Internet-based Pain Self-management for Persons With Acute Recurrent and Chronic Pancreatitis Pain (IMPACT)

September 20, 2021 updated by: Tonya Palermo, Seattle Children's Hospital

Development and Feasibility Testing of an Internet-based Pain Self-management Program for Persons With Acute Recurrent and Chronic Pancreatitis Pain (The IMPACT Study)

Pain is the cardinal symptom of acute recurrent and chronic pancreatitis, and available medical treatments have limited efficacy. Pain self-management programs equip patients to minimize the impact of chronic painful conditions on activity, health, and psychosocial functioning. The purpose of the current study is to pilot the use of Internet-delivered pain self-management course in adults with chronic and acute recurrent pancreatitis to generate preliminary feasibility and acceptability data to inform design of a subsequent large randomized controlled trial.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Acute recurrent pancreatitis (ARP) and chronic pancreatitis (CP) are associated with high disease burden across the lifespan. Recurring abdominal pain is the most prevalent and distressing symptom. Pain severity reduces health-related quality of life for individuals with CP and is associated with increased fatigue, anxiety and depressive symptoms, lower general health status, and reduced physical and role functioning. Medical therapies for CP pain have limited efficacy. Cognitive-behavioral interventions (CBT) offer safe and effective alternatives to pharmacological treatments for pain management. In other chronic painful conditions including gastrointestinal disorders, CBT interventions have been effective for reducing pain and pain impact including disability and depressive symptoms. CBT is traditionally provided by trained psychologists working with individual patients one-on-one or in small groups. Access to CBT is limited by availability of providers, with long waiting lists at centers offering CBT. The Internet is an ideal medium to provide pain self-management interventions that are low-cost and sustainable, and internet-based CBT has shown efficacy in children and adults with chronic pain, allowing clinics to greatly extend their reach to patients. The purpose of this study is to test the acceptability, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of an Internet-delivered CBT pain self-management course for adults with acute recurrent and chronic pancreatitis pain.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
32

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Minnesota
      • Rochester, Minnesota, United States, 55905
        • Mayo Clinic

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Age ≥ 18 years
  2. Able and willing to provide informed consent for participation in this study
  3. Meet CPDPC criteria for diagnosis of either suspected CP (CPDPC "yellow zone") or definite CP (CPDPC "red zone")
  4. Have personal internet access on any device (e.g., phone, tablet, computer)
  5. Has experienced pain intensity rated as 4 or higher on a 0-10 scale in the last month

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Currently undergoing treatment for cancer
  2. Inability to understand English well enough to complete questionnaires or to participate in treatment
  3. Severe depression (i.e., indicated by a score > 22 on the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9)
  4. Significant suicidal ideation (i.e., indicated by a score > 2 to Question 9 of the PHQ-9)
  5. Acutely suicidal or recent history of attempted suicide or self-harm (i.e., last 12 months)
  6. Currently receiving treatment with a psychologist

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: Internet-based CBT intervention
In addition to standard medical care, participants in the Internet-based CBT group will receive access to the Pancreatitis Pain Course and will be asked to complete all online modules over 2 months using their own smartphone or computer. A coach will guide participants through the weekly lessons.
Behavioral: Internet-based CBT intervention
The Internet-delivered Pancreatitis Pain Course consists of 5 lessons: 1) introduction, education, and symptom identification, 2) thought monitoring and challenging, 3) controlled breathing and pleasant activity scheduling, 4) activity pacing, and 5) relapse prevention and goal setting. Participants aim to complete one online lesson weekly for 5 weeks, and have up to 2 months to complete the course. Each lesson has a homework assignment to encourage participants to practice and apply skills. A coach who is part of the Seattle Children's Research Institute study team will make weekly contact with participants in the intervention arm through telephone or secure e-mail, for a period of between 10-15 minutes to encourage participants to work through the Course and apply the skills.
No Intervention: Wait list control group
Participants assigned to the Wait list control group will be asked to continue with any recommendations made by their clinic provider and will not be offered any internet-based content until after they complete the 5 month assessments (i.e. Months 5-7).

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Treatment acceptability
Time Frame: Immediately post-treatment
Participants will complete a 12-item Treatment Evaluation Inventory questionnaire that assesses satisfaction and acceptability of the course of treatment and satisfaction with the outcome of the intervention. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = Strongly disagree, to 5 = Strongly agree.
Immediately post-treatment

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Treatment feasibility
Time Frame: Immediately post-treatment
Feasibility will be determined by calculating rates of accrual, drop out, compliance, and missing data. Criteria for feasibility success will be based on: accrual rates >70%, attrition rates <15%, minimal technical difficulties (i.e., reported by <10%), adherence rates >80%, and minimal missing data.
Immediately post-treatment
Change in pain intensity
Time Frame: Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Participants will report on presence and intensity of pain daily for 7 days at each assessment period. Pain intensity will be assessed using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS), where 0= no pain, and 10 = worst pain. Mean average intensity of the pain reported will serve as the pain measure.
Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Change in pain-related disability
Time Frame: Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Participants will report their level of pain-related disability daily for 7 days at each assessment period. Questions of pain-related disability are taken from the Brief Pain Inventory and the Pain Disability Index. These measures assess the extent to which chronic pain disrupts aspects of daily life including social relations, work, mood, sleep, eating, and physical activity. All items are scored on a 0-10 NRS, with higher scores indicating greater disability.
Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Change in Disease specific and generic health related quality of life (HRQOL)
Time Frame: Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Participants will complete the 18-item Pancreatitis Quality of Life Instrument to assess for disease-specific HRQOL difficulties. Items are scored on a 0-5 scale where 0 = Not applicable, 1 = Much less, and 5 = Much more. Participants will also complete the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey to assess for general HRQOL.
Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Change in Medication use
Time Frame: Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Participants will record their medication use daily for 7 days at each assessment period
Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Change in Pain self-efficacy
Time Frame: Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Participants will complete the 4-item Chronic Pain Self-Efficacy Scale. This scale assesses perceived self-efficacy over three factors: pain management, coping with symptoms, and physical function. All items are scored on a 7-point Likert scale where 0 = Not at all confident, and 6 = Completely confident
Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Change in Psychological distress
Time Frame: Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Participants will complete the 4-item Anxiety and 4-item Depression subscales of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-29 Profile to assess for levels of psychological distress over the past week. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = Never, to 5 = Always.
Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Change in Sleep and Fatigue
Time Frame: Baseline, 3-month follow-up
Participants will complete the 4-item Sleep Disturbance and 4-item Fatigue subscales of the PROMIS-29 Profile to assess for problems with fatigue and sleep over the previous week. All items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging 1 = Not at all, to 5 = Very much, except for one sleep item which is scored 1 = very poor, to 5 = Very good.
Baseline, 3-month follow-up

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Seattle Children's Hospital

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Mayo Clinic
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)
Ohio State University
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Tonya M Palermo, PhD, Seattle Children's Research Institute

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
February 1, 2018

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
September 30, 2020

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
September 30, 2020

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
October 23, 2017

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
October 25, 2017

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
October 26, 2017

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
September 27, 2021

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
September 20, 2021

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
September 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • Mayo IRB #17-007214
  • U01DK108334 (U.S. NIH Grant/Contract)

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Pancreatitis, Chronic

Clinical Trials on Internet-based CBT intervention

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings