Cited by 125Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and TreatmentPediatric Pain Management Techniques

Evaluation of Stepped Care for Chronic Pain (ESCAPE) in Veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan Conflicts: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access
Bair, Matthew J., Ang, Dennis, Wu, Jingwei, Outcalt, Samantha D., Sargent, Christy, Kempf, Carol, Froman, Amanda, Schmid, Arlene A. +4 more·2015·JAMA Internal Medicine

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.97

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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.
Venue
JAMA Internal Medicine
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
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