Cited by 18Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

New approaches towards chronic pain: Patient experiences of a solution-focused pain management programme

Open access
Dargan, Peter J, Simm, Rebecca, Murray, Craig·2014·British Journal of Pain

Abstract

Research has suggested that Solution-Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) may be effective in facilitating meaningful change for those living with chronic pain. This study aimed to further this understanding through exploring the experiences of people living with chronic pain, who had attended an 8-week solution-focused pain management programme. The design of this study was conducted in consultation with a service-user advisory group, and employed a qualitative and interpretative design rooted in critical community psychology, participatory research frameworks and emancipatory disability research. Five participants opted-in to the study following an opportunity sampling method of persons who had attended a programme in the last 18 months. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Five main themes were identified: ‘Accessing the pain management programme’, ‘A solution-focused group’, ‘The solution-focused clinician’, ‘Solutions and changes’ and ‘Challenges and improvements’. Clinical and research implications of the findings are discussed. Summary points: There has been an international proliferation of pain management programmes (PMPs) aimed at helping those with chronic pain to live well, despite an unremitting condition. Arguably, the most popular psychological approaches used within PMPs are informed by cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). Despite a supportive evidence base for psychological approaches in pain management, there is a recognised need for further research into alternative approaches and their effectiveness. Emerging research and policy recommendations are beginning to value the expertise of those living with chronic conditions, particularly how these perspectives can be used to develop effective treatments and services. SFBT is an approach aimed at achieving a patient’s goals or ‘preferred future’ through identifying and utilising their expertise. SFBT may have significant efficacy in helping those with chronic conditions to live improved, meaningful lives.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This qualitative study explored five patients’ experiences of an 8-week solution-focused pain management programme in a community setting. Participants described the programme as supporting meaningful psychological and behavioural change, particularly through individualised, strengths-based group processes, though transition after the group remained challenging.

Key findings

  • Five main themes were identified: “Accessing the pain management programme,” “A solution-focused group,” “The solution-focused clinician,” “Solutions and changes,” and “Challenges and improvements.”
  • Participants valued having their expertise invited and shared; they described increased support, meaning, purpose, and connectedness through group participation.
  • The solution-focused clinician’s one-to-one communication within group exercises helped participants feel individually recognised, tailored to, and taken seriously despite living with an “invisible condition.”
  • The greatest reported challenge was sustaining self-determined changes after the group ended, described as “a hell of a step” when support from others was difficult to access.

Methods

  • Qualitative design using semi-structured interviews, informed by critical community psychology, participatory research, and emancipatory disability research; a service-user support group of 12 expert patients was consulted on design, recruitment, interview schedule, and procedure.
  • Participants were two men and three women (N = 5; age range = 25–75 years; time with chronic pain range = 3–12 years), recruited by opportunity sampling from 30 people who had attended at least 87.5% of one of the three most recent 8-week pain management programmes.
  • Interviews lasted 50–70 minutes, were transcribed verbatim, and analysed using inductive thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s six-stage process.

Limitations

  • The paper states that opportunity sampling may affect representation and generalisation of findings, and that it is unknown whether the positive effects described can be attributed to solution-focused brief therapy or to pain management programmes more widely.
  • The paper also states that because the study was opt-in only, no information is available on those who chose not to participate, and specific pain types and health conditions were not reported to protect anonymity.
  • Evident from the text: the sample was very small (N = 5), and the study is qualitative and exploratory, so it cannot establish effectiveness or causality.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2049463713516755

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 31 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data
    § Results

    Many participants had accepted that their pain was permanent prior to the programme.

    “As many participants had accepted that their pain was permanent prior to the programme, an additional feature within participants’ accounts regarded how they were simply curious to attend a group aimed at helping people to improve living with a chronic condition when there is ‘no cure’:”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    Participants' previous experiences of services seemed most predictive of their hopes and expectations about the pain management programme, rather than the information provided about the programme.

    “Importantly, participants’ previous experiences of services seemed most predictive of their hopes and expectations, rather than the information which had been provided about the PMP.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    Participants were regularly encouraged to share their individual knowledge and expertise derived from living with chronic pain.

    “In particular, participants described how they were regularly encouraged to share their individual knowledge and expertise derived from living with chronic pain.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    Several aspects of the solution-focused approach were noted to have positive impacts upon the group experience of the pain management programme.

    “In addition to common group factors that may promote engagement in PMPs (e.g. a sense of understanding from others living with pain), several aspects of the SF approach were noted to have positive impacts upon the group experience.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § Results

    Sharing individual knowledge and expertise led to perceived increases in feelings of support within the group.

    “Several participants described how this led to perceived increases in feelings of support within the group:”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 17
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 25
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    For some participants, referral to the pain management programme carried a sense of invalidation in their reality of pain, with one person questioning whether she had been 'chronic enough' to be referred earlier.

    “For some participants, this experience appeared to carry a sense of invalidation in their reality of pain, with one person questioning whether she had been ‘chronic enough’ to be referred earlier before further unsuccessful treatment experiences:”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    Participants who adopted a curious stance seemed to have attended the group with an open mind and would 'try anything' to improve their experience of living with pain.

    “These participants seemed to suggest that they had attended the group with an open mind and would ‘try anything’ to improve their experience of living with pain.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    Many participants hoped to reduce their medication as a result of attending the pain management programme.

    “For many participants, this could be represented by changes in medication:”
    • Also stated in: § Results · hedged
      “I hoped I could come off some medication, erm because as I said there before trying to deal with the pain [had been difficult] so if I could manage it er by different means […] I might be able to come off the medication. (Brenda, 338–344)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given
    § Results

    Negative experiences of services could lead participants to feel hesitant about attending the pain management programme.

    “While negative experiences of services could lead participants to feel hesitant about attending the PMP.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Discussion

    Participants valued having opportunities to share their expertise with staff and peers within the programme, and discussed benefits in learning from others and feeling valued and capable through sharing their perspectives.

    “Additionally, participants valued having opportunities to share their expertise with staff and peers within the programme, and discussed the benefits both in learning from others and feeling valued and capable through sharing their perspectives.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Participants' retrospective self-reports accurately reflect their experiences of the PMP.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    Participants valued life outside the PMP and focused on functioning after the PMP finished, rather than viewing the group itself as a 'treatment'.

    “Of essential importance to participants was the valuing of life outside of the PMP – rather than viewing the group itself as a ‘treatment’ – and the focus upon functioning after the PMP had finished.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Participants' retrospective self-reports accurately reflect their experiences of the PMP.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    The future-orientated focus and commitment to follow-up helped participants feel reassured and not 'dumped'.

    “Participants described that the future-orientated focus and commitment to follow-up helped them to feel reassured and that ‘you don’t feel dumped’”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Participants' retrospective self-reports accurately reflect their experiences of the PMP.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Results

    The valuing of each individual within the group process modelled positive conversations to other group members, which then began to occur naturally.

    “The valuing of each individual within the group process was also described to model positive conversations to other group members, which then began to occur naturally:”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Participants' retrospective self-reports accurately reflect their experiences of the PMP.
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § Discussion

    Participants valued the notion of 'aftercare' following the programme, whereby they could access future sessions to support them in times of challenge or difficulty, and felt that this encouraged them to maintain positive change.

    “Participants also valued the notion of ‘aftercare’ following the programme, whereby they could access future sessions to support them in times of challenge or difficulty, and felt that this encouraged them to maintain positive change.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Participants' retrospective self-reports accurately reflect their experiences of the PMP.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § Method

    The study was approved by the local National Health Service (NHS) ethics committee.

    “Following approval by the local National Health Service (NHS) ethics committee, participants were able to opt in to the research via email, telephone or letter.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § Method

    Prior to sampling, a patient-led support group was consulted regarding the study design, recruitment, interview schedule and procedure.

    “Prior to the sampling of participants, a patient-led support group was consulted regarding the study design, recruitment, interview schedule and procedure.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    Chronic pain is among the most prevalent of chronic conditions.

    “as chronic pain is among the most prevalent of chronic conditions,2”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [2] 2. Cornally N, McCarthy G. Chronic pain: the help-seeking behavior, attitudes, and beliefs of older adults living in the community. Pain Manag Nurs 2011; 12: 206–217. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Method

    The views of 12 expert patients were sourced during a 2-hour drop-in group.

    “The views of 12 expert patients were sourced during a 2-hour drop-in group.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    A recent systematic review suggests that CBT is effective in the management of chronic pain, with successful outcomes sustained upon mood and catastrophising at 6 months after treatment, although improvements upon pain are weaker and only significant immediately post treatment.

    “A recent systematic review suggests that CBT is effective in the management of chronic pain, with successful outcomes sustained upon mood and catastrophising at 6 months after treatment, although improvements upon pain are weaker and only significant immediately post treatment.5”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [5] 5. Williams AC, Eccleston C, Morley S. Psychological therapies for the management of chronic pain (excluding headache) in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 11: CD007407. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    The largest effects of SFBT were demonstrated upon behavioural problems (d = .61).

    “The largest effects of SFBT were demonstrated upon behavioural problems (d = .61).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [11] 11. Stams GJ, Dekovic M, Buist K, et al. Efficacy of solution-focused brief therapy: a meta-analysis. Dutch J Behav Ther 2006; 39: 81–95. [Google Scholar]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Method

    The quality and coherence of the final themes were appraised by two independent research supervisors to strengthen the validity of the analytical process.

    “The quality and coherence of the final themes were appraised by two independent research supervisors in an endeavour to strengthen the validity of the analytical process.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    The mechanism by which psychological therapies can reduce the negative effects of chronic pain is through increasing positive and meaningful behavioural change.

    “a number of studies indicating that the mechanism by which psychological therapies can reduce the negative effects of chronic pain is through increasing positive and meaningful behavioural change.16,17”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [16] 16. Berman BM, Swyers JP. Establishing a research agenda for investigating alternative medical interventions for chronic pain. Prim Care 1997; 24: 743–758. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [17] 17. Rainville J, Sobel J, Hartigan C, et al. Decreasing disability in chronic back pain through aggressive spine rehabilitation. J Rehabil Res Dev 1997; 34: 383–393. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    Research has consistently demonstrated that chronic pain impact breaches multiple aspects of the self, including physical, neurological, psychological, social and spiritual concerns.

    “Research utilising a variety of methodologies has consistently demonstrated that this impact breaches multiple aspects of the self, including – but not limited to – physical, neurological, psychological, social and spiritual concerns.1”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [1] 1. Smith BH, Hopton JL, Chambers WA. Chronic pain in primary care. Fam Pract 1999; 16: 475–482. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    A recent systematic review of SFBT found that 74% of studies reported significant positive behavioural and psychological outcomes and 23% reported positive trends.

    “a recent systematic review of SFBT found that 74% of studies reported significant positive behavioural and psychological outcomes and 23% reported positive trends.10”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [10] 10. Gingerich WJ, Peterson LT. Effectiveness of solution-focused brief therapy: a systematic qualitative review of controlled outcome studies. Res Social Work Prac 2013; 27: 266–283. [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § Method

    As the study was opt-in only, no information is available on those who chose not to participate.

    “As the study was opt-in only, no information is available on those who chose not to participate (either outcome data or opt-out reason).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    SF group therapy has been found to improve the rehabilitation of orthopaedic patients on sick leave in two studies: 60% SFBT group vs 13% control, and 68% SFBT vs 4% control.

    “SF group therapy has been found to improve the rehabilitation of orthopaedic patients on sick leave in two studies (60% SFBT group vs 13% Control)12 and (68% SFBT vs 4% Control).13”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [12] 12. Thorslund KW. Solution-focused group therapy for patients on long-term sick leave: a comparative outcome study. J Fam Psychother 2007; 18: 11–24. [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [13] 13. Cockburn JT, Thomas FN, Cockburn OJ. Solution-focused brief therapy and psychosocial adjustment to orthopedic rehabilitation in a work hardening program. J Occup Rehabil 1997; 7: 97–106. [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § Method

    The minutes of the service-user consultation were used to alter the structure of the research project.

    “The minutes of this consultation were used to alter the structure of the research project accordingly.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § Method

    Comparisons with the extant literature were made after data had been collected and analysed in order to ensure that the analysis was inductive and to minimise influence on the development of themes.

    “Comparisons with the extant literature were made after data had been collected and analysed in order to ensure that the analysis was inductive and to minimise influence on the development of themes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Method

    At the time of the study, the lead researcher was a male doctoral clinical psychology trainee of White British working class origin, without experience of chronic pain.

    “At the time of undertaking the study, the lead researcher was a male doctoral clinical psychology trainee of White British working class origin, without experience of chronic pain.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    The concept of a 'preferred future' when living with pain has more recently been given focus by pain researchers, as have techniques such as focusing on successes during pain consultations.

    “The concept of a ‘preferred future’ when living with pain has also more recently been given focus by pain researchers,18–20 as have techniques such as focusing on successes during pain consultations.21”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [18] 18. Brandstadter J, Rothermund K. The life-course dynamics of goal pursuit and goal adjustment: a two process framework. Dev Rev 2002; 22: 117–150. [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [19] 19. Brandstadter J, Rothermund K. Self-percepts of control in middle and later adulthood: buffering losses by rescaling goals. Psychol Aging 1994; 9: 265–273. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [20] 20. Crombez G, Eccleston C, De Vlieger P, et al. Is it better to have controlled and lost than never to have controlled at all? An experimental investigation of control over pain. Pain 2008; 137: 631–639. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [21] 21. Williamson A. Chronic psychosomatic pain alleviated by brief therapy. Contemp Hypn 2002; 19: 118–124. [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Abstract

    The study design was conducted in consultation with a service-user advisory group.

    “The design of this study was conducted in consultation with a service-user advisory group”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    Studies which examined length of treatment all found that SFBT used fewer treatment sessions than comparative interventions.

    “Studies which examined length of treatment all found that SFBT used fewer treatment sessions than comparative interventions, and the strongest evidence of effectiveness was found in the treatment of depression.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [10] 10. Gingerich WJ, Peterson LT. Effectiveness of solution-focused brief therapy: a systematic qualitative review of controlled outcome studies. Res Social Work Prac 2013; 27: 266–283. [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Method

    The lead researcher had no affiliations to the Community Pain Service and no personal or working relationships with any of the staff members or service users involved in the research.

    “The lead researcher had no affiliations to the Community Pain Service at which the study was conducted and no personal or working relationships with any of the staff members or service users involved in the research.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § Method

    A rigorous inductive approach was ensured through regularly corroborating emerging themes with initial data, such as providing a digital audio link to each paragraph of the transcript.

    “A rigorous inductive approach to qualitative research was ensured through regularly corroborating emerging themes with initial data, such as providing a digital audio link to each paragraph of the transcript, so that sections could be listened to again within their initial context to preserve intentionality and meaning.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    Living with chronic pain is an active process of searching for solutions, and to react passively to pain is 'counter biological'.

    “Eccleston and Crombez,14 for instance, describe that living with chronic pain is an active process of searching for solutions, and to react passively to pain is ‘counter biological’.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [14] 14. Eccleston C, Crombez G. Worry and chronic pain: a misdirected problem solving model. Pain 2007; 132: 233–236. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § Method

    An additional recruitment sample was not deemed necessary due to the saturation of data themes.

    “An additional recruitment sample of potential participants was not deemed necessary due to the saturation of data themes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Introduction

    A meta-analysis of 21 studies of SFBT outcome research comprising 1421 patients demonstrated only small to moderate positive effects on treatment outcomes (d = .37) and was not more effective than treatment as usual.

    “meta-analysis of 21 studies of SFBT outcome research comprising a total of 1421 patients demonstrated only small to moderate positive effects on treatment outcomes (d = .37) and was not more effective than treatment as usual.11”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [11] 11. Stams GJ, Dekovic M, Buist K, et al. Efficacy of solution-focused brief therapy: a meta-analysis. Dutch J Behav Ther 2006; 39: 81–95. [Google Scholar]

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation
    § Discussion

    The involvement of those living with chronic pain to shape the research design and interview focus is considered a strength of the study, as the information gained is more likely to be relevant to service users.

    “The involvement of those living with chronic pain (CP) to shape the research design and interview focus is considered as a strength of the study, as the information gained from the research is more likely to be of relevance to those using services.24”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [24] 24. Barnes C. What a difference a decade makes: reflections on doing ‘emancipatory’ disability research. Disabil Soc 2003; 18: 3–17. [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Discussion

    It is unknown whether the positive effects participants described can be attributed to SFBT or PMPs more widely.

    “It is also unknown whether the positive effects participants described can be attributed to SFBT or PMPs more widely.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § Discussion

    Participants were recruited via opportunity sampling, which may affect the representation and generalisation of findings.

    “However, as participants were recruited via opportunity sampling, this is a recognised feature that may affect the representation and generalisation of findings.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationown data
    § Discussion

    This may indicate the importance of follow-up contacts as a routine component of PMPs.

    “which may indicate the importance of follow-up contacts as a routine component of PMPs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Participants' retrospective self-reports accurately reflect their experiences of the PMP.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Discussion

    These experiences mirror the recommendations in policy guidance and demonstrate how they can be effective in practice.

    “These experiences mirror the recommendations in policy guidance22,33,34 and demonstrate how they can be effective in practice.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [22] 22. Department of Health (DOH). Our health, our care, our say: a new direction for community services. White paper. Cm 6737, January 2006. London: Department of Health. [Google Scholar]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [33] 33. Department of Health. The expert patient: a new approach to chronic disease management for the 21st century. London: Department of Health, 2001. [Google Scholar]

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [34] 34. Department of Health. Equity and excellence: liberating the NHS. London: Department of Health, 2010. [Google Scholar] Articles from British Journal of Pain are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

      Not checked in the free run.

    • Rests on an assumption: Participants' retrospective self-reports accurately reflect their experiences of the PMP.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Discussion

    High self-efficacy is suggested to be a more robust determinant of disability than pain intensity or duration.

    “As high self-efficacy is suggested to be a more robust determinant of disability than pain intensity or duration,29”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [29] 29. Denison E, Asenlof P, Lindberg P. Self-efficacy, fear avoidance, and pain intensity as predictors of disability in subacute and chronic musculoskeletal pain patients in primary health care. Pain 2004; 111: 245–252. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source

      Not checked in the free run.

38 of 38
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is a recognised need for further research into alternative psychological approaches to pain management and their effectiveness.

    “Despite a supportive evidence base for psychological approaches in pain management, there is a recognised need for further research into alternative approaches and their effectiveness.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Emerging research and policy recommendations are beginning to value the expertise of those living with chronic conditions, particularly how these perspectives can be used to develop effective treatments and services.

    “Emerging research and policy recommendations are beginning to value the expertise of those living with chronic conditions, particularly how these perspectives can be used to develop effective treatments and services.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The most popular psychological approaches used within pain management programmes are informed by cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT).

    “Arguably, the most popular psychological approaches used within PMPs are informed by cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Participants' retrospective self-reports accurately reflect their experiences of the PMP.

    “Participants felt that overall, their experiences of the PMP had been important in encouraging positive psychological and behavioural changes which allowed them to live better in the presence of chronic pain.”
4 of 4

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

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. The British Pain Society, 2012, Guidelines for pain management programmes for adults
  2. Williams AC, 2012, Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 11, CD007407
  3. Stams GJ, 2006, Dutch J Behav Ther, 39, 81
  4. Rainville J, 1997, J Rehabil Res Dev, 34, 383
  5. Department of Health (DOH), 2006, Our health, our care, our say: a new direction for community services
  6. Department of Health, 2001, The expert patient: a new approach to chronic disease management for the 21st century

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dargan, P. J., Simm, R., & Murray, C.
Affiliations
  • Lancaster University (GB)
  • Southport and Ormskirk Hospital NHS Trust (GB)
Venue
British Journal of Pain
Published
2013-12-16
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
34-42
ISSN
  • 2049-4637 (ISSN-L)
  • 2049-4645
OpenAlex
W2125058412
Cited by
18
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Counseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
chronic pain, solution-focused therapy, pain management program, patient experience, psychological intervention, preferred futures, service user involvement, clinician-patient relationship, community psychology, disability research

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

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