Evaluation of Stepped Care for Chronic Pain (ESCAPE) in Veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan Conflicts: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Open accessAbstract
IMPORTANCE: Despite the prevalence and the functional, psychological, and economic impact of chronic pain, few intervention studies of treatment of chronic pain in veterans have been performed. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a stepped-care intervention is more effective than usual care, as hypothesized, in reducing pain-related disability, pain interference, and pain severity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed a randomized clinical trial comparing stepped care with usual care for chronic pain. We enrolled 241 veterans from Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Operation New Dawn with chronic (>3 months) and disabling (Roland Morris Disability Scale score, ≥7) musculoskeletal pain of the cervical or lumbar spine or extremities (shoulders, knees, and hips) in the Evaluation of Stepped Care for Chronic Pain (ESCAPE) trial from December 20, 2007, through June 30, 2011. The 9-month follow-up was completed by April 2012. Patients received treatment at a postdeployment clinic and 5 general medicine clinics at a Veterans Affairs medical center. INTERVENTIONS: Step 1 included 12 weeks of analgesic treatment and optimization according to an algorithm coupled with pain self-management strategies; step 2, 12 weeks of cognitive behavioral therapy. All intervention aspects were delivered by nurse care managers. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Pain-related disability (Roland Morris Disability Scale), pain interference (Brief Pain Inventory), and pain severity (Graded Chronic Pain Scale). RESULTS: The primary analysis included 121 patients receiving the stepped-care intervention and 120 patients receiving usual care. At 9 months, the mean decrease from baseline in the Roland Morris Disability Scale score was 1.7 (95% CI, -2.6 to -0.9) points in the usual care group and 3.7 (95% CI, -4.5 to -2.8) points in the intervention group (between-group difference, -1.9 [95% CI, -3.2 to -0.7] points; P=.002). The mean decrease from baseline in the Pain Interference subscale score of the Brief Pain Inventory was 0.9 points in the usual care group and 1.7 points in the intervention group (between-group difference, -0.8 [95% CI, -1.3 to -0.3] points; P=.003). The Graded Chronic Pain Scale severity score was reduced by 4.5 points in the usual care group and 11.1 points in the intervention group (between-group difference, -6.6 [95% CI, -10.5 to -2.7] points; P=.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A stepped-care intervention that combined analgesics, self-management strategies, and brief cognitive behavioral therapy resulted in statistically significant reductions in pain-related disability, pain interference, and pain severity in veterans with chronic musculoskeletal pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00386243.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 53 · Cited by 125
- Authors
- Bair, M. J., Ang, D., Wu, J., Outcalt, S. D., Sargent, C., Kempf, C., Froman, A., Schmid, A. A., Damush, T. M., Yu, Z., Davis, L. W., & Kroenke, K.
- Affiliations
- Regenstrief Institute (US)
- Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
- Indiana University Indianapolis (US)
- Health Services Research & Development (US)
- Colorado State University (US)
- Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Bair, Matthew J.
- ORCID
- Venue
- JAMA Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2015-05-01
- Volume
- 175
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 682
- ISSN
- 2168-6106 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2125000185
- Cited by
- 125
- References
- 53
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 10.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- JAMA Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- IUScholarWorks (Indiana University) (submittedVersion)
- Publisher
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
- Keywords
- chronic pain, stepped care, veterans, musculoskeletal pain, pain-related disability, pain interference, pain intensity, cognitive behavioral therapy, pain self-management, analgesic treatment, nurse care managers, Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Veterans Affairs health care, usual care comparison, Brief Pain Inventory, Graded Chronic Pain Scale, post-traumatic stress
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Analgesics, Combined Modality Therapy, Disability Evaluation, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Monitoring, Physiologic, Nursing Process, Pain Measurement, Self Care, Veterans, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Iraq War, 2003-2011, Afghan Campaign 2001-, Chronic Pain, Musculoskeletal Pain, Pain Management
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review