Assessing clinically meaningful change following a programme for managing chronic pain
- 5 December 2007
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Clinical Rehabilitation
- Vol. 22 (3), 252-259
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215507081928
Abstract
Objectives: (1) To identify criteria for clinically meaningful change scores in commonly used measures of pain and related disability, using Goal Attainment Scaling as an external indicator of success. (2) To investigate the chances of achieving these scores following a pain management programme versus remaining on the waiting list. Design: Participants were assessed on entry to waiting list, on admission and at follow-up from the pain management programme. Three groups of Goal Attainment Scaling scores (-1.0, +1) were created from final Goal Attainment Scaling achievements. Mean scores on other measures were analysed in relation to Goal Attainment Scaling score groups by ANOVA. Differences in numbers achieving clinically meaningful changes when on the pain management programme or waiting list were compared. Subjects: Chronic musculoskeletal pain participants (N = 73) attending a rehabilitation centre, mean age (range) 44.8 (24—70) years, mean age (range) 44.8 (24—70), mean pain duration 7.7 (1—32) years. Intervention: Three-week (15-day) pain management programme based on cognitive behavioural principles. Measures: McGill Pain Questionnaire, 0—10 Pain Intensity Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ), General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), 5 minute walk, 1 minute sit/stand, 1 minute stair-climbing, and Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS). Results: Mean change scores differed significantly for three GAS groups and were highest in the most successful (+1) group. These scores were used to define clinically meaningful changes on the NRS (-3), ODQ (-12), walk (+87) and stairs (+14). Significantly more participants on the pain management programme achieved these scores than those on the waiting list. Conclusion: Using GAS as a criterion of patient-perceived improvement enabled identification of clinically meaningful changes on some other common measures. These successfully differentiated achievement between patients on the pain management programme and those on the waiting list.Keywords
This publication has 19 references indexed in Scilit:
- RCTs of psychological treatments for chronic pain: Progress and challengesPain, 2006
- Practical Guidelines for Assessing the Clinical Significance of Health-Related Quality of Life Changes within Clinical TrialsDrug Information Journal, 2003
- Goal attainment scaling in evaluating a multidisciplinary pain management programmeClinical Rehabilitation, 2002
- Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scalePain, 2001
- Validation of the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire, its sensitivity as a measure of change following treatment and its relationship with other aspects of the chronic pain experiencePhysiotherapy Theory and Practice, 1997
- Emotional distress as a mediator of the relationship between pain and disability: An experimental studyBritish Journal of Health Psychology, 1996
- The development of a battery of measures for assessing physical functioning of chronic pain patientsPain, 1994
- Efficacy of multidisciplinary pain treatment centers: a meta-analytic reviewPain, 1992
- The validity of the General Health Questionnaire for first-stage screening for mental illness in pain clinic patientsPain, 1991
- The McGill Pain Questionnaire: Major properties and scoring methodsPain, 1975