Cited by 123Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and Treatment

New generation psychological treatments in chronic pain

Open access
McCracken, Lance M, Yu, Lin, Vowles, Kevin E·2022·BMJ

Abstract

Chronic pain conditions are common and have a considerable impact on health and wellbeing. This impact can be reduced by cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), the most commonly applied psychological approach to chronic pain. At the same time, CBT continues to develop, and now includes what is sometimes called “third wave” CBT. In this review, we examine the evidence for application of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), a principal example of this new wave or latest generation of treatment approaches, in people with chronic pain. We identified 25 randomized controlled trials of ACT for adults with chronic pain. Across the included trials, small to large effect sizes favoring ACT were reported for key outcomes including pain interference, disability, depression, and quality of life. Evidence from three studies provided some support for the cost effectiveness of ACT for chronic pain. Evidence also supported the mediating role of theoretically consistent processes of change (psychological flexibility) in relation to treatment outcomes. Investigation of moderators and predictors of outcomes was limited and inconsistent. In future, a greater focus on process based treatments is recommended. This should include continued identification of evidence based processes of change, and research methods more suited to understanding the experience and needs of individual people.

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 · 10.1136/bmj-2021-057212

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. [8]8. ns=effect sizes for non-significant effects not reported; effect size (ES) signs are reversed from original manuscript in some cases to be consistent across all studies. Positive ES indicate superiority of ACT v control. CPAQ=chronic pain acceptance questionnaire; GACT=group ACT; ITT=intention to treat analyses; RPT=recommended pharmacological treatment; WL=waiting list. CLINICAL REVIEW by copyright. on 15 March 2022 at The HSC (Health Service Northern Ireland). Protected http://www.bmj.com/ BMJ: first published as 10.1136/bmj-2021-057212 on 28 February 2022. Downloaded from
  2. [28]28. Hayes SC. Acceptance and commitment therapy and the new behavior therapies: mindfulness, acceptance, and relationship. In: Hayes SC, Follette VM, Linehan MM, eds. Mindfulness and acceptance: Expanding the cognitive-behavioral tradition. Guildford Press 2004.1-29.
  3. [30]30. Fordyce WE. Behavioral methods for chronic pain and illness. CV Mosby, 1976.
  4. [32]32. Hayes S, Strosahl K, Wilson K. Acceptance and commitment therapy: The process and practice of mindful change. 2nd ed. Guilford Press, 2012.
  5. [33]33. Hayes SC, Strosahl KD, Wilson KG. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: The process and practice of mindful change. 2nd ed. Guilford Press, 2012.
  6. [48]48. Lin J, Paganini S, Sander L, etal. An internet-based intervention for chronic pain: A three-arm randomized controlled study of the effectiveness of guided and unguided acceptance and commitment therapy. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2017;114:681-8.pmid: 29082858
  7. [62]62. Kemani MK, Olsson GL, Lekander M, Hesser H, Andersson E, Wicksell RK. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of acceptance and commitment therapy and applied relaxation for longstanding pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Clin J Pain 2015;31:1004-16. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000203 pmid: 25585272 · DOI · Paper page
  8. [102]102. CLINICAL REVIEW by copyright. on 15 March 2022 at The HSC (Health Service Northern Ireland). Protected http://www.bmj.com/ BMJ: first published as 10.1136/bmj-2021-057212 on 28 February 2022. Downloaded

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McCracken, L. M., Yu, L., & Vowles, K. E.
Affiliations
  • Uppsala University (SE)
  • Middlesex University London (GB)
  • Queen's University Belfast (GB)
Corresponding author
McCracken, Lance M
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2022-02-28
Volume
376
Pages
e057212
ISSN
1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4214510919
Cited by
123
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 7
FWCI
4.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
chronic pain, acceptance and commitment therapy, third-wave CBT, psychological flexibility, pain interference, disability, depression, quality of life, cost-effectiveness, change processes, psychological intervention
MeSH terms
Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Chronic Pain, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

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