Mindfulness vs Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Chronic Low Back Pain Treated With Opioids: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Aleksandra E Zgierska, Robert R Edwards, Bruce Barrett, Cindy A Burzinski, Robert N Jamison, Yoshio Nakamura, Mary F Henningfield, Wen-Jan Tuan, Chan Shen, Nalini Sehgal, Robert P Lennon, Huamei Dong, Vernon M Chinchilli, Yuxin Liu, Alyssa Turnquist, Anthony R Schiefelbein, Elizabeth A Jacobs, Christin Veasley, Penney Cowan, Eric L Garland
{"title":"Mindfulness vs Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Chronic Low Back Pain Treated With Opioids: A Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Aleksandra E Zgierska, Robert R Edwards, Bruce Barrett, Cindy A Burzinski, Robert N Jamison, Yoshio Nakamura, Mary F Henningfield, Wen-Jan Tuan, Chan Shen, Nalini Sehgal, Robert P Lennon, Huamei Dong, Vernon M Chinchilli, Yuxin Liu, Alyssa Turnquist, Anthony R Schiefelbein, Elizabeth A Jacobs, Christin Veasley, Penney Cowan, Eric L Garland","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.3204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Chronic low back pain (CLBP) can necessitate opioid therapy. Effective approaches to reduce CLBP's symptoms and opioid-related harms are needed. Cognitive behavioral (CBT) and mindfulness-based (MBT) therapies may be useful but have not been well-studied for opioid-treated CLBP.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the effectiveness of MBT vs CBT in opioid-treated CLBP, hypothesizing MBT's superiority.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>In this 12-month community partner-informed, partially masked, multisite, randomized clinical trial, participants at primary and specialty care clinics and community settings were randomly assigned (1:1) to MBT or CBT groups. Participants included English-fluent adults (21 years or older), without prior MBT or CBT training, and with moderate-to-severe CLBP (average score ≥3 on the Brief Pain Inventory [BPI]; functional limitation score ≥20 on the Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), treated with an opioid dosage of at least 15 mg/d of morphine milligram equivalents (MME) for at least 3 months. Outcome data were collected from July 1, 2017, to November 23, 2022. Analysis used the intention-to-treat approach.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Manual-based MBT or CBT interventions consisting of 8 weekly therapist-led group sessions and at-home practice.</p><p><strong>Outcomes and measures: </strong>Self-reported coprimary (average pain severity, 0-10 [BPI]; functional limitations, 0-100 [ODI]) and secondary (mental and physical health-related quality of life [QOL] on the Medical Outcomes Study 12-Item Short Form Health Survey and opioid dose in MME per day, Timeline Followback) outcomes compared at 6 and 12 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 6024 screened individuals, 2926 were ineligible, 2328 were eligible, and 770 were enrolled, including 385 in the MBT and 385 in the CBT groups. Of these, 434 participants (56.4%) were female, 647 (84.0%) identified as non-Hispanic ethnicity, and 630 (81.8%) identified as White race; mean (SD) age was 57.8 (11.3) years. The mean (SD) BPI average pain score was 6.1 (1.6) (moderate pain) and the mean (SD) ODI functional limitation score was 47.2 (14.0) (moderate functional limitations), with reduced physical (mean [SD], 28.5 [8.3]) and mental (mean [SD], 42.5 [11.8]) health-related QOL on the SF-12 and high opioid dosage (mean [SD], 177 [1041] MME/d). Over time, each group significantly improved their outcomes, without serious adverse effects. The intention-to-treat linear mixed-effects model analysis did not detect significant between-group differences at 6 and 12 months for pain (0.21 [95% CI, -0.05 to 0.48; P = .12] and 0.13 [95% CI, -0.13 to 0.40; P = .33], respectively) or function (0.07 [95% CI, -1.80 to 1.93; P = .94], and 0.27 [95% CI, -1.59 to 2.12; P = .78], respectively) and indicated MBT's noninferiority relative to CBT on primary outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this large trial, CLBP-related symptoms improved, while opioid dosage decreased in both MBT and CBT groups at 6 and 12 months. Increasing availability of these safe psychological therapies could help reduce individual and societal burdens of refractory, opioid-treated CLBP.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03115359.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 4","pages":"e253204"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Network Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.3204","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) can necessitate opioid therapy. Effective approaches to reduce CLBP's symptoms and opioid-related harms are needed. Cognitive behavioral (CBT) and mindfulness-based (MBT) therapies may be useful but have not been well-studied for opioid-treated CLBP.

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of MBT vs CBT in opioid-treated CLBP, hypothesizing MBT's superiority.

Design, setting, and participants: In this 12-month community partner-informed, partially masked, multisite, randomized clinical trial, participants at primary and specialty care clinics and community settings were randomly assigned (1:1) to MBT or CBT groups. Participants included English-fluent adults (21 years or older), without prior MBT or CBT training, and with moderate-to-severe CLBP (average score ≥3 on the Brief Pain Inventory [BPI]; functional limitation score ≥20 on the Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), treated with an opioid dosage of at least 15 mg/d of morphine milligram equivalents (MME) for at least 3 months. Outcome data were collected from July 1, 2017, to November 23, 2022. Analysis used the intention-to-treat approach.

Interventions: Manual-based MBT or CBT interventions consisting of 8 weekly therapist-led group sessions and at-home practice.

Outcomes and measures: Self-reported coprimary (average pain severity, 0-10 [BPI]; functional limitations, 0-100 [ODI]) and secondary (mental and physical health-related quality of life [QOL] on the Medical Outcomes Study 12-Item Short Form Health Survey and opioid dose in MME per day, Timeline Followback) outcomes compared at 6 and 12 months.

Results: Among 6024 screened individuals, 2926 were ineligible, 2328 were eligible, and 770 were enrolled, including 385 in the MBT and 385 in the CBT groups. Of these, 434 participants (56.4%) were female, 647 (84.0%) identified as non-Hispanic ethnicity, and 630 (81.8%) identified as White race; mean (SD) age was 57.8 (11.3) years. The mean (SD) BPI average pain score was 6.1 (1.6) (moderate pain) and the mean (SD) ODI functional limitation score was 47.2 (14.0) (moderate functional limitations), with reduced physical (mean [SD], 28.5 [8.3]) and mental (mean [SD], 42.5 [11.8]) health-related QOL on the SF-12 and high opioid dosage (mean [SD], 177 [1041] MME/d). Over time, each group significantly improved their outcomes, without serious adverse effects. The intention-to-treat linear mixed-effects model analysis did not detect significant between-group differences at 6 and 12 months for pain (0.21 [95% CI, -0.05 to 0.48; P = .12] and 0.13 [95% CI, -0.13 to 0.40; P = .33], respectively) or function (0.07 [95% CI, -1.80 to 1.93; P = .94], and 0.27 [95% CI, -1.59 to 2.12; P = .78], respectively) and indicated MBT's noninferiority relative to CBT on primary outcomes.

Conclusions and relevance: In this large trial, CLBP-related symptoms improved, while opioid dosage decreased in both MBT and CBT groups at 6 and 12 months. Increasing availability of these safe psychological therapies could help reduce individual and societal burdens of refractory, opioid-treated CLBP.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03115359.

阿片类药物治疗慢性腰痛的正念与认知行为疗法:一项随机临床试验
重要性:慢性腰痛(CLBP)可能需要阿片类药物治疗。需要有效的方法来减少CLBP的症状和阿片类药物相关的危害。认知行为(CBT)和正念(MBT)疗法可能对阿片类药物治疗的CLBP有用,但尚未得到充分研究。目的:比较MBT与CBT治疗阿片类药物治疗CLBP的疗效,并假设MBT的优势。设计、设置和参与者:在这项为期12个月的社区伴侣知情、部分隐瞒、多地点、随机临床试验中,初级和专科护理诊所和社区设置的参与者被随机分配(1:1)到MBT或CBT组。参与者包括英语流利的成年人(21岁或以上),没有先前的MBT或CBT培训,中度至重度CLBP(短暂疼痛量表[BPI]平均评分≥3分;Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)功能限制评分≥20分),服用吗啡毫克当量(MME)至少15 mg/d的阿片类药物治疗至少3个月。结果数据收集于2017年7月1日至2022年11月23日。分析采用意向治疗方法。干预:以手册为基础的MBT或CBT干预,包括每周8次治疗师领导的小组会议和家庭实践。结果和测量:自我报告的主要(平均疼痛严重程度,0-10 [BPI];功能限制(0-100 [ODI])和次要(精神和身体健康相关的生活质量[QOL])在医学结局研究12项简短健康调查和阿片类药物剂量每日MME,时间线随访)6个月和12个月的结果进行比较。结果:在6024名筛选个体中,2926人不符合条件,2328人符合条件,770人入组,其中MBT组385人,CBT组385人。其中,434名参与者(56.4%)为女性,647名(84.0%)为非西班牙裔,630名(81.8%)为白种人;平均(SD)年龄57.8(11.3)岁。平均(SD) BPI平均疼痛评分为6.1(1.6)(中度疼痛),平均(SD) ODI功能限制评分为47.2(14.0)(中度功能限制),SF-12的身体健康相关生活质量(平均[SD], 28.5[8.3])和精神健康相关生活质量(平均[SD], 42.5[11.8])降低,阿片类药物剂量高(平均[SD], 177 [1041] MME/d)。随着时间的推移,两组患者的治疗效果均显著改善,且没有出现严重的不良反应。意向治疗线性混合效应模型分析未发现6个月和12个月时组间疼痛有显著差异(0.21 [95% CI, -0.05至0.48;p =。12]和0.13 [95% CI, -0.13至0.40;p =。33])或功能(0.07 [95% CI, -1.80至1.93;p =。94]和0.27 [95% CI, -1.59至2.12;p =。[78]),并表明MBT相对于CBT在主要结局上的非劣效性。结论和相关性:在这项大型试验中,MBT组和CBT组在6个月和12个月时,clbp相关症状得到改善,而阿片类药物剂量减少。增加这些安全的心理疗法的可用性可以帮助减轻难治性阿片类药物治疗的CLBP的个人和社会负担。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT03115359。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JAMA Network Open
JAMA Network Open Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
16.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
2126
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: JAMA Network Open, a member of the esteemed JAMA Network, stands as an international, peer-reviewed, open-access general medical journal.The publication is dedicated to disseminating research across various health disciplines and countries, encompassing clinical care, innovation in health care, health policy, and global health. JAMA Network Open caters to clinicians, investigators, and policymakers, providing a platform for valuable insights and advancements in the medical field. As part of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications, JAMA Network Open contributes to the collective knowledge and understanding within the medical community.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信