Effect of a Health Promotion Intervention for People With Chronic Pain at a Healthy Life Centre

Effect of and Experiences With a Health Promotion Intervention for People With Chronic Pain at a Healthy Life Centre - an Open, Pragmatic, Randomized Controlled Trial With a Nested Qualitative Study

The study's primary objective is to test the hypothesis that a group-based health promotion intervention with patient education and practical exercises delivered at a Healthy Life Centre increases patient activation in people living with chronic pain. Due to many people living with chronic pain, interventions focusing on self-management and coping are on the agenda in primary care. This study will investigate whether a Healthy Life Centre in a municipality is a suitable setting for interventions targeting people living with chronic pain. Short and long term effect of an intervention developed in a health promotion and salutogenic framework will be investigated in a randomized clinical trial.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

Previous research indicates that if self-management interventions are developed within a health promotion framework focusing on the participants' strengths, there is a beneficial effect on patient activation and thus on self-management behaviour. However, there is a lack of knowledge about which interventions will improve patient activation for persons with chronic pain. To be sustainable, such interventions should be delivered using the least possible amount of resources needed to get an effect. One way to do so is to deliver the intervention in primary care instead of in hospitals. The Healthy Life Centre is ideally situated to deliver these interventions. This is especially true due to their task of focusing on health promotion but also because they are set up to deliver low level interventions, meaning that it should be easy for everyone to access their services.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

121

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

      • Trondheim, Norway
        • Trondheim Kommune, Friskliv og mestring

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

14 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • pain for 3 months or more
  • able to participate in one hour physical activity

Exclusion Criteria:

  • not fluent in Norwegian
  • chronic pain arising from active malignant disease
  • serious mental health illness
  • substance abuse issues

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

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Health promotion in patient education
The self-management patient education has been developed at the Healthy Life Centre in Trondheim municipality based on cognitive behavioural theory and psychomotor physiotherapy. The intervention is developed in a health promotion framework focusing on salutogenesis aiming to improve the participants ability to activate their own resources for health behaviour changes .
Self-management patient education in groups once a week for 6 weeks. Each session include pain-related theory, group discussions and physical exercises focusing on posture and relaxation. Instructors with education in health promotion and behavioural change in addition to psychomotor physiotherapy.
Active Comparator: Physical activity in groups
Physical activity once a week for a period of 6 weeks in form of walking and simple strength exercises outdoor in groups led by an instructor. .
Physical activity once a week for a period of 6 weeks in form of walking and simple strength exercises outdoor in groups led by an instructor. Each session has a duration of one hour. The instructor has education in physical activity.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Patient Activation Measure (PAM)- 13 items
Time Frame: 1 year
Self-reported questionnaire at baseline, and 3- 6- 12 months after intervention. PAM-13 is an interval-level, uni-dimensional measure questionnaire with a four point scale with an additional not applicable option, giving a raw score from 13- 52, which is calibrated to a total score between 0 (less activated) to 100 (most activated).
1 year

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Sense of Coherence (SOC) according to SOC-13 questionnaire
Time Frame: 1 year
Self-reported questionnaire, The SOC-13, at baseline, and 3-6-12 months after intervention. The questionnaire consists of 13 items with seven options for answers, each with a scoring range from 1 to 7, giving a total score from 13 to 91.
1 year
Psychological distress on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)
Time Frame: 1 year
Self-reported questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) at baseline, and 3-6-12 months after intervention. The questionnaire consists of 14 items producing a separate score for anxiety and depression. The instrument has a total range from 0 (best) to 42 (worst).
1 year
Pain severity in Brief Pain Questionnaire
Time Frame: 1 year
Self-reported pain severity measured by 4 questions in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) instrument. All items in BPI are scored using a numeric rating scale from 0 to 10. Measured at baseline, and 3-6-12 months after intervention.
1 year
Pain interference in Brief Pain Questionnaire
Time Frame: 1 year
Self-reported pain interference measured by 7 questions in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) instrument. All items in BPI are scored using a numeric rating scale from 0 to 10. Measured at baseline, and 3-6-12 months after intervention.
1 year
Pain intensity on a Visual Analogue Scale 100-mm
Time Frame: 1 year
Self-reported experience of pain during the previous week using a one-item 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale at baseline, and 3-6-12 months after intervention. The anchoring points are "no pain" (0) and "intolerable pain" (100).
1 year
Quality of Life on EuroQoL (EQ-5D-5L) Instrument
Time Frame: 1 year
Self-reported using the EQ-5 Dimensional instrument. Measured at baseline, and 3-6-12 months after intervention.
1 year
Well-being on Visual Analogue Self-Rating Scale 100-mm
Time Frame: 1 year
Self-reported well-being measured by the Arizona Integrative Outcome Scale (AIOS) at baseline, and 3-6-12 months after intervention. This is a one-item 100 mm long Visual Analogue Self-Rating Scale followed by an instruction to reflect on the sense of well-being during the last month. The anchoring points are "worst you have ever been (0) and "best you ever been" (100).
1 year
Pain related self-efficacy according to Pain Self-efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ)
Time Frame: 1 year
Self-reported pain self-efficacy using the instrument Pain Self-efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ) at baseline, and 3-6-12 months after intervention. The questionnaire consist of 10 items scored on a range from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating stronger self-efficacy beliefs.
1 year
Physical ability in 30-seconds chair-to-stand test.
Time Frame: 1 year
The 30 seconds chair to stand test (30CST) performed at baseline, and 3-6-12 months after intervention.
1 year

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Collaborators

Investigators

  • Study Director: Kjersti Grønning, phd, Norwegian University of Science and Technology

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)

September 1, 2015

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 4, 2017

Study Completion (Actual)

December 4, 2017

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

August 21, 2015

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 21, 2015

First Posted (Estimate)

August 24, 2015

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

January 23, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 21, 2019

Last Verified

January 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 2015/1030

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 Chronic Pain

Clinical Trials on Patient education

Subscribe