EFFects of EXPosure and Cognitive-behavioural Therapy for Chronic BACK Pain (EFFECT-BACK)

May 14, 2025 updated by: University of Kaiserslautern-Landau

EFFECT-BACK: Tackling Back Pain - Effects of Exposure Therapy and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Chronic Back Pain

The overall aim of the present study is to compare two different psychological methods, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) and Graduated Exposure in vivo (EXP) in the treatment of chronic back pain with regard to effectiveness and improvement of pain related disability.

Exploratory research will also be conducted to identify predictors of which patient groups benefit more from which method. This should optimise treatment options and create effective treatment offers for subgroups of pain patients.

Exposure therapy is an effective and economical treatment modality and was shown in a previous pilot study to be superior to CBT in reducing perceived movement limitation. CBT, on the other hand, appeared to be more effective in establishing coping strategies. With the help of the current study it should be possible to compare the effectiveness of both treatment methods and, in perspective, to identify those patient groups that benefit from exposure therapy and thus create a tailor-made treatment programme for subgroups of pain patients.

A total of 380 patients (age: ≥ 18) with chronic back pain and a sufficient degree of impairment will be included and analysed in the study.

Study Overview

Status

Active, not recruiting

Detailed Description

According to a recently published study by the Robert Koch Institute with over 62 000 participants, one in six men (17.1%) and one in four women (24.4%) in Germany reported having suffered from chronic low back pain (CLBP) in the last 12 months. CLBP is a major cause of medical costs, absenteeism and disability. Despite apparent advances in medical care, the prevalence of CLBP continues to rise.

According to current guidelines, most of the commonly offered treatments such as injections or surgery are ineffective; only pharmacotherapy shows small effects but carries a high risk of side effects.

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), multidisciplinary approaches with psychological treatment components such as CBT and exercise, supported by psychological elements, improve pain and condition-related disability in the long term. Disappointingly, however, in most studies the effects of multidisciplinary or psychological treatment approaches are small to moderate, and in the case of multidisciplinary approaches, do not always justify the high costs of inpatient programmes. In outpatient care, specific psychological services in addition to pharmacotherapy and physiotherapy are rare.

EXP treatment for pain is a rarely used psychological treatment that specifically addresses the avoidance of physical activity in people with CLBP. In a previous pilot study with 88 participants, the investigators conducted for the first time a short (10 sessions) and a longer (15 sessions) outpatient EXP therapy programme and compared it with a standard 15-session CBT programme:

  • EXP was more effective than CBT in reducing movement-related impairment.
  • EXP-short outperformed EXP-long in efficiency after 10 sessions, meaning that individuals improved faster when offered fewer sessions.
  • EXP could be safely delivered in the outpatient psychological setting, however CBT was more effective than EXP in improving coping strategies.

A specific behavioural measure, the "BAT-BACK" test, successfully identified participants who benefited from EXP in terms of a reduction in pain-related impairment. Therefore, in the future, EXP therapy could be a tailored treatment option to achieve better treatment outcomes in subgroups of CLBP patients. However, studies with more participants are needed to further clarify whether EXP is successful and for which subgroup of patients. The proposed study would be the first to aim to find out which patient group is more likely to benefit from EXP and which from CBT.

Research question and rationale for the project:

Society is currently faced with the challenge of a widespread disease without being able to offer satisfactory treatment options. A comparison of an already established treatment method (CBT) with a still less known and used treatment method (EXP) should create starting points here. In addition, tailoring chronic pain treatment specifically to subgroups of pain patients could improve care.

In addition, EXP therapy is a promising and cost-effective treatment option that could easily be incorporated into multidisciplinary programmes for inpatients or offered by outpatient psychotherapists as part of the newly established 12-hour brief psychotherapy. In order to validate the preliminary results of the pilot study and to answer open questions, a multicentre study with a larger number of participants is implemented.

The study should also lead to a larger number of therapists trained in EXP therapy in different regions in Germany and to an increase in the visibility of the treatment manuals and could lead to a more frequent use of EXP for the benefit of the CLBP population. By publishing the results, the investigators hope to raise awareness, especially among psychological psychotherapists, that brief, manualised, focused treatments may be sufficient to reduce the burden of chronic pain. The identification of predictors will help all practitioners involved in the treatment of chronic pain to identify those patients who are more likely to benefit from EXP and those who are more likely to benefit from CBT.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

380

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

      • Essen, Germany, 45147
        • Essener Rückenschmerzzentrum, Universitätsklinikum Essen
      • Heidelberg, Germany, 69120
        • Schmerzzentrum, Ruprechts - Karls Universität Heidelberg
      • Mainz, Germany, 55122
        • Poliklinische Institutsambulanz für Psychotherapie
      • Marburg, Germany, 35037
        • Phillips-Universität Marburg
    • RLP
      • Landau, RLP, Germany, 76829
        • RPTU Kaiserslautern- Landau

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

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Chronic low back pain (duration > 6 months, pain on most days of the week)
  • Sufficient level of disability, as defined by QBPDS ≥ 15 (Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale)
  • Age 18 and above
  • Agreeing to participate, verified by completion of informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Back surgeries during the last six months or planned surgeries
  • Red Flags
  • inability to read or write in German
  • pregnancy
  • severe alcohol or drug addiction
  • psychotic disorders
  • another current psychological treatment
  • physical inability to attend sessions
  • parallel participation in another intervention study

Depression will be controlled for, medication will be required to stay stable until Follow-up and any changes will be controlled for, on-demand ("rescue") medication will be not allowed.

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: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Exposure (EXP)
Exposure in vivo for fear avoidant chronic low back pain patients. This treatment means that the individual is exposed to movements and tasks that have been avoided due to fear of (re)injury. The treatment begins after three educational lessons including the rational and developing a fear hierarchy. Exposure phase includes 10 exposures sessions which are highly individualized. Behavioral experiments can be included to correct catastrophic misinterpretations. The main purpose of this intervention type is to reduce pain related disability via diminishing fear avoidance.
10 sessions based on an individualized pain hierarchy
Active Comparator: Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT)
Cognitive behavioural psychotherapy for fear avoidant chronic low back patients. The therapy is modularized in three main parts. The educational lesson is followed by the module graded activity which represents the behavioral part of the program. The second module comprises relaxation. And the last part contains cognitive interventions. Cognitive behavioural intervention techniques are employed to support the patient in the process of coping with chronic pain: i.e. reduction of disability and improving functional ability.
10 sessions with graded activity, relaxations techniques and cognitive interventions

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in pain related disability
Time Frame: from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months after Posttest and 2 years after Posttest)

Clinically significant change in pain-related impairment at the end of therapy and at 6-months and 2-years follow-up compared to baseline.

Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS). Each item is scored from 0 to 5 (0 = not difficult at all, 5 = unable to do). Higher total scores reflect higher disability.

from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months after Posttest and 2 years after Posttest)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in pain disability
Time Frame: from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)

Clinically significant change in pain-related impairment at the end of therapy and at 6-months and 2-years follow-up compared to baseline.

Pain Disability Index (PDI). Each item is scored from 0 to 10 (0 = no disability, 10 = maximum disability). Higher total scores reflect higher interference of pain with daily activities.

from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)
Change in pain intensity
Time Frame: from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)

Clinically significant change in pain intensity at the end of therapy and at 6-months and 2-years follow-up compared to baseline.

adjusted 11-point Scale of the German Pain Questionaire (Deutscher Schmerzfragebogen, DSF). 3 Items, each item is scored from 0 to 10 (e.g. 0 = no pain, 10 = strongest pain). A higher score reflects stronger pain.

from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)
Change in coping
Time Frame: from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)

Change in coping at the end of therapy and at 6-month and 2-years follow-up compared to baseline.

Coping scale from the German questionnaire for the assessment of pain processing (Fragebogen zur Erfassung der Schmerzverarbeitung, FESV-BW). Each item is scored from 1 to 6 (1 = not true at all, 6 = completely true). Higher total scores reflect more frequent use of different coping strategies.

from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)
Change in emotional distress
Time Frame: from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)

Change in depression at the end of therapy and at 6-months and 2-years follow-up compared to baseline.

Depression scale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Each item is scored from 0 to 3. Higher total scores reflect stronger anxiety or depressiveness.

from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)
Change in pain catastrophizing
Time Frame: from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)

Change in catastrophizing at the end of therapy and at 6-months and 2-years follow-up compared to baseline.

Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). Each item is scored on a scale of 0 to 4 (0 = not at all, 4 = all the time). Higher total scores reflect more catastrophising thoughts.

from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)
Change in kinesiophobia
Time Frame: from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)

Change in kinesiophobia at the end of therapy and at 6-months and 2-years follow-up compared to baseline.

Photo Series of Daily Activities (PHODA). Each item is scored from 0 to 100 (0 = not harmful at all, 100 = extremely harmful). Higher scores reflect higher perceived harmfulness.

from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)
Change in pain anxiety
Time Frame: from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)

Change in pain anxiety avoidance at the end of therapy and at 6-months and 2-years follow-up compared to baseline.

Pain Anxiety Symptom Scale (PASS-20). Each item is scored from 0 to 5 (0 = never, 5 = always). Higher total scores reflect more fear of pain.

from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)
Change in psychological inflexibility
Time Frame: from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)

Change in psychological inflexibility at the end of therapy and at 6-months and 2-years follow-up compared to baseline.

Psychological Inflexibility in Pain Scale (PIPS). Each item is scored from 1 to 7 (1 = never true, 7 = always true). Higher total scores reflect higher inflexibility because of pain.

from Baseline to Posttest (an expected average of 15 weeks) to Follow Up Assessments (an expected average of 6 months and 2 years after Posttest)

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Collaborators

Investigators

  • Study Director: Julia A Glombiewski, Prof. Dr., RPTU Kaiserslautern - Landau, Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy

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)

March 1, 2022

Primary Completion (Estimated)

October 31, 2025

Study Completion (Estimated)

October 31, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

March 2, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 14, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

March 24, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimated)

May 20, 2025

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 14, 2025

Last Verified

May 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

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 Low Back Pain

Clinical Trials on Exposure therapy

Subscribe