"I don't have chronic back pain anymore": Patient Experiences in Pain Reprocessing Therapy for Chronic Back Pain.

In a recently published randomized controlled trial, two-thirds of the patients receiving a novel psychological treatment, pain reprocessing therapy (PRT), reported elimination or near-elimination of chronic back pain. The mechanisms of PRT and related treatments remain poorly understood but are hypothesized to center on pain reappraisal, fear reduction, and exposure-potentiated extinction. Here, we investigated treatment mechanisms from the participants' perspective. A sample of 32 adults with chronic back pain who received PRT completed semi-structured posttreatment interviews about their treatment experiences. The interviews were analyzed with multiphase thematic analysis. The analyses identified 3 major themes reflecting participants' understanding of how PRT led to pain relief: 1) reappraisal to reduce fear of pain, which included guiding participants to relate to pain as a helpful indicator, overcoming pain-related fear and avoidance, and reconceptualizing pain as a "sensation;" 2) the link between pain, emotions, and, stress, which included gaining insight into these connections and resolving difficult emotions; and 3) social connections, which included patient-provider alliance, therapist belief in the treatment model, and peer models of recovery from chronic pain. Our findings support the hypothesized mechanisms of PRT centered on pain reappraisal and fear reduction, but also highlight additional processes from the participants' perspective, including a focus on emotions and relationships. This study underscores the value of qualitative research methods in illuminating the mechanisms of novel pain therapies. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents participants' perspectives on their experience engaging in a novel psychotherapy for chronic pain, PRT. Through pain reappraisal, linking pain, emotions, and stress, and connecting with their therapist and peers, many participants reported an elimination or near-elimination of their chronic back pain with therapy.

Effect of Pain Reprocessing Therapy vs Placebo and Usual Care for Patients With Chronic Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Chronic back pain (CBP) is a leading cause of disability, and treatment is often ineffective. Approximately 85% of cases are primary CBP, for which peripheral etiology cannot be identified, and maintenance factors include fear, avoidance, and beliefs that pain indicates injury. Objective: To test whether a psychological treatment (pain reprocessing therapy [PRT]) aiming to shift patients' beliefs about the causes and threat value of pain provides substantial and durable pain relief from primary CBP and to investigate treatment mechanisms. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial with longitudinal functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and 1-year follow-up assessment was conducted in a university research setting from November 2017 to August 2018, with 1-year follow-up completed by November 2019. Clinical and fMRI data were analyzed from January 2019 to August 2020. The study compared PRT with an open-label placebo treatment and with usual care in a community sample. Interventions: Participants randomized to PRT participated in 1 telehealth session with a physician and 8 psychological treatment sessions over 4 weeks. Treatment aimed to help patients reconceptualize their pain as due to nondangerous brain activity rather than peripheral tissue injury, using a combination of cognitive, somatic, and exposure-based techniques. Participants randomized to placebo received an open-label subcutaneous saline injection in the back; participants randomized to usual care continued their routine, ongoing care. Main Outcomes and Measures: One-week mean back pain intensity score (0 to 10) at posttreatment, pain beliefs, and fMRI measures of evoked pain and resting connectivity. Results: At baseline, 151 adults (54% female; mean [SD] age, 41.1 [15.6] years) reported mean (SD) pain of low to moderate severity (mean [SD] pain intensity, 4.10 [1.26] of 10; mean [SD] disability, 23.34 [10.12] of 100) and mean (SD) pain duration of 10.0 (8.9) years. Large group differences in pain were observed at posttreatment, with a mean (SD) pain score of 1.18 (1.24) in the PRT group, 2.84 (1.64) in the placebo group, and 3.13 (1.45) in the usual care group. Hedges g was -1.14 for PRT vs placebo and -1.74 for PRT vs usual care (P < .001). Of 151 total participants, 33 of 50 participants (66%) randomized to PRT were pain-free or nearly pain-free at posttreatment (reporting a pain intensity score of 0 or 1 of 10), compared with 10 of 51 participants (20%) randomized to placebo and 5 of 50 participants (10%) randomized to usual care. Treatment effects were maintained at 1-year follow-up, with a mean (SD) pain score of 1.51 (1.59) in the PRT group, 2.79 (1.78) in the placebo group, and 3.00 (1.77) in the usual care group. Hedges g was -0.70 for PRT vs placebo (P = .001) and -1.05 for PRT vs usual care (P < .001) at 1-year follow-up. Longitudinal fMRI showed (1) reduced responses to evoked back pain in the anterior midcingulate and the anterior prefrontal cortex for PRT vs placebo; (2) reduced responses in the anterior insula for PRT vs usual care; (3) increased resting connectivity from the anterior prefrontal cortex and the anterior insula to the primary somatosensory cortex for PRT vs both control groups; and (4) increased connectivity from the anterior midcingulate to the precuneus for PRT vs usual care. Conclusions and Relevance: Psychological treatment centered on changing patients' beliefs about the causes and threat value of pain may provide substantial and durable pain relief for people with CBP. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03294148.