Index > Vol. 41/2009 > Iss. 7/June > pp. 569-575 > Abstract
Original report

Clinical effectiveness of an interdisciplinary pain management programme compared with standard inpatient rehabilitation in chronic pain: A naturalistic, prospective controlled cohort study

doi: 10.2340/16501977-0381

Abstract:

Objective: To compare the effects of an interdisciplinary pain management programme with those of standard in­patient rehabilitation by comprehensive biopsychosocial self-­assessment.
Methods: In this naturalistic prospective controlled cohort study, 164 chronic pain patients who participated in the interdisciplinary pain programme and 143 who underwent standard rehabilitation were assessed using standardized instruments. Effect differences were compared bivariately and analysed by multivariate logistic regression to control for baseline differences in the outcome variables and confounders.
Results: On entry into the clinic, the interdisciplinary pain programme patients were younger and showed significantly worse mental and psychosocial health than the standard rehabilitation patients. At discharge, the interdisciplinary pain programme patients reported greater improvement on pain (multivariate p = 0.034), social functioning (bivariate p = 0.009), and in trend in catastrophizing and ability to decrease pain. At the 6-month follow-up, the effects experienced by the standard rehabilitation group were higher on physical functioning, social functioning, anxiety, and life control (multivariate p = 0.013–0.050).
Conclusion: Intensive interdisciplinary rehabilitation with more behavioural therapies was accompanied by a greater improvement in patients who were severely affected by pain, compared with standard rehabilitation by the end of the stay, but not in the mid-term. Highly resource-consuming patients may benefit from subsequent, individually tailored outpatient care.

Authors:

Felix Angst, Martin L. Verra, Susanne Lehmann, Roberto Brioschi, André Aeschlimann

Key words:

pain, assessment, interdisciplinary, rehabilitation, behavioural therapy, controlled study.

References

  1. Main CJ, Spanswick CC, editors. Pain management. An interdisciplinary approach. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2000.
  2. Mease P. Fibromyalgia syndrome: review of clinical presentation, pathogenesis, outcome measures, and treatment. J Rheumatol 2005; 32 Suppl 75: 6-21.
  3. Gatchel RJ, Okifuji A. Evidence-based scientific data documenting the treatment and cost-effectiveness of comprehensive pain programs for chronic nonmalignant pain. J Pain 2006; 11: 779-793.
  4. Burckardt CS. Multidisciplinary approaches for management of fibromyalgia. Curr Pharmaceut Res 2006; 12: 59-66.
  5. Chou R, Huffman LH. Nonpharmacologic therapies for acute and chronic low back pain: a review of the evidence for an American Pain Society/American College of Physicians clinical practice guideline. Ann Intern Med 2007; 147: 492-504.
  6. Angst F, Brioschi R, Main CJ, Lehmann S, Aeschlimann A. Interdisciplinary rehabilitation in fibromyalgia and chronic back pain: a prospective outcome study with standardized assessments. J Pain 2006; 7: 807-815.
  7. Wolfe F, Smythe HA, Yunus MB, Bennett RM, Bombardier C, Goldenberg DL. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of fibromyalgia. Report of the multicenter criteria committee. Arthritis Rheum 1990; 33: 160-172.
  8. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B, editors. SF-36 Health survey: manual and interpretation guide. 3rd edn. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated; 2004.
  9. Bullinger M, Kirchberger I. SF-36 Fragebogen zum Gesundheits��zustand. Handanweisung. G��ttingen: Hogrefe; 1998.
  10. Kurth BM, Ellert U. The SF-36 questionnaire and its usefulness in population studies: Results of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey 1998. Soz Praeventivmed 2002; 47: 266-277.
  11. Kerns RD, Turk DC, Rudy TE. The West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory (WHYMPI). Pain 1985; 23: 345-356.
  12. Flor H, Rudy TE, Birnbaumer N, Streit B, Schugens MM. Zur Anwendbarkeit des West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory im deutschen Sprachraum. Der Schmerz 1990; 4: 82-87.
  13. Rosenstiel AK, Keefe FJ. The use of coping strategies in chronic low back pain patients: relationship to patient characteristics and current adjustment. Pain 1983; 17: 33-44.
  14. Luka-Krausgrill U, editor. Chronischer Schmerz und Depression: Untersuchungen zur Auftretensh��ufigkeit und Bedeutung biopsychologischer Faktoren [Postdoctoral thesis]. Mainz: Johannes Gutenberg University; 1995.
  15. Verra ML, Angst F, Lehmann S, Aeschlimann A. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validation of the German version of the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ-D). J Pain 2006; 7: 327-336.
  16. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983; 67: 361-370.
  17. Herrmann C, Buss U, Snaith RP. HADS-D. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Deutsche Version. Ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung von Angst und Depressivit��t in der somatischen Medizin. Berne: Hans Huber; 1995.
  18. Hinz A, Schwarz R: Angst und Depression in der Allgemeinbev��lkerung. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol 2001; 51: 193-200.
  19. Angst F, Verra M, Lehmann S, Aeschlimann A. Responsiveness of five outcome assessment instruments in chronic pain. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008; 8: 26.
  20. Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Steiner W, Stucki G. Responsiveness of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index as compared with the SF-36 in patients with osteoarthritis of the legs undergoing a comprehensive rehabilitation intervention. Ann Rheum Dis 2001; 60: 834-840.
  21. Rosner B. Non-parametric tests. In: Rosner B, editor. Fundamentals of biostatistics. 5th edn. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury (Thomson Learning); 2000, p. 343.
  22. Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 1989; 27 Suppl 3: 178-189.
  23. Rosenthal R. Parametric measures of effect size. In: Cooper H, Hedges LV, editors: The handbook of research synthesis. Russell Sage Foundation: New York; 1994; 16, p. 231-244.
  24. Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G. Smallest detectable and minimal clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF-36 quality of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 45: 384-391.
  25. Demyttenaere K, Bruffaerts R, Lee S, Posada-Villa J, Kovess V, Angermeyer MC, et al. Mental disorders among persons with chronic back or neck pain: results from the world mental health surveys. Pain 2007; 129: 332-342.
  26. Caroll LJ, Cassidy JD, C��t�� P. Factors associated with the onset of an episode of depressive symptoms in the general population. J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56: 651-658.
  27. Hayden JA, van Tulder MW, Tomlinson G. Systematic review: strategies of using exercise therapy to improve outcomes in chronic pain. Ann Intern Med 2005; 142: 776-785.
  28. Mallen CD, Peat G, Thomas E, Dunn KM, Croft PR. Prognostic factors for musculoskeletal pain in primary care: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract 2007; 57: 655-661.
  29. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Stepwise logistic regression. In: Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S, editors. Applied logistic regression. 2nd edn. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2000, p. 116-128, 346.
  30. Ostelo RWJG, van Tulder MW, Vlaeyen JWS, Linton SJ, Morley SJ Assendelft WJJ. Behavioural treatment for chronic low back pain. Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews 2004; 3: CD002014.
  31. Hayden JA, van tulder MW, Malvivaara AV, Koes BW. Meta-analysis: exercise therapy for nonspecific low back pain. Ann Intern Med 2005; 142: 765-775.
  32. Karajalainen K, Malmivaara A, van Tulder M, Roine R, Jauhainen M Hurri H, Koes B. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for fibromyalgia and musculoskeletal pain in working adults. Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews 1999; 3: CD001984.
  33. Angst F, Verra ML, Lehmann S, Aeschlimann A, Angst J. Refined insights into the pain-depression association in chronic pain patients. Clin J Pain 2008; 24: 808-816.