new directions in the psychology of chronic pain management
DESCRIPTION
Lecture followed audience discussion on contextual cognitive behaviour therapy and acceptance and commitment therapy in the management of chronic pain from the West of Scotland Pain Group on Wednesday 5th December 2007. The speaker is Lance M. McCracken PhD, of the Pain Management Unit at the Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases & University of Bath, Bath UK. www.wspg.org.uk Further reading: DAHL, J., & LUNDGREN, T. (2006). Living beyond your pain using acceptance and commitment therapy to ease chronic pain. Oakland, CA, New Harbinger Publications. http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/63472470 HAYES, S. C., STROSAHL, K., & WILSON, K. G. (1999). Acceptance and commitment therapy an experiential approach to behavior change. New York, Guilford Press. http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/41712470 MCCRACKEN, L. M. (2005). Contextual cognitive-behavioral therapy for chronic pain. Progress in pain research and management, v. 33. Seattle, IASP Press. http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/57564664TRANSCRIPT
New Directions in The Psychology of Chronic Pain
Management
Lance M. McCracken, PhD
Pain Management Unit
Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases & University of Bath
Bath UK
Bath Pain Management Unit
Medical Treatments for Chronic Pain
• Short trials of opioids: average 33% pain relief (Turk 2002, Clin J Pain).
• Surgery for degenerative lumbar conditions: “There is still insufficient evidence on the effectiveness of surgery on clinical outcomes to draw any firm conclusions.” (Gibson and Waddell, 2006, Cochrane Library).
• Regional Anesthesia: There is “insufficient evidence on the effectiveness of facet joint, epidural, and local injection therapy” for low back pain. (Nelemans et al. 2001, Spine).
Treatment Process in Chronic Low Back Pain
• Decreased fear and avoidance predict improved mood, interference, and daily activity.
• Changes in pain or physical capacity accounted for relatively little or no variance in outcomes.
McCracken & Gross (1998). J Occupational Rehabil.
McCracken, Gross, & Eccleston (2002). Behav Res Ther.
Is Pain Relief Necessary for Patient Satisfaction?
• N=62 patients with chronic pain followed in an Anesthesia-based specialty clinic.
• Strongest predictors of satisfaction:– Perceiving evaluation as complete.– Feeling the received explanation for treatment.– Believing that treatment improved daily activity.
McCracken et al. (2002). European Journal of Pain.
Comprehensive Pain Programs
• 14-60% pain reduction.
• 65% increase in physical activity
• 66% return to work.
• 68% reduction in annual healthcare costs.
As reviewed in: Gatchel and Okifuji (2006). The Journal of Pain.
History of Psychological Treatments for Chronic Pain
• Late 1960’s – 1980’s – Operant Behavioral.
• Early 1980’s to present – Cognitive Behavioral.
• Most recently – Acceptance-based, Mindfulness-based, and increasingly Contextual approaches.
The “Waves” of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy
• First: application of basic learning principles to behavior change.
• Second: emphasis on cognitive processes.
• Third: integration and expansion of behavioral and cognitive approaches in a contextual framework.
“Third Wave” Therapies
Therapy Approach Originators Problem area
Acceptance and Commitment Therapy
Hayes et al. 1999
General
Dialectical Behavior Therapy
Linehan 1993
Borderline Personality d/o
Functional Analytic Psychotherapy
Kohlenberg & Tsai, 1991
General
Integrative Behavioral Couples Therapy
Jacobson et al. 2000
Couples Discord
Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy
Teasdale et al. 2000
Relapse of Depression after CBT
“…there is little empirical support for the role of cognitive change as causalin symptomatic improvements achieved in CBT.”
(Longmore & Worrell, 2007)
Randomized Trial of Behavioral Activation, Cognitive Therapy, and Antidepressant
Medication for Major Depression
• 241 patients randomized• Results: Among severely depressed patients
BA was comparable to ADM and both outperformed CT.
• “These results challenge the assumption that directly modifying negative beliefs is essential for change…”
Dimidjian et al. J Consult Clin Psychol 2006; 74: 658-670.
“The single most remarkable fact about human existence is how hard it is for humans to be happy.”
(Hayes, Strosahl, & Wilson, 1999)
The ACT model of Psychopathology
Psychological Inflexibility
Dominance of the Conceptualized Past and Feared
Future
Lack of Values Clarity
Inaction, Impulsivity,or AvoidantPersistence
Attachment to theConceptualized Self
CognitiveFusion
ExperientialAvoidance
“Psychological Inflexibility”
• Process based in interactions of language and cognition with direct experiences that produce an inability to persist in, or change, a behavior pattern in the service of long term goals or values.
From: Hayes et al. Behav Res Ther 2006; 44: 1-25.
Radical Idea!
• In many cases of chronic pain, at least some of the time, CONTROL is not the SOLUTION; it’s the PROBLEM.
Radical Idea!
• It may be difficult for patients to talk or think their way out of problems based in talking and thinking.
Treatment Processes
• Acceptance
• Present focus (mindfulness)
• Cognitive de-fusion
• Values-based action
• Committed action
• A contextual sense of self
“I can’t go on”
Thought Action
Stopping
Context
Loss of contactWith present
CognitiveFusion
ExperientialUnwillingness
ValuesFailure
“I can’t go on”
Thought Action
Stopping
Context
Mindfulness Acceptance
CognitiveDe-fusion
Values-basedAction
Carryingon
or
“Psychological Flexibility”
Dimensions of CognitionFused – Overwhelmed by thought content, loss of contact with present situation, behavioral options narrowed.
De-fused- Aware of reactions as reactions,
contact with wider situation beyond thoughts, access to
a range of responses
True Untrue
Helpful UnhelpfulRational Irrational
In Other Words
• Thoughts have a dimension of literal truth, or consistency with reality.
• They also have a dimension of the functions or influences they exert.
• Cognitive Fusion is the degree to which these influences are exclusive or response narrowing and the degree to which they produce insensitivity and inflexibility.
Cognitive De-fusion
• A process of altering the role thoughts play in relation to other behavior.
• Not about changing content of thought.
• Includes awareness of the process and not merely the content of thinking.
• Alters impact of, and need to control, thought content.
Acceptance of Chronic Pain
• Processes of flexible and practical action, free from un-necessary restriction by pain.– Engagement in activities with pain present.– Absence of attempts to limit contact with
pain.
Values-Based Action
• Action in accord with relatively global desired life consequences.
• Guided by chosen directions in relation to family, intimate relations, friends, work, health, growth and learning, etc.
Mindfulness
• Moment-to-moment non-judgemental awareness.
• A quality of behavior that includes full, flexible, non-defensive, non-reactive, and present-focused contact with experienced events.
Mindfulness from an ACT Point of View
• Contact with the present moment.
• Acceptance.
• Cognitive defusion.
Role of Mindfulness and Acceptance in Chronic pain
• N = 105 patients at assessment.• Completed
– 0-10 ratings of pain.– Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (Brown and
Ryan, 2003).– British Columbia Major Depression Inventory– Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire.– Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale.– Sickness Impact Profile.
From: McCracken, Gauntlett-Gilbert and Vowles. Pain (2007).
Correlations of Mindfulness with Patient Functioning (N = 105)
r p <
Pain-related Anxiety -.39 .001
Depression -.51 .001
Depression Interference -.27 .05
Physical Disability -.40 .01
Psychosocial Disability -.50 .001
Alertness (SIP) -.48 .001
Regression Results: Variance Explained in Depression
6%
15%
29%
11%
39% Background
Pain
Acceptance
Mindfulness
Unexplained
Regression Results: Variance Explained in Psychosocial Disability
6%10%
27%
10%
47%
Background
Pain
Acceptance
Mindfulness
Unexplained
Regression Results: Variance Explained in Physical Disability
3%11%
18%
7%
61%
Background
Pain
Acceptance
Mindfulness
Unexplained
ACT for Disability due to Stress and Pain
• N = 19 health sector workers with daily stress and pain and 3 periods of > 7 days sick leave in the past year
• Randomized to:– Medical Treatment as Usual (MTAU)– Four 1-hour sessions of ACT plus MTAU
Dahl, Wilson, Nilsson. Dahl, Wilson, Nilsson. Behav TherBehav Ther 2004;35:785-802. 2004;35:785-802.
Results: Mean number sick days per month
02468
101214
One Month Intervals
Ave
rag
e S
ick
Day
s
ACT
MTAU
Medical Service Utilization: Physician, Specialist & Physiotherapist
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Me
an
Me
dic
al
Vis
its
1 Month Pre Post 6 Month FU
ACT
MTAU
Treatment
• Patients:– N = 171 highly disabled
adults with chronic pain– n = 114 at follow-up
• 3 or 4 week residential treatment.
• Daily sessions:– Physical conditioning– Psychology– Skills training– Education sessions
• Psychological Methods:– Exposure– Mindfulness– Metaphor– Confusion– Modelling– Explicit non-coercion
Team
• Clinical Psychologists
• Nurses
• Occupational Therapists
• Physicians
• Physiotherapists
• Psychology Assistants
Results from CCBT for Chronic Pain: Post Treatment and 3-Month
Follow-up
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
Pre-post
Pre-f-up
Eff
ec
t S
ize
Reliable Change Results (N = 114)
% Reliable Decline
% Reliably Improved
Depression 0 41.8
Pain-related Anxiety 0 49.1
Disability 3.4 44.0
Vowles & McCracken (under review). J Consult Clin Psychol
Reliable Change - Continued
Number of Domains Improved
> 1 > 2 > 3
Number of Patients
86 70 16
Percent Improved 75.6 61.4 14.0
Number needed to Treat
1.34 1.65 7.14
Variance in Improvements accounted for by Changes Acceptance and Values
Outcome ∆R2 β Acceptance
β
Values
Depression .17* -.36* -.06
Anxiety .33* -.63* -.02
Disability .18* -.41* -.03
* p < .01
A Contextual Analysis of Treatment Providers: Rehab Workers in Singapore
• N = 98.
• 76.5% women.
• 36.7% Nurses, 12.2% Physios, 10.2% OTs, 9.2% Physicians, 9.2% Admin, 22.% other.
• Age M = 35.45 yrs, sd = 8.9.
• Years at work M = 8.8, sd = 8.5.
Selected Correlation Results
Emotional Exhaustion (0-10)
Acceptance -.35**
Mindfulness -.43**
Values-based action -.50**
* p < .01; ** p < .001
Selected Correlation Results
General Health (SF-36)
Acceptance .36**
Mindfulness .30*
Values-based action .52**
* p < .01; ** p < .001
Selected Correlation Results
Vitality (SF-36)
Acceptance .52**
Mindfulness .43**
Values-based action .66**
* p < .01; ** p < .001
Selected Correlation Results
Emotional Functioning (SF-36)
Acceptance .74**
Mindfulness .40**
Values-based action .51**
* p < .01; ** p < .001
Variance in Worker Functioning Explained by Acceptance, Mindfulness,
and Values-based ActionCriterion Variable ∆R2
Emotional Exhaustion .31*
General Health .25*
Vitality .52*
Emotional Functioning .61*
* P < .001
Summary
• Current analyses of human behavior show us that language and thinking can create great problems for human beings.
• These analyses also show two ways to help: change in the content or in the context of experience.
• Contextual processes include acceptance, cognitive defusion, mindfulness, and values.
Thank you.