Cited by 34Pediatric Pain Management TechniquesMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and Treatment

Getting back to living: Further evidence for the efficacy of an interdisciplinary pediatric pain treatment program

Bruce, Barbara K., Ale, Chelsea M., Harrison, Tracy E., Bee, Susan, Luedtke, Connie, Geske, Jennifer, Weiss, Karen E.·2017·The Clinical Journal of Pain

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study examined key functional outcomes following a 3-week interdisciplinary pediatric pain rehabilitation program for adolescents with chronic pain. Maintenance of gains was evaluated at 3-month follow-up. METHODS: Participants included 171 adolescents (12 to 18 y of age) with chronic pain who completed a hospital-based outpatient pediatric pain rehabilitation program. Participants completed measures of functional disability, depressive symptoms, pain catastrophizing, opioid use, school attendance, and pain severity at admission, discharge, and at 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Similar to other interdisciplinary pediatric pain rehabilitation program outcome studies, significant improvements were observed at the end of the program. These improvements appeared to be maintained or further improved at 3-month follow-up. Nearly 14% of the patients were taking daily opioid medication at admission to the program. All adolescents were completely tapered off of these medications at the end of the 3-week program and remained abstinent at 3-month follow-up. DISCUSSION: This study adds to the available data supporting interdisciplinary pediatric pain rehabilitation as effective in improving functioning and psychological distress even when discontinuing opioids. Implications for future research and limitations of the study are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ajp.0000000000000433

Cites

54 of 54 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bruce, B. K., Ale, C. M., Harrison, T. E., Bee, S., Luedtke, C., Geske, J., & Weiss, K. E.
Affiliations
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Anesthesiology
  • Nursing
Corresponding author
  • Bruce, Barbara K.
  • Ale, Chelsea M.
  • Bee, Susan
  • Weiss, Karen E.
Venue
The Clinical Journal of Pain
Published
2017-06
Volume
33
Issue
6
Pages
535-542
ISSN
0749-8047 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2516286125
Cited by
34
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1
FWCI
4.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Mayo Clinic
  • Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
pediatric chronic pain, interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation, adolescents, functional disability, maintenance of treatment gains, opioid tapering, opioid use, pain catastrophizing, depressive symptoms, school attendance, pain intensity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Ambulatory Care, Analgesics, Opioid, Child, Depression, Disability Evaluation, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Pain Measurement, Schools, Treatment Outcome, Catastrophization, Chronic 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