Effects of Pain Neuroscience Education on Pain Attitudes and Beliefs in Physiotherapy Assistant Students

June 3, 2025 updated by: Hatice Gül, Akdeniz University

Effects of Traditional Pain Education and Pain Neuroscience Education on Pain Attitudes and Beliefs in Physiotherapy Assistant Students

The goal of this educational trial is to learn whether Pain Neuroscience Education (PNE) improves pain-related attitudes and beliefs in physiotherapy assistant (PTA) students in Turkey compared to traditional pain education. The main questions this study aims to answer are:

Does a single-session PNE-based education improve students' beliefs about the relationship between pain and disability? Does it reduce reliance on biomedical (organic) pain beliefs compared to traditional pain education? In this study, researchers will compare PNE-based education to traditional pain education, both delivered through 70-minute lectures.

Participants were randomly assigned to either the PNE group or the traditional education group, attended a one time 70-minute classroom lecture, completed questionnaires at three time points: before the session, immediately after, and 3 months later.

The main tools used will be the Health Care Providers' Pain Attitudes and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS) and the Pain Beliefs Questionnaire (PBQ), which includes organic and psychological subscales.

This study aims to support the integration of contemporary pain neuroscience content into physiotherapy assistant curricula to enhance biopsychosocial understanding at an early stage of professional education.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

In Turkey, research on the impact of pain neuroscience education (PNE) on the knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes of undergraduate physiotherapy students remains scarce. Moreover, there appears to be no study that directly contrasts traditional pain education with a PNE-based approach that conceptualizes pain as an outcome-driven process, enriched with metaphors and storytelling. Existing literature suggests that physiotherapy assistant programs often provide limited exposure to neuroscience content, which may contribute to the lack of significant improvements in students' understanding and attitudes toward pain following PNE.

Against this background, the current study was developed to explore how a metaphor-supported, case-based PNE intervention influences the pain-related knowledge and beliefs of physiotherapy assistant students. To the best of our knowledge, no prior study in Turkey has systematically evaluated the effects of PNE within this specific student group. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial was designed to compare the outcomes of traditional structural pain education and a neuroscience-based educational program on pain-related beliefs and attitudes among physiotherapy assistant students.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

41

Phase

  • 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

    • Konyaaltı
      • Antalya, Konyaaltı, Turkey, 07070
        • Akdeniz University

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

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Students were eligible to participate if they were undergraduate physiotherapy assistant students enrolled at the Vocational School of Health Services.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Individuals were excluded if they had previously received in-depth teaching on pain neurophysiology or traditional pain education.

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: Other
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Traditional Pain Education
Participants in the control group received a 70-minute lecture based on the biomedical model of pain.
Participants in the control group received a 70-minute lecture based on the biomedical model of pain. Educational content included anatomical pathways for pain process (receptors, Aδ and C fibers, spinal cord, and ascending tracts), mechanisms of action potential generation, and the Gate Control Theory. The role of the brain was briefly addressed in the context of descending inhibition. While the Neuromatrix Theory was mentioned, the presentation lacked metaphorical or narrative-based content. Case examples centered on inflammation and tissue injury.
Experimental: PNE based education
Students in the intervention group received a 70-minute lecture grounded in the biopsychosocial model of pain.

Students in the intervention group received a 70-minute lecture grounded in the biopsychosocial model of pain. The session emphasized that pain is not a direct result of tissue damage, but rather a complex and context-dependent output of the brain. The lecture explored how pain emerges from the brain's interpretation of various inputs, including sensory signals, prior experiences, beliefs, emotions, and environmental factors.

Instructional strategies included the use of clinically relevant metaphors and storytelling to promote reconceptualization of pain. Examples such as "the alarm system" were used to illustrate peripheral and central sensitization, while real-life anecdotes (a player unaware of injury during a game or a nail-in-foot case with no significant damage) highlighted the dissociation between nociception and pain experience.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
The Health Care Pain Attitudes and Impairment Relationship Scale
Time Frame: Participants completed the HC-PAIRS at baseline, Day 1 and 3 months.
The HC-PAIRS is a 12-item scale that measures healthcare providers' beliefs about how much pain leads to disability in low back pain cases, using a 7-point Likert scale. Higher scores indicate more negative attitudes. The Turkish version was validated and showed strong reliability (ICC = 0.85).
Participants completed the HC-PAIRS at baseline, Day 1 and 3 months.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Pain Beliefs Questionnaire
Time Frame: Participants completed the Pain Beliefs Questionnaire at baseline, Day 1 and 3 months
The Pain Beliefs Questionnaire (PBQ) is a 12-item tool designed to assess individuals' beliefs about pain, divided into two subscales: Organic (8 items) and Psychological (4 items). The Organic subscale reflects beliefs about the physical causes of pain, while the Psychological subscale focuses on the influence of emotional and mental states such as anxiety and relaxation. Items are rated on a 6-point scale ranging from "always" to "never." Subscale scores are calculated by summing the relevant items. The PBQ can be used with healthy individuals and has been shown to have valid and reliable psychometric properties in its Turkish version.
Participants completed the Pain Beliefs Questionnaire at baseline, Day 1 and 3 months

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Sponsor

Collaborators

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Hatice Gül, Akdeniz University

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.

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)

December 12, 2024

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 12, 2024

Study Completion (Actual)

March 12, 2025

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 26, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 3, 2025

First Posted (Estimated)

June 5, 2025

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimated)

June 5, 2025

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 3, 2025

Last Verified

June 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 03.10.2024, TBAEK-683

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

IPD Plan Description

Since the dataset includes personal data, it is not planned to be shared.

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 Musculoskeletal Pain

Clinical Trials on Traditional pain education

Search Similar Trials