A Comparative Meta-Analysis of Unidisciplinary Psychology and Interdisciplinary Treatment Outcomes Following Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Adults with Chronic Pain

Kevin E. Vowles, Melissa Pielech, Karlyn A. Edwards, Mindy L. McEntee, Robert W. Bailey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

While much of the literature provides positive support for psychological interventions for chronic pain, two recent meta-analyses indicate small to moderate benefits only. This inconsistency in findings suggests that there are other treatment-related variables to consider. One possible consideration pertains to treatment format, as psychological models form the basis for both unidisciplinary psychology and integrated interdisciplinary treatments for chronic pain. Therefore, a comparative meta-analysis of unidisciplinary and interdisciplinary treatments was performed to determine whether there were differences in treatment effect size (ES) at post-treatment and follow-ups of up to one year. One specific treatment model, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), was investigated as it was felt that this literature was extensive enough to perform the planned analysis, while also being circumscribed enough in size to make it feasible. In total, 29 articles met inclusion criteria, 13 reported outcomes for unidisciplinary ACT and 15 for interdisciplinary ACT. At both post-treatment and follow-up, interdisciplinary ACT had a greater ES for physical disability, psychosocial impact and depression compared to unidisciplinary ACT. No differences in ES were observed for pain intensity, pain-related anxiety, or pain acceptance. Findings remained the same when study heterogeneity was considered. There was a significant difference observed between treatment format and treatment duration – on average, unidisciplinary interventions were of shorter duration than interdisciplinary interventions. Moderation analyses examining the relation between total treatment duration and ES generally indicated a moderate positive relation between treatment length and ES. This relation was strong for psychosocial impact.
LanguageEnglish
JournalJournal of Pain
Early online date02 Nov 2019
DOIs
Publication statusEarly online date - 02 Nov 2019

Fingerprint

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy
Chronic Pain
Meta-Analysis
Psychology
Therapeutics
Pain
Psychological Models

Cite this

@article{676d366e02b34965b3e91e166f90aeca,
title = "A Comparative Meta-Analysis of Unidisciplinary Psychology and Interdisciplinary Treatment Outcomes Following Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Adults with Chronic Pain",
abstract = "While much of the literature provides positive support for psychological interventions for chronic pain, two recent meta-analyses indicate small to moderate benefits only. This inconsistency in findings suggests that there are other treatment-related variables to consider. One possible consideration pertains to treatment format, as psychological models form the basis for both unidisciplinary psychology and integrated interdisciplinary treatments for chronic pain. Therefore, a comparative meta-analysis of unidisciplinary and interdisciplinary treatments was performed to determine whether there were differences in treatment effect size (ES) at post-treatment and follow-ups of up to one year. One specific treatment model, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), was investigated as it was felt that this literature was extensive enough to perform the planned analysis, while also being circumscribed enough in size to make it feasible. In total, 29 articles met inclusion criteria, 13 reported outcomes for unidisciplinary ACT and 15 for interdisciplinary ACT. At both post-treatment and follow-up, interdisciplinary ACT had a greater ES for physical disability, psychosocial impact and depression compared to unidisciplinary ACT. No differences in ES were observed for pain intensity, pain-related anxiety, or pain acceptance. Findings remained the same when study heterogeneity was considered. There was a significant difference observed between treatment format and treatment duration – on average, unidisciplinary interventions were of shorter duration than interdisciplinary interventions. Moderation analyses examining the relation between total treatment duration and ES generally indicated a moderate positive relation between treatment length and ES. This relation was strong for psychosocial impact.",
author = "Vowles, {Kevin E.} and Melissa Pielech and Edwards, {Karlyn A.} and McEntee, {Mindy L.} and Bailey, {Robert W.}",
year = "2019",
month = "11",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpain.2019.10.004",
language = "English",
journal = "The Journal of Pain",
issn = "1526-5900",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",

}

A Comparative Meta-Analysis of Unidisciplinary Psychology and Interdisciplinary Treatment Outcomes Following Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Adults with Chronic Pain. / Vowles, Kevin E.; Pielech, Melissa; Edwards, Karlyn A.; McEntee, Mindy L.; Bailey, Robert W.

In: Journal of Pain, 02.11.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Comparative Meta-Analysis of Unidisciplinary Psychology and Interdisciplinary Treatment Outcomes Following Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Adults with Chronic Pain

AU - Vowles, Kevin E.

AU - Pielech, Melissa

AU - Edwards, Karlyn A.

AU - McEntee, Mindy L.

AU - Bailey, Robert W.

PY - 2019/11/2

Y1 - 2019/11/2

N2 - While much of the literature provides positive support for psychological interventions for chronic pain, two recent meta-analyses indicate small to moderate benefits only. This inconsistency in findings suggests that there are other treatment-related variables to consider. One possible consideration pertains to treatment format, as psychological models form the basis for both unidisciplinary psychology and integrated interdisciplinary treatments for chronic pain. Therefore, a comparative meta-analysis of unidisciplinary and interdisciplinary treatments was performed to determine whether there were differences in treatment effect size (ES) at post-treatment and follow-ups of up to one year. One specific treatment model, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), was investigated as it was felt that this literature was extensive enough to perform the planned analysis, while also being circumscribed enough in size to make it feasible. In total, 29 articles met inclusion criteria, 13 reported outcomes for unidisciplinary ACT and 15 for interdisciplinary ACT. At both post-treatment and follow-up, interdisciplinary ACT had a greater ES for physical disability, psychosocial impact and depression compared to unidisciplinary ACT. No differences in ES were observed for pain intensity, pain-related anxiety, or pain acceptance. Findings remained the same when study heterogeneity was considered. There was a significant difference observed between treatment format and treatment duration – on average, unidisciplinary interventions were of shorter duration than interdisciplinary interventions. Moderation analyses examining the relation between total treatment duration and ES generally indicated a moderate positive relation between treatment length and ES. This relation was strong for psychosocial impact.

AB - While much of the literature provides positive support for psychological interventions for chronic pain, two recent meta-analyses indicate small to moderate benefits only. This inconsistency in findings suggests that there are other treatment-related variables to consider. One possible consideration pertains to treatment format, as psychological models form the basis for both unidisciplinary psychology and integrated interdisciplinary treatments for chronic pain. Therefore, a comparative meta-analysis of unidisciplinary and interdisciplinary treatments was performed to determine whether there were differences in treatment effect size (ES) at post-treatment and follow-ups of up to one year. One specific treatment model, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), was investigated as it was felt that this literature was extensive enough to perform the planned analysis, while also being circumscribed enough in size to make it feasible. In total, 29 articles met inclusion criteria, 13 reported outcomes for unidisciplinary ACT and 15 for interdisciplinary ACT. At both post-treatment and follow-up, interdisciplinary ACT had a greater ES for physical disability, psychosocial impact and depression compared to unidisciplinary ACT. No differences in ES were observed for pain intensity, pain-related anxiety, or pain acceptance. Findings remained the same when study heterogeneity was considered. There was a significant difference observed between treatment format and treatment duration – on average, unidisciplinary interventions were of shorter duration than interdisciplinary interventions. Moderation analyses examining the relation between total treatment duration and ES generally indicated a moderate positive relation between treatment length and ES. This relation was strong for psychosocial impact.

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpain.2019.10.004

DO - 10.1016/j.jpain.2019.10.004

M3 - Article

JO - The Journal of Pain

T2 - The Journal of Pain

JF - The Journal of Pain

SN - 1526-5900

ER -