Cited by 77Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsPain Management and Treatment

Specific and general therapeutic mechanisms in cognitive behavioral treatment of chronic pain

Burns, John W., Nielson, Warren R., Jensen, Mark P., Heapy, Alicia, Czlapinski, Rebecca, Kerns, Robert D.·2015·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Many studies document efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for chronic pain, but few studies have examined potential treatment mechanisms. In analyses of data from a controlled trial, we examined whether changes in attitudes toward adopting a pain self-management approach-CBT-specific mechanisms-and quality of working alliance and patient expectations-general mechanisms-early in treatment were related to later-treatment changes in outcomes. METHOD: Our sample was composed of 94 adults (primarily White; mean age: 55.3 years, SD = 11.7; 23% female) who participated in enhanced or standard CBT, and completed measures of attitudes toward self-management (mechanisms), pain intensity, pain interference, depressive symptoms and goal accomplishment (outcomes) at pretreatment, 4- and 8-week assessments, and posttreatment. Working alliance was measured at 4 and 8 weeks, and patient expectations at 3 weeks. RESULTS: Because the CBT conditions produced comparable improvements, we combined them. Precontemplation and action attitudes toward pain self-management showed significant quadratic trends over assessments such that 67% and 94.1% (respectively) of total pre-post changes occurred in the first 4 weeks. Outcomes showed only significant linear trends. Cross-lagged regressions revealed that pretreatment-to-4-week changes in action attitudes and 4-week levels of working alliance were related significantly with 4-week-to-posttreatment changes in pain intensity and interference but not vice versa and that 3-week patient expectations were related to 4-week-to-posttreatment changes in interference. Analyses in which mechanism factors were entered simultaneously revealed nonsignificant unique effects on outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Adopting an action attitude early in treatment may represent a specific CBT mechanism but with effects held largely in common with 2 general mechanisms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0037208

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a lumbar fusion study, high pre-operative depression was the only significant predictor of failure to return to work after surgery, even when pre- and post-operative pain intensity were included.

    “In multivariate analyses, high pre-operative symptoms of depression remained the only significant predictor of failure to return to work after surgery, even in multivariate models with pre- and post-operative pain intensity included.”
  • Patients with pre-operative depression scores in the upper half were about one-third less likely to return to work, and those who returned took nearly twice as long after surgery to start working again.

    “patients in the upper half of the distribution of pre-operative depression scores were approximately ⅓ less likely to return to work and, among those who did return, took nearly twice as long post-operatively to begin working again 56.”
  • In that lumbar fusion study, depression fully mediated the prospective association between pain intensity and occupational disability.

    “In this study, depression fully mediated the prospective association between pain intensity and occupational disability.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Burns, J. W., Nielson, W. R., Jensen, M. P., Heapy, A., Czlapinski, R., & Kerns, R. D.
Affiliations
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
  • St Joseph's Health Care (CA)
  • University of Washington Medical Center (US)
  • VA Connecticut Healthcare System (US)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2015
Volume
83
Issue
1
Pages
1-11
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W2036053437
Cited by
77
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 3
FWCI
4.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Department of Veterans Affairs
  • Health Services Research and Development Research Enhancement Award Program (REA 08-266)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, chronic pain, therapeutic mechanisms, pain self-management, therapeutic relationship, patient expectations, pain intensity, pain interference, depressive symptoms, goal achievement, precontemplation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Chronic Pain

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