Chronic Low-back Pain Clinical Trial
Official title:
Efficacy of the Cognitive Functional Therapy (CFT) in Patients With Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: a Study Protocol for a Randomized Sham-controlled Trial
NCT number | NCT04518891 |
Other study ID # | 2604/2020 |
Secondary ID | |
Status | Recruiting |
Phase | N/A |
First received | |
Last updated | |
Start date | May 17, 2021 |
Est. completion date | December 2023 |
Chronic low back pain is a public health problem, and there is strong evidence that it is associated with a complex interaction of biopsychosocial factors. Cognitive functional therapy (CFT) is a promising new intervention that deals with potentially modifiable multidimensional aspects of pain (eg, provocative cognitive, movement and lifestyle behaviors). In order to better understand the contextual effects, the aim of the current study is to investigate the efficacy of CFT compared with a sham-intervention for pain intensity and disability post-intervention in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain (CLBP). This study is a randomized clinical trial (RCT) in which 152 (18 - 60 years old) patients with CLBP will be enrolled. The patients will be randomly allocated to receive: (1) CFT intervention or (2) sham-intervention. The experimental group will receive individualized CFT in a pragmatic manner (5 to 7 sessions) based on the clinical progression of participants. The sham group will attend six sessions: consisted of 30 minutes of photobiomodulation using a detuned device and more 15 minutes of talking about neutral topics. Participants will be assessed pre and post-intervention, three months and six months after randomization. Patients from both groups also will receive an educational booklet. The primary outcomes will be pain intensity and disability post-intervention. The secondary outcomes will be: pain intensity and disability at 3- and 6-month follow-up, as well as self-efficacy, global perceived effect of improvement and functioning post-intervention, 3- and 6-month follow-up. The patients and the assessor will be blinded to treatment administered (active vs. sham). The between-group differences (effects of treatment) and their respective 95% confidence intervals will be calculated by constructing linear mixed models. Treatment effect for the primary and secondary outcomes will be estimated using mixed linear models. To the best of our knowledge, the current study will be the first to compare CFT vs. sham intervention. Sham-controlled RCTs may help to understand the influence of non-specific factors on treatment outcomes. Considering complex interventions as CFT, it is imperative to understand the impact of contextual factors on outcomes.
Status | Recruiting |
Enrollment | 152 |
Est. completion date | December 2023 |
Est. primary completion date | June 2023 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | All |
Age group | 18 Years to 60 Years |
Eligibility | Inclusion Criteria: - Age between 18 to 60 years; - Current episode of CLBP lasting more than 3 months (including cases with pain in the lower limbs); - Seeking primary clinical care for at least 6 weeks ago for this episode of low back pain; - Primary pain located between T12 and the gluteal folds; - Pain intensity equal to or greater than 4 on the 0-10 numerical pain scale; - Pain caused by certain postures, activities and movements; - Score greater than 14% on the Oswestry Disability Index; - And be able to speak and understand Portuguese well to complete the questionnaires. Exclusion Criteria: - Classification in red flags (neoplastic diseases or tumors in the spine, inflammatory diseases, infections and fractures); - Leg pain as a primary problem (eg nerve root compression or disc prolapse with active radiculopathy, or lumbar stenosis); - Previous physiotherapy treatments (less than six months before the evaluation period); - History of spine surgery; - Pregnancy; - Rheumatological / inflammatory disease; - Progressive neurological disease. |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
Brazil | University of Sao Paulo | Ribeirão Preto | São Paulo |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
University of Sao Paulo |
Brazil,
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Other | Expactation: Standford ExpectationTreatment Scale (SETS) | The SETS is a scale with six items, three covering positive treatment related expectations and three regarding negative treatment related expectations. The SETS is comprised of a seven-point Likert-type response scale was chosen, varying from (1) 'strongly disagree' to (7) 'strongly agree'. An average of items 1, 3, and 5 yields the positive expectancy score (higher score means strong positive expectation), while an average of 2, 4, and 6 yields the negative expectancy score (higher score means strong negative expectation). | Baseline | |
Other | Depression: Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item (PHQ-9) | The PHQ-9 is a nine-item questionnaire designed to screen for depression in primary care and other medical settings. They incorporate DSM-IV depression criteria with other leading major depressive symptoms into a brief self-report instrument. Score ranges from 0 to 21. The standard cut-off score for screening to identify possible major depression is 10 or above. | Baseline | |
Other | Anxiety: Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale (GAD7) | The GAD-7 is a 7-item self-report measure of generalized anxiety symptoms grouped into one factor of generalized anxiety. Respondents score each item in a 4-point scale based on how often they have been bothered by the described symptoms over the last two weeks (not at all = 0; several days = 1; more than half the days = 2; nearly every day = 3). Total scores range from 0 to 21, with higher scores reflecting higher severity levels of anxiety. | Baseline | |
Other | Kinesiophobia: Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK) | This scale was used to assess fear and avoidance beliefs about movement and reinjury. The 17 statements were scored on 4-point scales from ''strongly disagree'' to ''strongly agree,'' yielding a total range from 17 to 68. Higher scores indicate more severe fear-avoidance beliefs. | Baseline | |
Other | Catastrophizing: Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) | The scale is composed of 13 items, the total score is the sum of the items divided by the number of items answered, with the minimum score being 0 and the maximum being 5 for each item. Higher scores indicated a greater presence of catastrophic thoughts. | Baseline | |
Primary | Pain intensity: Numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) | The NPRS used in this trial will consist of numbers from 0 to 10, in which 0 represents "no pain" and 10 represents "worst pain imaginable". High scores mean worse pain intensity. | Post-intervention | |
Primary | Low Back Pain Related Disability: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) | The ODI consists of 10 items, each of which has six response options. The total score will be calculated by summing up all the points, ranging from 10 to 50. This sum will be transformed into a percentage (0 to 100). High scores mean worse disability. | Post-intervention | |
Secondary | Pain intensity: Numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) | The NPRS used in this trial will consist of numbers from 0 to 10, in which 0 represents "no pain" and 10 represents "worst pain imaginable". High scores mean worse pain intensity. | 3 and 6 months after randomization | |
Secondary | Low Back Pain Related Disability: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) | The ODI consists of 10 items, each of which has six response options. The total score will be calculated by summing up all the points, ranging from 10 to 50. This sum will be transformed into a percentage (0 to 100). High scores mean worse disability. | 3 and 6 months after randomization | |
Secondary | Pain Self-Efficacy: Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) | The PSEQ has 10 items related individual's confidence to perform a certain task which are rated on a 7-point ordinal scale (ranging from 0: "not at all confident" to 6: "completely confident"). The score ranges from 0 to 60, higher score means better self-efficacy. | Post-intervention, 3 and 6 months after randomization | |
Secondary | Global perceived effect: Global Perceived Effect Scale (GPES) | GPES is an 11-point scale ranging from -5 ("vastly worse") through 0 (no change) to +5 (completely recovered).Higher score means better perception of improvement. | Post-intervention, 3 and 6 months after randomization | |
Secondary | Function: Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) | In the PSFS patients are asked to identify up to three important activities that they are having difficulties with or are unable to perform due to their condition. In addition, the patients are asked to rate, on an 11-point scale (ranging from 0 to 10) their current level of ability associated with each activity. Score ranges from 0 (unable to perform) to 10 (able to perform at preinjury level). Higher score means better function. | Post-intervention, 3 and 6 months after randomization |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Recruiting |
NCT05963451 -
Brain, Psychological and Epigenetic Determinants for Optimizing the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain
|
||
Completed |
NCT04283370 -
A Study Protocol Comparing a Home Rehabilitation Program Versus e-Health Program in Low Back Pain
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04824547 -
Evaluation of Long-Term Continuity of Exercises in Low Back Pain Individuals
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04046419 -
In Turkish Version "Health Care Providers and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS)"
|
||
Completed |
NCT04399772 -
COgNitive FuncTional Therapy+ for Chronic Low Back paIn
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05780021 -
Motivational Support Program in Chronic Low Back Pain After Multidisciplinary Functional Rehabilitation
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04555278 -
Combining Non-invasive Brain Stimulation and Exercise to Treat Low Back Pain
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04530071 -
Evaluation of Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of CordSTEM-DD in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain
|
Phase 1/Phase 2 | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT06347328 -
The Benefits of Posterior Joint Infiltration in Chronic Low Back Pain
|
N/A | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT06080464 -
Clinician Satisfaction With the VERABAND™
|
N/A | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT04940715 -
Efficacy of Passive Joint Mobilization vs Mobilization With Movement on Pain Processing in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT04683718 -
A First in Human Feasibility Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of the BIOTRONIK Prospera SCS System With HomeStream Remote Management
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05724160 -
Using Non-Weightbearing Stationary Elliptical Machines for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT06030128 -
Core Stabilization Exercise Therapy in Chronic Lower Back Back Management in Community Dwelling Older Adults
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05846087 -
Mobile App-delivered Sleep Therapy (SleepFix) for Individuals With Chronic Low Back Pain and Insomnia
|
N/A | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT05396014 -
The BEST Trial: Biomarkers for Evaluating Spine Treatments
|
Phase 4 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT06140862 -
Ankle Spine Syndrome "RAFFET Syndrome II
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT05512338 -
Motivation and Adherence to Exercise Recommendations
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05021146 -
Essential Oil for Chronic Low Back Pain
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT06423755 -
Swimming Versus Standard Physiotherapy Care as Rehabilitation Modalities for Persistent Low Back Pain: Feasibility Study
|
N/A |