requires the ability to appraise one’s situation and resources, and decide on a course of action [13]. This ability is called self-efficacy in social cognitive theory and can be enhanced by: practicing and mastering a task or skill; observing peers modeling the skill; receiving reinforcement feedback and support; and working on improving one’s emotional state [14]. Since self-management interventions (SMIs) target self-efficacy at least one, and most often a combination, of the above four efficacy-enhancing strategies are included. This article reviews the evidence for SMIs in chronic pain groups. SMI studies were included

212

Pain Manage. (2013) 3(3)

if: published in 2007 or more recently; participants reported pain for a minimum of 3 months; details of the intervention were included; and the inter­ventions met Lorig and Holman’s definition of self-management. An intervention was considered to meet Lorig and Holman’s definition if it: taught a pain management skill; targeted self-efficacy through one of the previously mentioned strategies; and involved participants in pain management goals [13]. All studies addressing the clinician’s role were also included. As the focus of SMIs is equipping individuals with selfefficacy and not on teaching specific exercises, a discussion of exercise approaches is a separate topic for review. Overview of SMIs „„ Intervention types

A wide variety of SMI programs are described in recent studies. Although some authors specify no basis for their intervention protocols, three models are frequently cited as being used or adapted to develop interventions (Table 1). First, the Stanford model of patient self-management aims to provide individuals with a toolkit of knowledge and skills for managing pain and the physical, social and emotional consequences. It is typically delivered in a community setting, and facilitated by a healthcare professional and community volunteer with a chronic pain condition or, more recently, by two trained lay leaders [201]. The second type of SMI, acceptance and commitment therapy, aims to help individuals change behaviors that are motivated by fear of pain to those motivated by a desire to engage in valued activities despite pain [15]. This SMI is generally delivered in a clinical setting by a clinical psychologist or an interdisciplinary team consisting of psychologists, nurses and occupational and physical therapists. Third, cognitive–behavioral therapy principles have been used to develop or supplement a pre-existing SMI. Cognitive–behavioral therapy seeks to help individuals identify the relationships between their thoughts, emotions and behaviors and encourage positive selfmanagement behaviors [202]. It is delivered in a

future science group

Self-management interventions for chronic pain 

Review

Table 1. Overview of common self-management interventions. Intervention

Common topics

Typical mode and length

Ref.

Stanford Model (includes Chronic Pain Self-Management Program, Arthritis Self-Management Program and Chronic Angina Self-Management Program)

Self-management principles/responsibilities Goal setting and action plans Pain management tools (e.g., use of medications and multiple cognitive strategies) Problem solving Physical activity and exercise Healthy eating Dealing with difficult emotions and depression Fatigue and sleep Working with your healthcare provider Principles of the pain–avoidance–suffering cycle Identifying values/valued activities, and gradually increasing exposure to value-directed behavior (instead of pain-directed behavior) Cognitive defusion (identifying and observing negative thoughts without acting on them, and distancing oneself from them) Mindfulness Accepting and being willing to engage with pain Committing to action and identifying obstacles to desired action Planning for future action and obstacles

Group sessions: ƒƒ 6 weeks with 2 h of group sessions per week (total: 12 h) Online: ƒƒ 6 weeks with 1–2 h online per week to cover all 25 sessions (total: 6–12 h) Workbook provided for group and online sessions

[201]

Acceptance and commitment therapy

Modified cognitive– behavioral therapy†

Group sessions: ƒƒ 3–4 weeks of 6.5 h per day for 5 days of each week ƒƒ 8 weeks of 1.5 h sessions per week Workbook with telephone support ± one individual session: ƒƒ 6 weeks of scheduled workbook exercises with one telephone call per week Cognitive restructuring (e.g., identifying and evaluating catastrophic Group sessions: thinking and constructing realistic alternatives) ƒƒ 5–12 weeks with 1.5–2 h sessions Identifying and restructuring pain avoidance beliefs and behaviors per week Behavioral activation (e.g., pacing and activity scheduling) Individual sessions: Understanding biopsychosocial influences of pain ƒƒ 6–25 weeks with two to goal setting 25 sessions Lifestyle changes (e.g., exercise) Online: Self-regulatory skills (e.g., progressive muscle relaxation and ƒƒ 4–8 weeks with one or more breathing exercises) modules per week Pain management skills (e.g., attention diversion and stress-coping skills) Relapse prevention strategies

[15]

[202]

Reflects cognitive–behavioural therapy as it has been modified in the current literature to include elements of self-management and self-efficacy.



clinical setting by a trained individual, typically a clinical psychologist or cognitive–behavioral therapist [202]. The details of each SMI may or may not be tailored to meet specific needs of different chronic pain groups. For example, both unmodified [16,17] and modified [18–20] acceptance and commitment therapy interventions have been tested and found to be effective in pain groups reporting high levels of pain distress, disability and/or interference. „„ Format

SMIs are delivered using various formats, settings and facilitators to reach a target pain population (Box 1). Group sessions are the most common format, and are frequently cited as a strategic decision whereby the group dynamic is used to encourage problem solving [17,21–32] and role modeling [25,33]. Hurley et al. tested a SMI in individuals with chronic knee pain that included

future science group

both educational topics similar to the Stanford model and an exercise component. Using a randomized cluster design, 418 participants were assigned to usual care, or SMIs were delivered in individual or group sessions. When all groups were compared 6 months after completing the intervention, participants receiving the SMI sessions in either format reported significantly improved physical function, health-related quality of life, pain, anxiety and self-efficacy [23]. Group sessions were less expensive to deliver [34], and there may be added benefits from group processes (e.g., social interaction), validation from other group members and the structure and ­routine of group meetings [35]. „„ Setting

Hospital and clinic locations are the most common settings for SMIs. Less formal setting options include community locations such as

www.futuremedicine.com

213

Review  Mann, LeFort & VanDenKerkhof Box 1. Overview of self-management intervention organization and delivery. Formats ƒƒ Group sessions ƒƒ Individual sessions ƒƒ Telephone calls and/or self-study toolkits ƒƒ Online website ƒƒ Combinations (e.g., initial individual session followed by telephone calls) Noncompletion & withdrawals ƒƒ Percentage in group or individual sessions ranges from 0 to 58% (average percentage reported: 21%) ƒƒ Percentage in online sessions ranges from 0 to 26% (average percentage reported: 16%) ƒƒ Percentage in self-study toolkits ranges from 30 to 54% (average percentage reported: 42%) Settings ƒƒ Hospital/clinic ƒƒ Community center ƒƒ Home (individual, online or telephone formats) Facilitators ƒƒ Clinical psychologists ƒƒ Physical and occupational therapists ƒƒ Nurses and nurse practitioners ƒƒ Physicians ƒƒ Students or others trained in cognitive–behavioural therapy ƒƒ Social workers ƒƒ Fitness instructors ƒƒ Trained community volunteers living with the targeted chronic pain condition ƒƒ Combinations of professionals or a professional teamed with a trained volunteer Participants ƒƒ Aged 8–89 years ƒƒ Pain present for a minimum of 3 months ƒƒ Unknown, moderate or high levels of daily pain-related disability, interference and/or anxiety ƒƒ Mild-to-severe pain intensity ƒƒ Pain conditions: general chronic pain, back pain, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, hemophilia, noncardiac chest and angina pain, tempromandibular joint dysfunction pain, fibromyalgia syndrome, chronic widespread pain, headaches, irritable bowel syndrome and spinal cord injury pain

seniors centers, which may improve accessibility [27,36]. Rarely, SMIs have been delivered by a facilitator in an individual’s home when limited mobility presents a significant challenge [37,38]. Telephone- and internet-based interventions have been developed and tested more recently, and allow participants to select their own setting and timing (Box 1) [16,36,39–51].

and problem-solving discussions to help individuals reach their goals [22] and role-playing scenarios (e.g., communicating with family/primary care physician) [54]. In SMIs delivered online or via telephone, facilitator roles include designing online content [55], providing feedback on discussion or journal posts [44], problem solving with an individual [39] and reviewing previously taught skills (Box 1) [56].

„„ Facilitator

SMIs are delivered by multidisciplinary HCPs or by trained lay leaders in the case of standardized interventions. Most SMIs are delivered by at least two facilitators, whose roles may differ depending on their area of expertise. In group and individual sessions, facilitator roles may include educating (e.g., differences between acute and chronic pain) [52], instructing in skills (e.g., correct low back posture) [53], leading brainstorming

214

Pain Manage. (2013) 3(3)

„„ Participants

SMIs have been tested in individuals across the lifespan living with varying conditions and levels of pain and disability. SMIs are most often delivered to adults aged 18 years or older who are able to attend sessions in community or clinical settings; however, SMIs are also commonly designed for, and offered to, groups of adults aged 50 years and older. Chronic pain of all types, back pain

future science group

Self-management interventions for chronic pain  and arthritis are the most commonly studied conditions (Box 1). Since pain occurs in a social context, partners and/or parents are often invited to attend at least one session or participate in a specially designed partner/parent inter­vention [25,56–59]. Participants were recruited from pain clinics [26,33,43,52,60–62], rehabilitation facilities [19–20,57,63], primary care [17,22,23,31,34,39,46,64–70] and community centers [21,27,28,35,53,71] representing various levels of health status and access to healthcare services. Evidence for SMIs „„ Feasibility

SMI feasibility studies have focused on acceptability and utility of new delivery modes, and measures of cost–effectiveness have been included in other SMI studies. Costs and healthcare use were included in one pragmatic randomized controlled trial [24] and one cohort study [33] with those participating in the intervention having lower pain management costs (e.g., fewer follow-up appointments). Recipients of SMIs report decreased use of analgesics [64,65,72], hospitalizations [73], visits to emergency rooms and other medical/health consultations [28,72,74,75], and overall self-reported healthcare use [19,20,76] compared with pre-SMI use or usual care group. The acceptability of group and individual selfmanagement sessions has been largely established in prior research. Current studies have focused on whether individuals perceive SMIs delivered in an online format to be useful, acceptable and satisfactory. Moderate-to-high ratings of acceptability, usefulness and satisfaction with online formats have been reported in teenagers aged 11–17 years [48,55] and adults aged 55 years or older [36]. There were only two studies where the online delivery of a SMI was either not well accepted in a small group of adults, or felt to be too labor intensive when a lot of time using a handheld device was needed to complete online journals and questions [44,51]. Generally, researchers reported lower adherence to programs with significant required time (e.g., attendance of both affected individuals and partners [58]) and ­minimal contact with peers and/or HCPs (Box 1) [16]. „„ Pain, health-related quality of life

& mental health

Pain is the most commonly measured outcome of SMIs, and is generally measured as pain intensity, pain disability and/or pain interference. In reviewed studies that included one of

future science group

Review

these pain outcomes, statistically significant immediate (e.g., measured at the end of intervention) [18,22,33,42,47,53,56,57,59–61,72,77–86] and sustained improvements (e.g., typically measured 3–12 months after the intervention ends) were reported [18,20,22,23,28,29,39,45,48,52,55,56,59,60,62,65,71, 72,74,77,81,83,85–89]. Effect sizes for reduced pain intensity and interference fall between d = 0.27 and d = 0.50 [48,55,59,74], with pain intensity ratings decreasing by 1–3 points/mm on an 11-point visual analog or numeric rating scale [39,48,87,90]. Improvements in pain were noted immediately following the intervention and in the following months and years. An improvement immediately following the intervention did not predict whether improvement would be reported in the following months and years (e.g., groups with no immediate pain improvement reported improved pain at later follow-up), which suggests multiple processes underlying these improvements. Measures of mental health are the second most common outcome of SMI research, including catastrophizing, depression and anxiety. Participants of SMIs consistently report less catastrophizing [31,41,42,47,49,51,61,64,65,76,81,82,89–91] and anxiety [16–18,23,43,49,53,57,59,62,65,82,83,92–94] than preintervention or usual care group levels immediately following the intervention. This improvement was generally sustained in the following months to years; however, unlike pain there were no delayed gains in either catastro­phizing or anxiety. This supports the work of Curran and colleagues who identified post-treatment improvement as the best indicator of long-term improvements in mood, self-efficacy and catastrophizing [95]. The evidence for SMIs decreasing dep­ression is mixed with both significant [17–20,42,43,48, 52,53,57–59,62,64–66,72–76,80,91,92,94,96] and null results reported [16,21,23,24,31,38,49,57,60,61,64,65,83,84,89,95,97]. Individuals with depression are potentially less likely to be ready to self-manage their pain, and have higher levels of pretreatment pain intensity and disability [81,95]. Despite these challenges, having comorbid depression does not mean that an individual will not experience positive outcomes from a SMI. Glombiewski et al. screened participants for depression prior to their starting of a SMI. Having pretreatment depression did not predict post-treatment variation in pain intensity scores [80]. In interventions combining self-management and antidepressant pharmaco­ therapy, participants receiving the combined therapies reported significantly better mental health outcomes than those receiving usual care,

www.futuremedicine.com

215

Review  Mann, LeFort & VanDenKerkhof

216

just self-management or just pharmacotherapy [66,82]. These findings suggest that maximum improvements in depression may require both self-management and aggressive antidepressant therapies. The evidence for the role of SMIs in improving health-related quality of life is also relatively consistent both immediately after and in the months following the delivery of a SMI [16,17,23,25,30,32,33,41, 46,47,56,63,72,79,86,87,97]. This improvement has been reported in both mental and physical domains of health-related quality of life, but is more common in physical domains. All long-term improvements in health-related quality of life were preceded by a short-term gain, thus the processes by which health-related quality of life can be improved through SMIs occur during the delivery phase.

A discrepancy may exist between how HCPs and those living with chronic pain perceive the role of HCPs. When HCPs were asked to describe their role in supporting self-management for patients with chronic low back pain, they included encouraging exercise, prescribing analgesics, providing sickness certificates and referring to specialists [101]. Conversely, individuals with chronic spinal cord pain identified family physicians as the person to whom they address their management questions, although most reported that he/she was not able to answer them. Question topics included both traditional medical and alternative pain management therapies, pain causes, future expectations, how other people with similar conditions manage and how to access information on their condition [102].

HCPs’ role in self-management

„„ Identifying & targeting self-management

„„ Self-management advice

barriers & facilitators

HCPs can support self-management by providing self-management advice and encouragement for those who are ready. Individuals with chronic low back pain have reported that, as a necessary first step in learning to self-manage, they had to make an internal shift to realize that their active participation was necessary for relief of pain (e.g., physical therapy only helped if they performed their homework between visits). This shift helped them see themselves, rather than a clinician, as the agent of relief, and to view relief as a long-term practice rather than an immediate cure [98]. Helping individuals make this shift in focus from cure to active self-management was a key approach used by HCPs of multidisciplinary pain clinics when biomedical interventions had failed to provide relief [99]. Facilitating this shift involved educating patients/clients about the ‘chronic’ nature of their pain, emphasizing selfmanagement as a therapy similar to traditional biomedical treatments, sharing pain management plans with patients/clients and shifting the perception of HCPs from one of medical intervention to one of skills education (e.g., stretches and relaxation) [99]. Once focused on management, individuals report being ready to hear self-management messages [98]. When interviewed, patients with chronic pain reported that self-management messages were most helpful when they were consistent between HCPs [100], individualized for their level of function [98], and supported with ongoing reassurance and encouragement [98].

Using qualitative interviews, individuals have been asked to describe barriers and facilitators of chronic pain self-management (Box 2). Some barriers could be targeted directly; for example, an individual who is doing fairly well self-managing, but reports a lack of family support may be encouraged to attend a support group or referred to a SMI that encourages family participation. Other barriers may highlight the need for referral to a SMI (e.g., an individual who feels that his/her current self-management strategies are ineffective). Still other barriers may be permanent, but addressed through a SMI or self-management advice tailored to specific needs (e.g.,  modified exercises for individuals with spinal cord injuries). Other personal or situational factors may present opportunities for clinicians to build on the individual’s resources (Box 2). Some of these factors may be addressed easily by HCPs, such as reinforcing the evidence [103] and encouraging self-management activities [104]. Other facilitators of self-management may be optimized through a SMI, such as receiving support from peers [105] and learning a variety of new skills [104].

Pain Manage. (2013) 3(3)

Selecting individuals for successful SMI Following participation in a SMI, specific qualities have been identified which seem to predict, mediate or be associated with improved outcomes (Table 2). Similar to the findings of qualitative research, acceptance of the chronic nature of pain and willingness to take an active role in management were identified. These qualities can

future science group

Self-management interventions for chronic pain  be used to recognize which individuals are likely to benefit from a SMI. The Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire has also been used to assess readiness to self-manage [106]. This tool is based on the transtheoretical model of change and stages theory and categorizes individuals into one of four stages: precontemplation, contemplation (combined with the preparation stage from the model), action and maintenance [106]. Individuals in the precontemplation stage look to HCPs to manage and relieve their pain [106] and may have high levels of psychological distress, low self-efficacy and fear of movement [107]. These individuals are unlikely to be ready to engage in active self-management [108]. Those in the contemplation stage have just started to consider involvement in pain management, but may not have the necessary skills [106]. Individuals in this stage may benefit from a SMI where they can gain the knowledge, skills and self-efficacy to get started. In the action stage, individuals are learning and using self-management skills, and may turn to HCPs or SMIs to reinforce and teach new skills [106,108]. Individuals in this stage tend to have low levels of psychological distress, low fear of movement and high levels of self-efficacy [107]. Finally, individuals in the management stage use self-management strategies that they find useful and express confidence in their ability to manage future pain [106]. There is evidence to support the benefit of SMIs, resources and support from HCPs for individuals in the contemplation and action stages of self-management [63,109], thus assessing stage of change may help identify who will benefit from a SMI. Conclusion & future perspective Chronic pain is difficult to manage. Even with multiple treatment modalities and maximally tolerated doses of the best pharmacologic agents, pain intensity is often reduced by only 26–38% [10,110], thus individuals are increasingly relying on SMIs to manage their pain. This paper includes a review of research on current approaches to SMIs, as defined by Lorig and Holman [13] and published in the past 5 years, when a critical mass of research in this field began to emerge. The results suggest that SMIs can reduce both the physical and psychosocial burden on affected individuals while reducing healthcare use. Although research participants may be different from the average individual with chronic pain, these results include participants

future science group

Review

Box 2. Barriers and facilitators of self-management. Barriers ƒƒ Lack of support from family and friends [104] ƒƒ Limited physical resources [104] ƒƒ Depression [104] ƒƒ Ineffectiveness of pain management strategies [104] ƒƒ Time limitations and competing life priorities [104] ƒƒ Activity avoidance due to fear of pain exacerbation [104] ƒƒ Lack of tailoring of strategies to personal needs [104] ƒƒ Inability to maintain use of strategies outside of an intervention study [104] ƒƒ Physical limitations [104] ƒƒ Difficult patient–physician interactions [104] Facilitators ƒƒ Encouragement from healthcare providers [104] ƒƒ Treated depression [104] ƒƒ Supportive family and friends [104] ƒƒ Having a variety of self-management strategies to use [104] ƒƒ Social support from individuals with the same condition [105] ƒƒ Flexibility in self-management program scheduling [103] ƒƒ Tailoring of self-management program to level of disability [103] ƒƒ Hearing concrete evidence supporting the effectiveness of self-management strategies [103]

from various sectors of care and they support the need for HCPs to explore whether SMIs are an appropriate addition to their current chronic pain care. HCPs play an important role in realizing these positive effects. To actualize this role, HCPs may require additional training in how to colla­borate with their patients/clients in setting health goals and decision-making, and tailoring SMIs to individual barriers, facilitators and needs. The role of personality factors and traits as barriers to self-management have been identified in the literature; however, they were not addressed in the studies included in this review. Some of the current self-management barriers may be eliminated through the use of online SMIs. Self-management websites provide a cost-effective means of reaching individuals in their own homes, thus eliminating issues of mobility, transportation and rural access. In addition, online material allows individuals to tailor interventions by providing opportunities for them to select topics of interest, reread sections and continue to receive self-management support outside of a specific number of sessions. The shift in focus from cure to management has been repeatedly identified as a critical step in learning to self-manage. Further work is needed to understand how to help individuals accept the chronic nature of their pain. Evaluating readiness

www.futuremedicine.com

217

Review  Mann, LeFort & VanDenKerkhof Table 2. Factors predicting or associated with positive outcomes of self-management intervention. Factors

Predictors/correlates/mediators/moderators of positive outcomes

Demographic

Non-Caucasian ethnicity [111] Older age [112] Pain intensity [113,114] Fewer comorbid conditions [112] Physical activity [115] High baseline levels of pain-related anxiety [111] Catastrophizing [113] Optimism [112] High self-efficacy [96,108,115–117] Sense of internal control over pain [96] High perceived importance of self-management behavior [117,118] High acceptance of chronic pain and perceived ability to manage it [113,119] Pain beliefs [120] Stage of change/readiness to change (contemplation, action or maintenance stage as per the Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire) [106,117,118,121] Use of self-management strategies prior to intervention [114] High level of mastery in skills related to care of condition [112] Giving information on the effectiveness of self-management strategies and illness, and clarifying doubts and questions during clinical encounters [114] Receiving loss-based messaging of self-management behaviors (e.g., “if you don’t perform self-management behaviour X you may experience the following negative consequences...”) [108] High satisfaction with information provided by primary care physician [96]

Health status

Mental health

Pain and management beliefs

Current self-management skills Healthcare provider’s actions

to self-manage may help with identifying who is appropriate for referral to a SMI; however, more work is needed in developing tools for this purpose. Financial & competing interests disclosure The authors would like to thank the Canadian Pain Society for providing funding through the Trainee Research Interchange Program that supported collaboration on this paper. S LeFort carries out leader training for the Chronic Pain Self-Management Program and is paid for her time by Stanford University. The authors have no other relevant

References n

n n

2

3

218

Reitsma M, Tranmer J, Buchanan D, VanDenKerkhof EG. The epidemiology of chronic pain in Canadian men and women between 1994 and 2007: longitudinal results of the national population health survey. Pain Res. Manage. 17(3), 166–172 (2012). Azevedo FL, Cost-Pereira A, Mendonca L, Dias CC, Castro-Lopes JM. Epidemiology of chronic pain: a population-based nationwide study on its prevalence, characteristics, and associated disability in Portugal. J. Pain 13(8), 773–783 (2012). Elzahaf RA, Tashani OA, Unsworth BA, Johnson MI. The prevalence of chronic pain

Open access This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

with an analysis of countries with a human development index less than 0.9: a systematic review without meta-analysis. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 28(7), 1221–1229 (2012).

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: of interest of considerable interest 1

affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed. No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

4

5

6

Wong WS, Fielding R. Prevalence and characteristics of chronic pain in the general population of Hong Kong. J. Pain 12(2), 236–245 (2011). Johannes CB, Le TK, Zhou X, Johnston JA, Dworkin RH. The prevalence of chronic pain in United States adults: results of an internet-based survey. J. Pain 11 (11), 1230–1239 (2010). Bouhassira D, Lanteri-Minet M, Attal N, Laurent B, Touboul C. Prevalence of chronic pain with neuropathic characteristics in the general population. Pain 136(3), 380–387 (2008).

Pain Manage. (2013) 3(3)

7

Gustorff B, Dorner T, Likar R, Grisold W, Lawrence K, Schwarz FRA. Prevalence of self-reported neuropathic pain and impact on quality of life: a prospective representative survey. Acta Anaesthesiol. Scand. 52(1), 132–136 (2008).

8

Carnes D, Parsons S, Ashby D et al. Chronic musculoskeletal pain rarely presents in a single body site: results from a UK population study. Rheumatology 46(7), 1168–1170 (2007).

9

Carnes D. Patterns of chronic pain in the population. Int. J. Osteopathic Med. 14(3), 81–85 (2011).

10 Turk DC, Wilson HD, Cahana A. Treatment

of chronic non-cancer pain. Lancet 337 (9784), 2226–2235 (2011). 11 Fredheim OMS, Redheim OMS, Kaasa S

et al. Chronic non-malignant pain patients

future science group

Self-management interventions for chronic pain  report as poor health-related quality of life as palliative cancer patients. Acta Anaesthesiol. Scand. 52(1), 143–148 (2008).

23 Hurley MV, Walsh NE, Mitchell HL et al.

Clinical effectiveness of a rehabilitation program integrating exercise, self-management, and active coping strategies for chronic knee pain: a cluster randomized trial. Arthritis Rheum. 57(7), 1211–1219 (2007).

12 Barham L. Economic burden of chronic pain

across Europe. J. Pain Palliat. Care Pharmacother. 26(1), 70–72 (2012). 13 Lorig KR, Holman HR. Self-management

education: history, definition, outcomes, and mechanisms. Ann. Behav. Med. 26(1), 1–7 (2003). n n

24 Jessep SA, Walsh NE, Ratcliffe J, Hurley MV.

Long-term clinical benefits and costs of an integrated rehabilitation programme compared with outpatient physiotherapy for chronic knee pain. Physiotherapy 95(2), 94–102 (2009).

Provides a comprehensive overview of self-management.

14 Bandura A. Self-Efficacy: the Exercise of

Control. WH Freeman (Ed.). Worth Publishers, NY, USA (1997).

25 McGillion MH, Watt-Watson J, Stevens B,

LeFort SM, Coyte P, Graham A. Randomized controlled trial of a psychoeducation program for the self-management of chronic cardiac pain. J. Pain Symptom Manage. 36(2), 126–140 (2008).

15 Hayes SC, Luoma JB, Bond FW, Masuda A,

Lillis J. Acceptance and commitment therapy: model, processes and outcomes. Behav. Res. Ther. 44(1), 1–25 (2006).

26 Morone NE, Greco CM, Weiner DK.

16 Johnston M, Foster M, Shennan J, Starkey N,

Johnson A. The effectiveness of an acceptance and commitment therapy self-help intervention for chronic pain. Clin. J. Pain 26(5), 393–402 (2010).

Mindfulness meditation for the treatment of chronic low back pain in older adults: a randomized controlled pilot study. Pain 134(3), 310–319 (2008). 27 Murphy SL, Strasburg DM, Lyden AK et al.

17 Wetherell JL, Afari N, Rutledge T et al.

A randomized, controlled trial of acceptance and commitment therapy and cognitive–behavioral therapy for chronic pain. Pain 152(9), 2098–2107 (2011).

Effects of activity strategy training on pain and physical activity in older adults with knee or hip osteoarthritis: a pilot study. Arthritis Rheum. 59(10), 1480–1487 (2008). 28 Osborne RH, Wilson T, Lorig KR, McColl

18 McCracken LM, MacKichan F, Eccleston

C. Contextual cognitive–behavioral therapy for severely disabled chronic pain sufferers: effectiveness and clinically significant change. Eur. J. Pain 11(3), 314–322 (2007).

GJ. Does self-management lead to sustainable health benefits in people with arthritis? A 2-year transition study of 452 Australians. J. Rheumatol. 34(5), 1112–1117 (2007). 29 Oslund S, Robinson RC, Clark TC et al.

Long-term effectiveness of a comprehensive pain management program: strengthening the case for interdisciplinary care. Proc. (Bayl. Univ. Med. Cent.) 22(3), 211–214 (2009).

19 Vowles KE, McCracken LM. Acceptance and

value-based action in chronic pain: a study of treatment effectiveness and process. J. Consulting Clin. Psychol. 76(3), 397–407 (2008).

30 Perry KN, Nicholas MK, Middleton J.

Multidisciplinary cognitive behavioural pain management programmes for people with a spinal cord injury: design and implementation. Disabil. Rehabil. 33(13), 1272–1280 (2011).

20 Vowles KE, McCracken LM, O’Brien JZ.

Acceptance and values-based action in chronic pain: a three-year follow-up analysis of treatment effectiveness and process. Behav. Res. Ther. 49(11), 748–755 (2011).

31 Thorn BE, Day MA, Burns J et al.

21 Ersek M, Turner JA, Cain KC, Kemp CA.

Results of a randomized controlled trial to examine the efficacy of a chronic pain self-management group for older adults [ISRCTN11899548]. Pain 138(1), 29–40 (2008). 22 Hansen Z, Daykin A, Lamb SE.

A cognitive–behavioural programme for the management of low back pain in primary care: a description and justification of the intervention used in the back skills training trial (BeST; ISRCTN 54717854). Physiotherapy 96(2), 87–94 (2010).

future science group

Randomized trial of group cognitive behavioral therapy compared with a pain education control for low-literacy rural people with chronic pain. Pain 152(12), 2710–2720 (2011). n n

Example of how self-management interventions can be tailored to meet the needs of unique groups.

32 Wong SY, Chan FW, Wong RL et al.

Comparing the effectiveness of mindfulness-based stress reduction and multidisciplinary intervention programs for

Review

chronic pain: a randomized comparative trial. Clin. J. Pain 27(8), 724–734 (2011). 33 Davies S, Quintner J, Parsons R et al.

Pre-clinic group education sessions reduce waiting times and costs at public pain medicine units. Pain Med. 12(1), 59–71 (2001). 34 Hurley MV, Walsh NE, Mitchell HL et al.

Economic evaluation of a rehabilitation program integrating exercise, self-management, and active coping strategies for chronic knee pain. Arthritis Rheum. 57(7), 1220–1229 (2007). 35 Newton-John T, Geddes J. The non-specific

effects of group-based cognitive–behavioural treatment of chronic pain. Chronic Illness. 4(3), 199–208 (2008). 36 Berman RLH, Iris MA, Bode R, Drengenberg

C. The effectiveness of an online mind–body intervention for older adults with chronic pain. J. Pain 10(1), 68–79 (2009). 37 Laforest S, Nour K, Gignac M, Gauvin L,

Parisien M, Poirier M. Short-term effects of a self-management intervention on health status of housebound older adults with arthritis. J. Appl. Gerontol. 27(5), 539–567 (2008). 38 Laforest S, Nour K, Parisien M, Poirier M,

Gignac M, Lankoande H. ‘I’m taking charge of my arthritis’: designing a targeted self-management program for frail seniors. Phys. Occup. Ther. Geriatr. 26(4), 45–66 (2008). 39 Allen KD, Oddone EZ, Coffman CJ et al.

Telephone-based self-management of osteoarthritis: a randomized trial. Ann. Intern. Med. 153(9), 570–579 (2010). 40 Allen M, Iezzoni LI, Huang A, Huang L,

Leveille SG. Improving patient–clinician communication about chronic conditions: description of an internet-based nurse e-coach intervention. Nursing Res. 57(2), 107–112 (2008). 41 Buhrman M, Nilsson-Ihrfelt E, Jannert M,

Strom L, Andersson G. Guided internet-based cognitive behavioural treatment for chronic back pain reduces pain catastrophizing: a randomized controlled trial. J. Rehabil. Med. 43(6), 500–505 (2011). 42 Carpenter KM, Stoner SA, Mundt JM, Stoelb

B. An online self-help CBT intervention for chronic lower back pain. Clin. J. Pain 28(1), 14–22 (2012). 43 Chiauzzi E, Pujol LA, Wood M et al.

PainACTION-back pain: a self-management website for people with chronic back pain. Pain Med. 11(7), 1044–1058 (2010). 44 Kristjansdottir OB, Fors EA, Eide E et al.

Written online situational feedback via mobile

www.futuremedicine.com

219

Review  Mann, LeFort & VanDenKerkhof phone to support self-management of chronic widespread pain: a usability study of a web-based intervention. BMC Musculoskeletal Dis. 12(1), 51–59 (2011). 45 Lorig KR, Ritter PL, Laurent DD, Plant K.

The internet-based arthritis self-management program: a one-year randomized trial for patients with arthritis or fibromyalgia. Arthritis Care Res. 59(7), 1001–1017 (2008). 46 McBeth J, Prescott G, Scotland G et al.

Cognitive behavior therapy, exercise, or both for treating chronic widespread pain. Arch. Intern. Med. 172(1), 48–57 (2012). 47 Oerlemans S, van Cranenburgh O,

48 Palermo TM, Wilson AC, Peters M,

Lewandowski A, Somhegyi H. Randomized controlled trial of an internet-delivered family cognitive–behavioral therapy intervention for children and adolescents with chronic pain. Pain 146(1–2), 205–213 (2009). Highlights a new approach to addressing self-management in pediatric groups and involving the family unit.

49 Ruehlman LS, Karoly P, Enders C.

A randomized controlled evaluation of an online chronic pain self management program. Pain 153(2), 319–330 (2012). 50 Schultz PJ, Rubinell S, Hartung U.

An internet-based approach to enhance self-management of chronic low back pain in the Italian-speaking population of Switzerland: results from a pilot study. Int. J. Public Health 52(5), 286–294 (2007). 51 Zufferey CM, Schulz PJ. Self-management of

chronic low back pain: an exploration of the impact of a patient-centered website. Patient Educ. Counsel. 77(1), 27–32 (2009). 52 Wicksell RK, Ahlqvist J, Bring A, Melin L,

Olsson GL. Can exposure and acceptance strategies improve functioning and life satisfaction in people with chronic pain and whiplash-associated disorders (WAD)? A randomized controlled trial. Cogn. Behav. Ther. 37(3), 169–182 (2008). 53 Dunstan DA, Covic T. Can a rural

community-based work-related activity program make a difference for chronic pain-disabled injured workers? Aust. J. Rural Health 15(3), 166–171 (2007). 54 Kravitz RL, Tancredi DJ, Grennan T et al.

Cancer health empowerment for living without pain (ca-HELP): effects of a tailored education and coaching intervention on pain

220

55 Long AC, Palermo TM. Brief report:

web-based management of adolescent chronic pain: development and usability testing of an online family cognitive behavioral therapy program. J Pediatr. Psychol. 34(5), 511–516 (2009). 56 Naylor MR, Keefe FJ, Brigidi B, Naud S,

Helzer JE. Therapeutic interactive voice response for chronic pain reduction and relapse prevention. Pain 134(3), 335–345 (2008). 57 Heutink M, Post MWM, Bongers-Janssen

Herremans P, Spreeuwenberg P, van Dulmen S. Intervening on cognitions and behavior in irritable bowel syndrome: a feasibility trial using PDAs. J. Psychosom. Res. 70(3), 267–277 (2011).

n

and impairment. Pain 152(7), 1572–1582 (2011).

HMH et al. The CONECSI trial: results of a randomized controlled trial of a multidisciplinary cognitive behavioral program for coping with chronic neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury. Pain 53(1), 120–128 (2012). 58 Martire LM, Schulz R, Keefe FJ, Rudy TE,

Starz TW. Couple-oriented education and support intervention for osteoarthritis: effects on spouses’ support and responses to patient pain. Family Syst. Health 26(2), 185–195 (2008). 59 Morley S, Williams A, Hussain S. Estimating

the clinical effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy in the clinic: evaluation of a CBT informed pain management programme. Pain 137(3), 670–680 (2008). 60 Matsubara T, Arai YP, Shimo K et al. Effects

of cognitive–behavioral therapy on pain intensity and level of physical activity in Japanese patients with chronic pain – a preliminary quasiexperimental study. J. Phys. Ther. 1(2), 49–57 (2010). 61 Morlion B, Kempke S, Luyten P, Coppens E,

Van Wambeke P. Multidisciplinary pain education program (MPEP) for chronic pain patients: preliminary evidence for effectiveness and mechanisms of change. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 27(8), 1595–1601 (2011). 62 Thorsell J, Finnes A, Dahl J et al.

A comparitive study of 2 manual-based self-help interventions, acceptance and commitment therapy and applied relaxation, for persons with chronic pain. Clin. J. Pain 27(8), 716–723 (2011). 63 Dysvik E, Kvaløy JT, Stokkeland R, Natvig

GK. The effectiveness of a multidisciplinary pain management programme managing chronic pain on pain perceptions, healthrelated quality of life and stages of change – a non-randomized controlled study. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 47(7), 826–835 (2010). 64 Gustavsson C, Denison E, Koch L.

Self-management of persistent neck pain: a randomized controlled trial of a multi-

Pain Manage. (2013) 3(3)

component group intervention in primary health care. Eur. J. Pain 14(6), 630.e1–630.e11 (2010). 65 Gustavsson C, Denison E, von Koch L.

Self-management of persistent neck pain: two-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of a multicomponent group intervention in primary health care. Spine 36(25), 2105–2115 (2011). 66 Kerns RD. Antidepressants combined with

self-management of pain improves outcomes in people with comorbid pain and depression. Evid. Based Ment. Health 13(1), 13 (2010). 67 Kroenke K, Bair M, Damush T et al.

Stepped care for affective disorders and musculoskeletal pain (SCAMP) study: design and practical implications of an intervention for comorbid pain and depression. Gen. Hosp. Psychiatry 29(6), 506–517 (2007). 68 Kroenke K, Bair MJ, Damush TM et al.

Optimized antidepressant therapy and pain self-management in primary care patients with depression and musculoskeletal pain. JAMA 301(20), 2099–2110 (2009). 69 Hush J. Combined pain self-management and

antidepressant therapy are effective in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain with depression. Aust. J. Physiother. 55(3), 208 (2009). 70 Day MA, Thorn BE, Kapoor S. A qualitative

analysis of a randomized controlled trial comparing a cognitive–behavioural treatment with education. J. Pain 12(9), 941–952 (2011). 71 Wu S, Vivienne, Kao M, Wu M, Tsai M,

Chang W. Effects of an osteoarthritis self-management programme. J. Adv. Nurs. 67(7), 1491–1501 (2011). 72 Glombiewski J, Hartwich-Tersek J, Rief W.

Two psychological interventions are effective in severely disabled, chronic back pain patients: a randomised controlled trial. Int. J. Behav. Med. 17(2), 97–107 (2010). 73 Moore RKG, Groves DG, Bridson JD et al.

A brief cognitive–behavioral intervention reduces hospital admissions in refractory angina patients. J. Pain Symptom Manage. 33(3), 310–316 (2007). 74 Goeppinger J, Lorig KR, Ritter PL, Mutatkar

S, Villa F, Gizlice Z. Mail-delivered arthritis self-management tool kit: a randomized trial and longitudinal followup. Arthritis Rheumatol. 61(7), 867–875 (2009). 75 McCracken LM, Gutiérrez-Martínez O.

Processes of change in psychological flexibility in an interdisciplinary group-based treatment for chronic pain based on acceptance and commitment therapy. Behav. Res. Ther. 49(4), 267–274 (2011).

future science group

Self-management interventions for chronic pain  76 Dubin R, King-VanVlack C. The trajectory of

chronic pain: can a community-based exercise/education program soften the ride? Pain Res. Manage. 15(6), 361–368 (2010). 77 Brown CS, Wan J, Bachmann G, Rosen R.

Self-management, amitriptyline, and amitripyline [sic] plus triamcinolone in the management of vulvodynia. J. Womens Health 18(2), 163–169 (2009). 78 Litt MD, Shafer DM, Kreutzer DL. Brief

cognitive–behavioural treatment for TMD pain: long-term outcomes and moderators of treatment. Pain 151(1), 110–116 (2010). 79 Gardner-Nix J, Backman S, Barbati S,

Grummitt J. Evaluating distance education of a mindfulness-based meditation programme for chronic pain management. J. Telemed. Telecare 14(2), 88–92 (2008). 80 Glombiewski JA, Hartwich-Tersek J, Rief W.

Depression in chronic back pain patients: prediction of pain intensity and pain disability in cognitive–behavioral treatment. Psychosomatics 51(2), 130–136 (2010). 81 Hammond A, Bryan J, Hardy A. Effects of a

modular behavioural arthritis education programme: a pragmatic parallel-group randomized controlled trial. Rheumatology 47(11), 1712–1718 (2008). 82 Keefe FJ, Shelby RA, Somers TJ et al.

Effects of coping skills training and sertraline in patients with non-cardiac chest pain: a randomized controlled study. Pain 152(4), 730–741 (2011). 83 Lipsitz JD, Gur M, Albano AM, Sherman B.

A psychological intervention for pediatric chest pain: development and open trial. J. Dev. Behav. Pediatr. 32(2), 153–157 (2011). 84 Niedermann K, de Bie RA, Kubli R et al.

Effectiveness of individual resource-oriented joint protection education in people with rheumatoid arthritis. A randomized controlled trial. Patient Educ. Counsel. 82(1), 42–48 (2011). 85 Yip YB, Sit JW, Fung K et al. Impact of an

arthritis self-management programme with an added exercise component for osteoarthritic knee sufferers on improving pain, functional outcomes, and use of health care services: an experimental study. Patient Educ. Counsel. 65(1), 113–121 (2007). 86 Lamb SE, Hansen Z, Lall R et al. Group

cognitive behavioural treatment for low-back pain in primary care: a randomised controlled trial and cost–effectiveness analysis. Lancet 375(9718), 916–923 (2010). 87 Alp A, Kanat E, Yurtkuran M. Efficacy of a

self-management program for osteoporotic

future science group

subjects. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 86(8), 633–640 (2007). 88 Sahin N, Albayrak I, Durmus B, Ugurlu H.

and expectations for clinical management. Disabil. Rehabil. 29(24), 1899–1909 (2007). 99 Harding G, Campbell J, Parsons S, Rahman

Effectiveness of back school for treatment of pain and functional disability in patients with chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. J. Rehabil. Med. 43(3), 224–229 (2011).

A, Underwood M. British pain clinic practitioners’ recognition and use of the bio-psychosocial pain management model for patients when physical interventions are ineffective or inappropriate: results of a qualitative study. BMC Musculoskeletal Dis. 11(1), 51–60 (2010).

89 Wicksell RK, Melin L, Olsson GL. Exposure

and acceptance in the rehabilitation of adolescents with idiopathic chronic pain – a pilot study. Eur. J. Pain 11(3), 267–274 (2007).

100 Matthias MS, Bair MJ, Nyland KA et al.

Self-management support and communication from nurse care managers compared with primary care physicians: a focus group study of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Pain Manage. Nurs. 11(1), 26–34 (2010).

90 Riddle DL, Keefe FJ, Nay WT, McKee D,

Attarian DE, Jensen MP. Pain coping skills training for patients with elevated pain catastrophizing who are scheduled for knee arthroplasty: a quasi-experimental study. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 92(6), 859–865 (2011).

101 Crowe M, Whitehead L, Gagan MJ, Baxter

D, Panckhurst A. Self-management and chronic low back pain: a qualitative study. J. Adv. Nurs. 66(7), 1478–1486 (2010).

91 Zautra AJ, Davis MC, Reich JW et al.

Comparison of cognitive behavioral and mindfulness meditation interventions on adaptation to rheumatoid arthritis for patients with and without history of recurrent depression. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 76(3), 408–421 (2008).

102 Norman C, Bender JL, Macdonald J et al.

Questions that individuals with spinal cord injury have regarding their chronic pain: a qualitative study. Disabil. Rehabil. 32(2), 114–124 (2010). 103 Townley S, Papaleontiou M, Amanfo L et al.

92 Mead K, Theadom A, Byron K, Dupont S.

Pilot study of a 4-week pain coping strategies (PCS) programme for the chronic pain patient. Disabil. Rehabil. 29(3), 199–203 (2007).

Preparing to implement a self-management program for back pain in New York City senior centers: what do prospective consumers think? Pain Med. 11(3), 405–415 (2010). 104 Bair MJ, Matthias MS, Nyland KA et al.

93 Thorn BE, Pence LB, Ward LC et al.

Barriers and facilitators to chronic pain self-management: a qualitative study of primary care patients with comorbid musculoskeletal pain and depression. Pain Med. 10(7), 1280–1290 (2009).

A randomized clinical trial of targeted cognitive behavioral treatment to reduce catastrophizing in chronic headache sufferers. J. Pain 8(12), 938–949 (2007). 94 Vowles KE, Wetherell JL, Sorrell JT.

Targeting acceptance, mindfulness, and values-based action in chronic pain: findings of two preliminary trials of an outpatient group-based intervention. Cogn. Behav. Prac. 16(1), 49–58 (2009). 95 Curran C, Williams AC, Potts HW.

Cognitive–behavioral therapy for persistent pain: does adherence after treatment affect outcome? Eur. J. Pain 13(2), 178–188 (2009).

n

Weiss J, Aquino J. Strategies used for managing symptoms by women with fibromyalgia. J. Clin. Nurs. 21(5–6), 626–635 (2012). 106 Kerns RD, Rosenberg R, Jamison RN,

Caudill MA, Haythornthwaite J. Readiness to adopt a self-management approach to chronic pain: the Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire (PSOCQ). Pain 72(1–2), 227–234 (1997).

readiness to self-manage pain. Clin. J. Pain 23(3), 259–266 (2007). n

Comparison of a pain management program with usual care in a pain management center for people with spinal cord injury-related chronic pain. Clin. J. Pain 26(3), 206–216 (2010). 98 Liddle SD, Baxter GD, Gracey JH. Chronic

low back pain: patients’ experiences, opinions

Provides an overview of self-management barriers and facilitators.

105 Kengen Traska T, Rutledge DN, Mouttapa M,

96 Hadjistavropoulos H, Shymkiw J. Predicting

97 Perry KN, Nicholas MK, Middleton JW.

Review

Outlines the use of the Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire for assessing readiness to self-manage.

107 Fors T, Damsgård E, Røe C, Anke A.

Readiness to adopt a self-management approach to pain – are profiles of subscale scores on the pain stages of change questionnaire useful? Eur. J. Pain 14(10), 1051–1058 (2010).

www.futuremedicine.com

221

Review  Mann, LeFort & VanDenKerkhof 108 Janke EA, Spring B, Weaver F. The effect of

message framing on self-management of chronic pain: a new perspective on intervention? Psychol. Health 26(7), 931–947 (2011). 109 Cooper K, Smith BH, Hancock E. Patients’

perceptions of self-management of chronic low back pain: evidence for enhancing patient education and support. Physiotherapy 95(1), 43–50 (2009). 110 Finnerup NB, Sindrup SH, Jensen TS.

The evidence for pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain. Pain 150(3), 573–581 (2010). 111 Cucciare M, Sorrell J, Trafton J. Predicting

response to cognitive–behavioral therapy in a sample of HIV-positive patients with chronic pain. J. Behav. Med. 32(4), 340–348 (2009). 112 Kurtz ME, Kurtz JC, Given CW, Given BA.

Patient optimism and mastery – do they play a role in cancer patients’ management of pain and fatigue? J. Pain Symptom Manage. 36(1), 1–10 (2008). 113 Vowles KE, McCracken LM, Eccleston C.

Processes of change in treatment for chronic pain: the contributions of pain, acceptance, and catastrophizing. Eur. J. Pain 11(7), 779–787 (2007).

222

114 Escolar-Reina P, Medina-Mirapeix F,

Gascón-Cánovas JJ, Montilla-Herrador J, Valera-Garrido JF, Collins SM. Self-management of chronic neck and low back pain and relevance of information provided during clinical encounters: an observational study. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 90(10), 1734–1739 (2009). 115 Miles CL, Pincus T, Carnes D et al. Can we

identify how programmes aimed at promoting self-management in musculoskeletal pain work and who benefits? A systematic review of sub-group analysis within RCTs. Eur. J. Pain 15(8), 775.e1–11 (2011).

in persons with spinal cord injury-related pain. J. Pain 9(7), 606–612 (2008). 119 Samwel HJA, Kraaimaat FW, Crul BJP,

van Dongen RD, Evers AWM. Multidisciplinary allocation of chronic pain treatment: effects and cognitive–behavioural predictors of outcome. Br. J. Health Psychol. 14(3), 405–421 (2009). 120 Turner JA, Holtzman S, Mancl L. Mediators,

moderators, and predictors of therapeutic change in cognitive–behavioral therapy for chronic pain. Pain 127(3), 276–286 (2007). 121 Gersh E, Arnold C, Gibson SJ.

The relationship between the readiness for change and clinical outcomes in response to multidisciplinary pain management. Pain Med. 12(1), 165–172 (2011).

116 Krein SL, Heisler M, Piette JD, Butchart A,

Kerr EA. Overcoming the influence of chronic pain on older patients’ difficulty with recommended self-management activities. Gerontologist 47(1), 61–68 (2007). 117 Kratz AL, Molton IR, Jensen MP, Edhe DM,

Nielson WR. Further evaluation of the motivational model of self-management: coping with chronic pain in multiple sclerosis. Ann. Behav. Med. 41(3), 391–400 (2011). 118 Molton IR, Jensen MP, Nielson W, Cardenas

D, Ehde DM. A preliminary evaluation of the motivational model of pain self-management

Pain Manage. (2013) 3(3)

„„

Websites

201 Stanford Medicine. Chronic Pain

Self-Management Program. http://patienteducation.stanford.edu/ programs/cpsmp.html 202 Cognitive behavioural therapy core

information document. www.health.gov.bc.ca/library/publications/ year/2007/MHA_CognitiveBehavioural Therapy.pdf

future science group