Search

After reviewing how psychological treatment for chronic pain comes to have its current form, and summarizing treatment effectiveness, we explore several areas of development. We describe third wave therapies, such as mindfulness; we discuss what the research literature aggregated can tell us about what trials are more useful to conduct; and we outline some areas of promise and some failures to deliver on promise. The article is drawn together using the framework of the normal psychology of pain, identifying some of its most important implications for improving life for people with chronic pain.

Background: This is an update of the original Cochrane review first published in Issue 1, 2003, and previously updated in 2009 and 2012. Chronic pain affects many children, who report severe pain, disability, and distressed mood. Psychological therapies are emerging as effective interventions to treat children with chronic or recurrent pain. This update focuses specifically on psychological therapies delivered face-to-face, adds new randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and additional data from previously included trials., Objectives: There were three objectives to this review. First, to determine the effectiveness on clinical outcomes of pain severity, disability, depression, and anxiety of psychological therapy delivered face-to-face for chronic and recurrent pain in children and adolescents compared with active treatment, waiting-list, or standard medical care. Second, to evaluate the impact of psychological therapies on depression and anxiety, which were previously combined as 'mood'. Third, we assessed the risk of bias of the included studies and the quality of outcomes using the GRADE criteria., Search Methods: Searches were undertaken of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO. We searched for further RCTs in the references of all identified studies, meta-analyses, and reviews. Trial registry databases were also searched. The date of most recent search was January 2014., Selection Criteria: RCTs with at least 10 participants in each arm post-treatment comparing psychological therapies with active treatment, standard medical care, or waiting-list control for children or adolescents with episodic, recurrent or persistent pain were eligible for inclusion. Only trials conducted in person (face-to-face) were considered. Studies that delivered treatment remotely were excluded from this update., Data Collection and Analysis: All included studies were analysed and the quality of outcomes were assessed. All treatments were combined into one class, psychological treatments. Pain conditions were split into headache and non-headache. Both conditions were assessed on four outcomes: pain, disability, depression, and anxiety. Data were extracted at two time points; post-treatment (immediately or the earliest data available following end of treatment) and at follow-up (between three and 12 months post-treatment)., Main Results: Seven papers were identified in the updated search. Of these papers, five presented new trials and two presented follow-up data for previously included trials. Five studies that were previously included in this review were excluded as therapy was delivered remotely. The review thus included a total of 37 studies. The total number of participants completing treatments was 2111. Twenty studies addressed treatments for headache (including migraine); nine for abdominal pain; two for mixed pain conditions including headache pain, two for fibromyalgia, two for recurrent abdominal pain or irritable bowel syndrome, and two for pain associated with sickle cell disease.Analyses revealed psychological therapies to be beneficial for children with chronic pain on seven outcomes. For headache pain, psychological therapies reduced pain post-treatment and at follow-up respectively (risk ratio (RR) 2.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.97 to 3.09, z = 7.87, p < 0.01, number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) = 2.94; RR 2.89, 95% CI 1.03 to 8.07, z = 2.02, p < 0.05, NNTB = 3.67). Psychological therapies also had a small beneficial effect at reducing disability in headache conditions post-treatment and at follow-up respectively (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.24, z = 3.90, p < 0.01; SMD -0.46, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.13, z = 2.72, p < 0.01). No beneficial effect was found on depression post-treatment (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.14, z = 1.11, p > 0.05). At follow-up, only one study was eligible, therefore no analysis was possible and no conclusions can be drawn. Analyses revealed a small beneficial effect for anxiety post-treatment (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.04, z = 2.25, p < 0.05). However, this was not maintained at follow-up (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -1.00 to 0.45; z = 0.75, p > 0.05).Analyses revealed two beneficial effects of psychological treatment for children with non-headache pain. Pain was found to improve post-treatment (SMD -0.57, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.27, z = 3.74, p < 0.01), but not at follow-up (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.19, z = 0.73, p > 0.05). Psychological therapies also had a beneficial effect for disability post-treatment (SMD -0.45, 95% CI -0.71 to -0.19, z = 3.40, p < 0.01), but this was not maintained at follow-up (SMD -0.35, 95% CI -0.71 to 0.02, z = 1.87, p > 0.05). No effect was found for depression or anxiety post-treatment (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.17, z = 0.54, p > 0.05; SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.07, z = 1.33, p > 0.05) or at follow-up (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.28, z = 0.53, p > 0.05; SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.33, z = 0.32, p > 0.05)., Authors' Conclusions: Psychological treatments delivered face-to-face are effective in reducing pain intensity and disability for children and adolescents (<18 years) with headache, and therapeutic gains appear to be maintained, although this should be treated with caution for the disability outcome as only two studies could be included in the follow-up analysis. Psychological therapies are also beneficial at reducing anxiety post-treatment for headache. For non-headache conditions, psychological treatments were found to be beneficial for pain and disability post-treatment but these effects were not maintained at follow-up. There is limited evidence available to estimate the effects of psychological therapies on depression and anxiety for children and adolescents with headache and non-headache pain. The conclusions of this update replicate and add to those of the previous review which found that psychological therapies were effective in reducing pain intensity for children with headache and non-headache pain conditions, and these effects were maintained at follow-up for children with headache conditions.

Background: Depression with comorbid pain is associated with a poor response to various treatments. The objective in this secondary analysis was to determine whether patients reporting pain have different depression and pain outcomes over time in response to acupuncture, counselling or usual care., Methods: Self-reported ratings of depression and pain from 755 patients in a pragmatic randomised controlled trial of acupuncture (302) or counselling (302) compared to usual care alone (151) are described and analysed using a series of regression models and analysis of covariance. Patient-reported outcomes of Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-9 for depression, SF36 bodily pain and EQ-5D, all at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months., Results: At baseline, 755 patients reported EQ-5D pain categories; 384 (50.9%) reported moderate-to-extreme pain. Controlling for baseline depression, a linear regression model showed that the presence of pain at baseline was associated with poorer depression outcomes at 3 months mean difference=-1.16, (95% CI 0.12 to 2.2). Participants with moderate-to-extreme pain at baseline did better at 3 months if they received acupuncture (mean reduction in Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) from baseline=6.0, 95% CI 5.0 to 7.1 and a mean reduction in SF-36 bodily pain=11.2, (95% CI 7.1 to 15.2) compared to improvements for those who received counselling (4.3, 95% CI 3.3 to 5.4; 7.6, 95% CI 3.6 to 11.6) or usual care (2.7, 95% CI 1.50 to 4.0: 7.2, 95% CI 2.3 to 12.1). In comparison, no notable differences were seen between treatment arms within the no pain comparator group., Conclusions: Patients with depression and pain at baseline recovered less well from treatment over 3 months than those with depression and no pain. Reductions in both depression and pain were most marked in the acupuncture group, followed by the counselling group and then the usual care group.

Unlabelled: Scientific models are like tools, and like any tool they can be evaluated according to how well they achieve the chosen goals of the task at hand. In the science of treatment development for chronic pain, we might say that a good model ought to achieve at least 3 goals: 1) integrate current knowledge, 2) organize research and treatment development activities, and 3) create progress. In the current review, we examine models underlying current cognitive behavioral approaches to chronic pain with respect to these criteria. A relatively new model is also presented as an option, and some of its features examined. This model is called the psychological flexibility model. This model fully integrates cognitive and behavioral principles and includes a process-oriented approach of treatment development. So far it appears capable of generating treatment applications that range widely with regard to conditions targeted and modes of delivery and that are increasingly supported by evidence. It has led to the generation of innovative experiential, relationship-based, and intensive treatment methods. The scientific strategy associated with this model seeks to find limitations in current models and to update them. It is assumed within this strategy that all current treatment approaches will one day appear lacking and will change., Perspective: This Focus Article addresses the place of theory and models in psychological research and treatment development in chronic pain. It is argued that such models are not merely an academic issue but are highly practical. One potential model, the psychological flexibility model, is examined in further detail., (Copyright © 2014 American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This article reports the development of natural history and active treatment benchmarks for psychological treatments of chronic pain. The benchmarks were derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reported in a published meta-analysis. In two preliminary studies we surveyed small samples of active clinicians working in U.K. pain management programs. Study 1 assessed the fit between routine clinical treatment and the selected RCTs. In study 2 Delphi methodology was used to determine a set of outcome domains to be used in the development of benchmarks. In study 3 we extracted data from a set of RCTs where both pre- and post-treatment data were reported. Measures were allocated to 1 of 5 outcome domains (cognitive coping and appraisal, pain experience, pain behavior, emotional functioning, and physical functioning). Pre-treatment to post-treatment effect sizes (Cohen's d) were computed and, where necessary, aggregated within trial so that each trial contributed a single estimate to outcome domain. Effect size (ES) benchmarks were computed for all trials and those trials with an explicit cognitive behavior therapy protocol. In no case did the ES estimates for the untreated control deviate from 0. The average ES across outcome domains for the treatment arms was approximately 0.35. These benchmarks may be used to assess the effectiveness of routine clinical treatments for chronic pain. The application of these data and the limitations of the study are discussed., (Copyright © 2013 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Psychological interventions are a mainstay of modern pain management practice and a recommended feature of a modern pain treatment service. Systematic reviews for the evidence of psychological interventions are reviewed in this article. The evidence for effectiveness is strongest for cognitive behavioural therapy with a focus on cognitive coping strategies and behavioural rehearsal. Most evidence is available for treatments of adult pain, although adolescent chronic pain treatments are also reviewed. It is clear that treatment benefit can be achieved with cognitive behavioural methods. It is possible to effect change in pain, mood, and disability, changes not achieved by chance or by exposure to any other treatment. However, the overall effect sizes of treatments for adults, across all trials, are modest. Reasons for the relatively modest treatment effects are discussed within the context of all treatments for chronic pain being disappointing when measured by the average. Suggestions for improving both trials and evidence summaries are made. Finally, consideration is given to what can be achieved by the pain specialist without access to specialist psychology resource.

Background: Chronic pain affects many children, who report severe pain, distressed mood, and disability. Psychological therapies are emerging as effective interventions to treat children with chronic or recurrent pain. This update adds recently published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to the review published in 2009., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of psychological therapies, principally cognitive behavioural therapy and behavioural therapy, for reducing pain, disability, and improving mood in children and adolescents with recurrent, episodic, or persistent pain. We also assessed the risk of bias and methodological quality of the included studies., Search Methods: Searches were undertaken of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycLIT. We searched for RCTs in references of all identified studies, meta-analyses and reviews. Date of most recent search: March 2012., Selection Criteria: RCTs with at least 10 participants in each arm post-treatment comparing psychological therapies with active treatment were eligible for inclusion (waiting list or standard medical care) for children or adolescents with episodic, recurrent or persistent pain., Data Collection and Analysis: All included studies were analysed and the quality of the studies recorded. All treatments were combined into one class: psychological treatments; headache and non-headache outcomes were separately analysed on three outcomes: pain, disability, and mood. Data were extracted at two time points; post-treatment (immediately or the earliest data available following end of treatment) and at follow-up (at least three months after the post-treatment assessment point, but not more than 12 months)., Main Results: Eight studies were added in this update of the review, giving a total of 37 studies. The total number of participants completing treatments was 1938. Twenty-one studies addressed treatments for headache (including migraine); seven for abdominal pain; four included mixed pain conditions including headache pain, two for fibromyalgia, two for pain associated with sickle cell disease, and one for juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Analyses revealed five significant effects. Pain was found to improve for headache and non-headache groups at post-treatment, and for the headache group at follow-up. Mood significantly improved for the headache group at follow-up, although, this should be interpreted with caution as there were only two small studies entered into the analysis. Finally, disability significantly improved in the non-headache group at post-treatment. There were no other significant effects., Authors' Conclusions: Psychological treatments are effective in reducing pain intensity for children and adolescents (<18 years) with headache and benefits from therapy appear to be maintained. Psychological treatments also improve pain and disability for children with non-headache pain. There is limited evidence available to estimate the effects of psychological therapies on mood for children and adolescents with headache and non-headache pain. There is also limited evidence to estimate the effects on disability in children with headache. These conclusions replicate and add to those of the previous review which found psychological therapies were effective in reducing pain intensity for children with headache and non-headache pain conditions, and these effects were maintained at follow-up.

Research on the effectiveness of distraction as a method of pain control is inconclusive. One mechanism pertains to the motivational relevance of distraction tasks. In this study the motivation to engage in a distraction task during pain was experimentally manipulated. Undergraduate students (N=73) participated in a cold pressor test (CPT) and were randomly assigned to three groups: a distraction-only group performed a tone-detection task during the CPT, a motivated-distraction group performed the same task and received a monetary reward for good task performance, and a control group did not perform the tone-detection task. Results indicated that engagement in the distraction task was better in the motivated-distraction group in comparison with the distraction-only group. Participants in both distraction groups experienced less pain compared to the control group. There were no overall differences in pain intensity between the two distraction groups. The effect of distraction was influenced by the level of catastrophic thinking about pain. For low catastrophizers, both distraction groups reported less pain as compared to the non-distracted control group. This was not the case for high catastrophizers. For high catastrophizers it mattered whether the distraction task was motivationally relevant: high catastrophizers reported less intense pain in the motivated-distraction group, as compared to the non-distracted control group. We conclude that increasing the motivational relevance of the distraction task may increase the effects of distraction, especially for those who catastrophize about pain., (Copyright 2010 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The purpose of this meta-analytic review was to quantify the effects of psychological therapies for the management of chronic pain in youth. Specifically, in this review we updated previous systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials by including new trials, and by adding disability and emotional functioning to pain as treatment outcomes. Electronic searches of the Cochrane Register of Randomised Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PsycLIT, EMBASE, and the Social Sciences Citation Index were conducted from inception through August 2008. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed, and data extracted on the three primary outcomes of interest. Twenty-five trials including 1247 young people met inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Meta-analytic findings demonstrated a large positive effect of psychological intervention on pain reduction at immediate post-treatment and follow-up in youth with headache, abdominal pain, and fibromyalgia. Small and non-significant effects were found for improvements in disability and emotional functioning, although there were limited data on these outcomes available in the included studies. Omnibus cognitive-behavioral therapy, relaxation therapy, and biofeedback all produced significant and positive effects on pain reduction. Studies directly comparing the effects of self-administered versus therapist-administered interventions found similar effects on pain reduction. Psychological therapies result in improvement in pain relief across several different pain conditions in children. Future trials are needed that incorporate non-pain outcome domains, that focus significant therapeutic content on reductions in disability, and that include extended follow-up to better understand maintenance of treatment effects.

The selection of outcome criteria for chronic pain, both the domain of measurement and the magnitude of change, in RCTs is largely determined by the investigators. The present study investigated patient-determined criteria for the magnitude of change necessary to achieve an 'acceptable outcome' (endpoint) on the brief pain inventory and two subscales of the multidimensional pain inventory. Seventy-eight patients attending a chronic pain out-patient clinic were asked to rate their current state on the measures and then complete the scales as they would if treatment were to result in an acceptable outcome. The differences between the two sets of scores are described in terms of raw change scores, percentage change and by comparing the judgments of acceptable outcomes to statistically defined criteria (reliable change index and clinically significant change). Participants indicated a lower level of pain severity, impact and interference and a higher level of activity as part of an acceptable outcome. The degree of acceptable changes indicated by participants was higher (median values=44-75%) than the 30-50% typically reported as the threshold for clinically significant change for measures of pain experience in other studies. We also conducted tests of two models of change judgment. Neither adequately fit the data. There were discrepancies between the patients' judgments of acceptable outcomes and the RCI and SCS criteria. Suggestions for future research and possible clinical implications are discussed.

Background: Psychological treatments are designed to treat pain, distress and disability, and are in common practice. No comprehensive systematic review has been published since 1999., Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of psychological therapies on pain, disability, and mood., Search Strategy: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological therapy were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE and Psychlit and CENTRAL from the beginning of each abstracting service until January 2008. A further search was undertaken from January 2008 to August 2008. Additional studies were identified from the reference lists of retrieved papers and from discussion with investigators., Selection Criteria: Full publications of RCTs of psychological treatments compared with an active treatment, waiting list or treatment as usual. Studies were excluded if the pain was primarily headache, or was associated with a malignant disease. Studies were also excluded if the number of patients in any treatment arm was less than 10., Data Collection and Analysis: Fifty-two studies were examined with a quality rating scale specifically designed for use with these studies. Data were extracted from 40 studies (4781 participants) by two authors. Two main classes of treatment (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) and Behaviour Therapy (BT)), were compared with two control conditions (Treatment as Usual (TAU) and Active control (AC)), at two assessment points (immediately following treatment and six months following treatment), giving eight comparisons. For each comparison, treatment effectiveness was assessed on three outcomes: pain, disability, and mood giving a total of 24 analyses., Main Results: Overall there is an absence of evidence for BT, except for pain immediately following treatment compared with TAU. CBT has some small positive effects for pain, disability and mood. At present there is insufficient data on quality or content of treatment to investigate their influence on outcome. The quality of the trial design has improved over time but the quality of treatments has not., Authors' Conclusions: CBT and BT have weak effects in improving pain. CBT and BT have minimal effects on disability associated with chronic pain. CBT and BT are effective in altering mood outcomes, and there is some evidence that these changes are maintained at six months.

Background: Headache, recurrent abdominal pain, and musculoskeletal pain affect many children, who report severe pain, distressed mood, and disability. Psychological therapies are emerging as effective interventions to treat children with chronic or recurrent pain. This is a substantially updated and expanded version of the Cochrane review published in 2003., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of psychological therapies for reducing pain, disability, and improving mood in children and adolescents with recurrent, episodic, or persistent pain., Search Strategy: Searches were undertaken of MEDLINE, PsycLIT, EMBASE and CONSORT. RCTs were sought in references of all identified studies, meta-analyses and reviews. Date of most recent search: August 2008., Selection Criteria: Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) with at least ten participants in each arm post-treatment comparing psychological therapies with placebo, waiting list or standard medical care for children or adolescents with episodic, recurrent or persistent pain, were eligible for inclusion., Data Collection and Analysis: All included studies were analysed and the quality of the studies recorded. All treatments were combined into one class: psychological treatments; headache and non-headache outcomes were separately analysed on three outcomes: pain, disability, and mood., Main Results: Thirty-four RCT studies were recovered; 29 met the inclusion criteria. The total number of participants completing treatments was 1432. Twenty studies addressed treatments for headache (including migraine); six for abdominal pain; one for both headache and abdominal pain, one study was for fibromyalgia, and one was for pain associated with sickle cell disease. The analysis of headache treatment versus control differences immediately post-treatment for pain gave an odds ratio (OR) of 5.51 (95% CI 3.28 to 9.24; z = 6.46, P < 0.05); NNT = 2.57 (CI 2.2 to 3.13). At follow-up, the OR was 9.91 (95% CI 3.73 to 26.33); z = 9.91, P < 0.05); NNT = 1.99 (CI 1.63 to 2.72). Analysis of non-headache treatment versus control differences immediately post-treatment for pain found a large effect size of -0.94 (95% CI -1.43 to -0.44) Z = 3.71, P < 0.05. At follow-up, a large effect size was found of -1.08 (95%CI -1.84 to -0.33); Z = 2.82, P < 0.05). There were no other significant effects., Authors' Conclusions: Psychological treatments are effective in pain control for children with headache and benefits appear to be maintained. Psychological treatments may also improve pain control for children with musculoskeletal and recurrent abdominal pain. There is little evidence available to estimate effects on disability or mood.

Randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses provide evidence for the efficacy of cognitive-behaviourally informed treatment (CBT) programmes for chronic pain. The current study aims to provide practice-based evidence for the effectiveness of CBT in routine clinical settings. Over a 10-year period 1013 pain patients were accepted into a 4 week in-patient pain management programme. Data from more than 800 patients was available at pre-treatment and at one month post-treatment and for around 600 patients at pre-treatment and at 9 months follow-up. Measures reported in this analysis were pain experience and interference, psychological distress (depression and anxiety), self-efficacy, catastrophizing, and walking. Change from pre-treatment to post-treatment and follow-up was assessed with conventional statistical tests, the computation of effect sizes and by the reliable change index (RCI) and clinically significant change (CSC) methodology. These analyses provide evidence of statistical improvement at post-treatment and follow-up and the RCI/CSC methodology suggested that between 1 in 3 and 1 in 7 (depending on the outcome measure) achieved clinically significant gains. There was also evidence that a small percentage of patients (1-2%) reliably deteriorated during the period of treatment. The limitations in the inferences that can be drawn from this study and of the methodology are discussed. A case is made for the application of benchmarking methods using data from RCTs in order to more fully evaluate practice and to generate better quality practice based evidence.

Since the introduction of behavioral medicine in the early 70s, cognitive-behavioral treatment interventions for chronic pain have expanded considerably. It is now well established that these interventions are effective in reducing the enormous suffering that patients with chronic pain have to bear. In addition, these interventions have potential economic benefits in that they appear to be cost-effective as well. Despite these achievements, there is still room for improvement. First, there is a substantial proportion of patients who do not appear to benefit from treatment interventions available. Second, although the effect sizes of most cognitive-behavioral treatments for chronic pain are comparable to those in psychopathology, they are quite modest. Third, there is little evidence for differential outcomes for different treatment methods. Fourth, there still is relatively little known about the specific biobehavioral mechanisms that lead to chronic pain and pain disability. One direction is to better match treatment programs to patients' characteristics. This can be done according to an "Aptitude X Treatment Interaction" framework, or from the perspective of the Moderator-Mediator distinction. In this introduction to the special series on what works for whom in cognitive-behavioral treatments for chronic pain, we review existing knowledge concerning both moderating and mediating variables in cognitive-behavioral treatments for chronic pain. We further argue in favor of theory-driven research as the only way to define specific a priori hypotheses about which patient-treatment interactions to expect. We also argue that replicated single-participant studies, with appropriate statistics, are likely to enhance new developments in this clinical research area.

This article reports the development of a protocol for the therapeutic application of "attention control" for chronic pain. Attention control is the limitation of the impact of pain by switching or retunning attention. An expert systems approach was used to develop the protocol. In the first stage an extensive literature search retrieved published and unpublished accounts of attention control strategies and a draft treatment manual was prepared. In the second stage 6 experts were recruited and they independently read and reviewed the draft manual. They were interviewed using a semi-structured protocol to elicit their views on the draft manual. The manual was then revised to accommodate the information and expertise. In addition to providing expert opinion on the manual the experts also raised issues about the process of change in psychological treatment for chronic pain. These issues were organized into a process model of change in chronic pain.

Background: An increasing number of children suffer with pain that lasts for six months or longer. Traditional treatment for such pain has been pharmacological and/or physical. Increasingly, following developments in the field of adult chronic pain management, psychological therapies are being employed to treat children with chronic or recurrent pain., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of psychological therapies in treating chronic or recurrent pain in children and adolescents, and to test the null hypothesis that psychological therapies are no more effective than placebo, waiting list control or standard medical care., Search Strategy: Electronic searches of the Cochrane Register of Randomised Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (1966-1999), Social Sciences Citation Index (1981-1999) and PsycLit (1974-1999) were made. RCTs were also sought in references of all identified studies, meta-analyses and reviews, and first authors and experts within the field were contacted. Date of the most recent search: December 1999., Selection Criteria: RCTs with at least five participants in each study arm which compared psychological therapies with placebo, waiting list or standard medical care for children or adolescents with chronic or recurrent pain were eligible for inclusion., Data Collection and Analysis: Data were inspected for heterogeneity. For homogeneous dichotomous data the odds ratio with 95% confidence interval were calculated on an intention to treat basis., Main Results: Thirty papers were recovered, representing 28 RCTs. Of these, 18 were analysable and included a total of 808 patients, 438 of whom entered treatment conditions. Fifteen were trials of chronic or recurrent headache; two for recurrent abdominal pain; and one for sickle cell pain. Only pain experience data from 13 trials were meta-analysable. Two meta-analyses were conducted. The first analysis of single treatments versus controls gave a pooled odds ratio of 8.83 (95% CI 4.33 to 18.03; z=5.98, P < 0.00001, df = 12 ). The second analysis (combined treatment versus control) produced a similar estimate: pooled odds ratio = 8.64 ( 95% CI = 4.13 to 18.07; z-5.73, P < 0.00001, df = 9 ). Both analyses indicate that psychological treatment is effective when compared with a pooled group of control conditions. From the pooled data set the NNT was 2.32 (95%CI 1.96 to 2.88)., Reviewer's Conclusions: There is very good evidence that psychological treatments, principally relaxation and cognitive behavioural therapy, are effective in reducing the severity and frequency of chronic headache in children and adolescents. There is at present no evidence for the effectiveness of psychological therapies in attenuating pain in conditions other than headache, and little evidence for the effectiveness of psychological therapies in improving non-pain outcomes.

A computer and a hand search of the literature recovered 33 papers from which 25 trials suitable for meta-analysis were identified. We compared the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural treatments with the waiting list control and alternative treatment control conditions. There was a great diversity of measurements which we grouped into domains representing major facets of pain. Effect sizes, corrected for measurement unreliability, were estimated for each domain. When compared with the waiting list control conditions cognitive-behavioural treatments were associated with significant effect sizes on all domains of measurement (median effect size across domains = 0.5). Comparison with alternative active treatments revealed that cognitive-behavioural treatments produced significantly greater changes for the domains of pain experience, cognitive coping and appraisal (positive coping measures), and reduced behavioural expression of pain. Differences on the following domains were not significant; mood/affect (depression and other, non-depression, measures), cognitive coping and appraisal (negative, e.g. catastrophization), and social role functioning. We conclude that active psychological treatments based on the principle of cognitive behavioural therapy are effective. We discuss the results with reference to the complexity and quality of the trials.

AIM OF REPORT. This report reviews the evidence about the effectiveness of treatments for chronic pain. While treatment of chronic pain is usually seen as an integrated service, this report concentrates on the individual interventions that constitute the service. HOW THE RESEARCH WAS CONDUCTED. Searches of databases and journals identified over 15,000 randomised studies with pain as an outcome, and many more which were not randomised. Over 150 systematic reviews relevant to chronic pain treatment were identified and their quality assessed using a simple scoring system. Systematic reviews conducted for this report were based mainly on randomised trials. The number needed to treat (NNT) was chosen as the output for the report. NNTs of 2-4 indicate effective treatments. Because NNT is treatment-specific it overcomes problems associated with highly variable placebo or control event rates in pain trials. Such variability is predominantly due to the limited numbers of patients in the clinical trials. Dichotomous outcome measures are important in synthesising information from many studies, and in deriving NNTs. Methods have been developed which allow mean information on pain relief and intensity to be converted reliably into the simple dichotomous outcome of at least 50% pain relief. RESEARCH FINDINGS. PHYSICAL INTERVENTIONS. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) has been shown not to be effective in postoperative and labour pain. In chronic pain, there is evidence that TENS effectiveness increases slowly, and that large doses need to be used. There is lack of evidence for the effectiveness of TENS in chronic pain. There is a lack of evidence for the effectiveness of relaxation. Intravenous systemic regional blockade with guanethidine has been shown to be without effect. Epidural corticosteroids are effective in the short term for back pain and sciatica. Injections of corticosteroids in or around shoulder joints for shoulder pain have been shown not to be effective. There is a lack of evidence supporting spinal cord stimulators. Case series are of poor quality and do not provide evidence of effectiveness, although at least 50% pain relief at 5 years is reported in over 50% of patients. PHARMACOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONS. Minor analgesics are important in chronic pain. NNTs were calculated for analgesics given orally for moderate or severe acute postoperative pain. The NNTs found ranged from 17 (poor) for codeine, 60 mg, to 2.5 (good) for ibuprofen, 400 mg. Anticonvulsant and antidepressant drugs are prescribed for neuropathic pains like diabetic neuropathy. NNTs are of the order of 2.5, showing them to be effective treatments. However, there are too few studies with too few patients to determine which is the best drug. Minor adverse events are common, and major adverse events occur in about 1 in 20 patients. There are no studies comparing antidepressants and anticonvulsants directly. Systemic local anaesthetic-type drugs have been shown to be effective in nerve injury pain but there is little or no evidence to support their use in migraine or cancer-related pain. Topical NSAIDs (for example, gels, creams) are effective in rheumatological conditions with an overall NNT of 3. There are too few studies to determine which is the best agent. Topical NSAIDs have few adverse events; most importantly they are without the major gastrointestinal adverse events found with oral NSAIDs, which might make them an important choice for some patients with peripheral arthritis. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

The article reviews the study "Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials of Psychological Therapy for Chronic Pain in Children and Adolescents, with a Subset Meta-Analysis of Pain Relief" by C. Eccleston and colleagues. It determines the efficacy of psychological interventions in reducing the frequency and severity of chronic pain in children and adolescents. It indicates that psychological interventions are effective reliever of chronic pain and distress in children and adolescents.