Multidisciplinary allocation of chronic pain treatment: effects and cognitive-behavioural predictors of outcome
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Multidisciplinary treatment approaches have been found to be effective for chronic pain patients although there are large individual differences in outcomes. To increase overall treatment effects, tools are needed to identify patients most likely to benefit from tailored, comprehensive modular treatment schemes. DESIGN: The present study evaluates the effects of a multidisciplinary pain treatment allocation protocol in chronic pain patients and seeks to identify cognitive-behavioural predictors of outcome. Pain intensity, functional disability, depression, and use of medication in an intervention group of 110 chronic pain patients were compared to the outcomes of a 110 strong control group. RESULTS: Paired pre- and post-treatment t tests showed that all primary outcomes had significantly decreased in the intervention group with ANCOVAs revealing a main group effect for post-treatment pain intensity levels and functional disability. Paired t tests demonstrated both variables to have significantly reduced after treatment relative to the levels reported by the control group. Predictor analyses further showed higher levels of acceptance to significantly predict larger reductions in pain intensity in the intervention but not in the control group. CONCLUSION: The tested multidisciplinary allocation scheme for out-patient treatment of chronic pain complaints was effective in reducing pain intensity and functional disability. Findings also showed that especially those patients that are able to accept their condition are likely to profit most from the treatment in terms of pain reduction.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Improving acceptance is considered as more important than other coping strategies to achieve treatment success in chronic pain.
“improving acceptance is considered as more important than other coping strategies to achieve treatment success [59-64].”
From Cognitive behavior therapy in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome: The role of illness acceptance and neuroticism. (2013) · cites this paper as [62]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 47 · Cited by 40
- Authors
- Samwel, H. J. A., Kraaimaat, F. W., Crul, B. J. P., van Dongen, R. D., & Evers, A. W. M.
- Affiliations
- Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Samwel, Han J. A.
- Venue
- British Journal of Health Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-09
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 405-421
- ISSN
- 1359-107X (ISSN-L)
- 2044-8287
- OpenAlex
- W1995254084
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 0.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Journal of Health Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
- 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, multidisciplinary pain management, treatment allocation, pain intensity, functional disability, depression, medication use, treatment outcomes, outpatient pain management
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Ambulatory Care, Chronic Disease, Combined Modality Therapy, Comprehensive Health Care, Cooperative Behavior, Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation, Female, Helplessness, Learned, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain, Pain Measurement, Patient Care Team, Psychotherapy, Group, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Pain Clinics, Interdisciplinary Communication, 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