- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT07143396
- Original Trial
Evaluation of a Mind-Body Based Approach for Chronic Pain Treatment
Evaluation of a Mind-Body Application in Combination With a Graded Movement Program for the Treatment of Chronic Pain
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
- Name: Cynthia J Thomson, PhD
- Phone Number: 2518 604-792-0025
- Email: cynthia.thomson@ufv.ca
Study Locations
-
-
British Columbia
-
Chilliwack, British Columbia, Canada, V2R0N3
- University of the Fraser Valley
-
Contact:
- Cynthia J Thomson, PhD
- Phone Number: 2518 604-792-0025
- Email: cynthia.thomson@ufv.ca
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Participants aged 19 to 75 years with chronic pain
- Chronic pain is defined as having non-malignant chronic or persistent pain for at least 6 months.
- Participants must experience pain at least half the days in the last 6 months.
- Pain can include bodily pain or head (migraine) pain
- Participants must have access to an electronic device
- Participants must be willing to engage in weekly somatic education activities
Exclusion Criteria:
- Individuals reporting a cognitive impairment that can interfere with completing questionnaires and using a mobile application.
- Individuals reporting substance use disorder (within the last 6 months).
- Individuals reporting any of the following medical conditions: metastatic cancer, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, scleroderma, polymyositis.
- Individuals with previous experience with the mind-body app under study (Note: use of "Calm" or another meditation-only app is not an exclusion).
- Individuals with current regular (at least once a week) engagement with a somatic movement program (e.g., Feldenkrais, Hanna Somatics, Somatic Yoga, Tai Chi, Pilates)
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: N/A
- Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Mind-body mobile application and guided movement
Participants are asked to engage (minimum 4x per week) with a user-guided mobile application (app) that employs mind-body techniques including expressive writing, meditation, cognitive behavioural therapy, and pain education.
The app also includes access to podcasts that focus on pain counselling and pain education.
Participants are also asked to follow (3x per week) an audio-guided somatic education program (light-intensity graded movement).
|
Self-directed: The study team recommends daily use of the mobile app for 6 weeks, with a minimum of 4 times per week, and engagement with the somatic education program at least 3 times per week for 6 weeks.
Frequency of app usage and somatic education engagement will be monitored via weekly surveys.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Brief Pain Inventory-short form (BPI-SF) Pain Severity
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 weeks.
|
Measures self reported pain severity (over past 24 hours). BPI Pain Severity: single item scale within larger Brief Pain Inventory tool that asses pain "average" pain severity. Item scale ranges from 0 to 10. 0 = "no pain", 10 = "pain as bad as you can imagine". Higher scores indicate worse outcome (pain severity), lower scores indicate better outcome. Item range = (0,10). |
Baseline, 6 weeks.
|
|
Change in Brief Pain Inventory-short form (BPI-SF) Pain Interference
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 weeks.
|
Item 9 on the BPI measures interference with daily living.
There are 7 items (reflecting seven daily activities) and each is scored on 11-point scales from 0 = "does not interfere" to 10 = "completely interferes" for interference with activities of daily living.
Pain interference score is calculated as an average of the 7 items, with a range from 0 to 10. Higher scores represent worse outcomes (higher interference).
|
Baseline, 6 weeks.
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Intensity short form 3a
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks
|
Measures self reported pain intensity over the past 7 days "on average" and "at its worst" along with an item to assess pain intensity "now". The three items are added together to produce a raw score which can be converted to a t-score. Each item uses 5-pt Likert scale from 1 = "had no pain" to 5 = "very severe". Raw scores range from 3 to 15. Higher scores indicate worse outcomes. |
Baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks
|
|
Change in Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Interference short form 8a
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks
|
Measures self reported pain interference in daily activities (over 7 days). 8 items are added together for a raw score, which can then be converted to a t-score. Each item uses 5-pt Likert scale from 1 = "not at all" to 5 = "very much" (regarding pain interference). Raw scores range from 8 to 40. Higher scores indicate worse outcomes. |
Baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks
|
|
Change in Pain Catastrophizing Questionnaire (PCS)
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks
|
Measures thoughts and perceptions of pain, 13 items, scored using 5-pt Likert scale 0 = "not at all" to 4 = "all the time". Scores are the sum of all items. min score = 0; max score = 52. Higher scores indicate worse outcomes. |
Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks
|
|
Change in Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia Questionnaire (TSK)
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks
|
Measured self-reported kinesiophobia assessing fear of movement or re-injury due to pain. Each item rated on a 4-point Likert scale: 1 = "strongly disagree" to 4 = "strongly agree." Total score range = (11, 44). Higher scores indicate greater fear of movement and worse outcomes. |
Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks
|
|
Change in Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21)
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks
|
Measures self reported emotional states, three subscales: depression, anxiety, stress (each 7 items) Items scored on 4-point Likert scale: 0 = "did not apply to me at all" to 3 = "applied to me very much or most of the time". Scores for each subscale are summed. Scores are then multiplied by 2 to calculate final score for each subscale. Scale ranges for each subscale is from 0 to 42 (after doubling of scores). Higher scores indicate worse outcomes. |
Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks
|
|
Change in Quality of Life Short Form 12 (SF-12) Physical Component Score
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks
|
Measures self-reported impact of health on daily life. The SF-12 is a brief version of the SF-36 and contains 12 items measured using a variety of Likert scales and dichotomous yes/no scales, with each item response assigned a numerical weight. The Physical Component Score (PCS) is a summary score that is reported as a z-score. Scores are calculated using regression weights and constants that have been derived from a U.S. population. Each item response choice category is coded as an indicator variable (scored 1 / 0). Indicator variables are weighted using regression coefficients from the US population for the PCS. The weighted scores across all items are then summed and are added to a constant (regression intercept) to obtain a summary score. Score ranges 0 to 100. Normalized score such that component scales have a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 in the general population. Lower scores indicate worse outcomes. Higher scores indicate improved physical health. |
Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks
|
|
Change in Quality of Life Short Form 12 (SF-12) Mental Component Score
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks
|
Measures self-reported impact of health on daily life. The SF-12 is a brief version of the SF-36 and contains 12 items measured using a variety of Likert scales and dichotomous yes/no scales, with each item response assigned a numerical weight. The Mental Component Score (MCS) is a summary score that is reported as a z-score. Scores are calculated using regression weights and constants that have been derived from a U.S. population. Each item response choice category is coded as an indicator variable (scored 1 / 0). Indicator variables are weighted using regression coefficients from the US population for the MCS. The weighted scores across all items are then summed and are added to a constant (regression intercept) to obtain a summary score. Score ranges 0 to 100. Normalized score such that component scales have a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 in the general population. Lower scores indicate worse outcomes. Higher scores indicate improved mental health. |
Baseline, 6 and 12 weeks
|
|
Change in Brief Pain Inventory Pain Severity Composite Score
Time Frame: baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks
|
A composite score derived from the average of four items that assesses at its "worst", "least", "average" over the past 24 hours, along with "now". Item scales range from 0 to 10. 0 = "no pain", 10 = "pain as bad as you can imagine". Higher scores indicate worse outcome, lower scores indicate better outcome. Item range = (0,10). |
baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks
|
|
Change in Brief Pain Inventory Pain Severity (from baseline to 12 weeks)
Time Frame: baseline, 12 weeks
|
Note: This is a secondary outcome (change from 0 to 6 weeks is a primary outcome). Measures self reported pain severity and pain interference (over past 24 hours). BPI Pain Severity: single item scale within larger Brief Pain Inventory tool that inquires about "average" pain severity over the past 24 hours. Item scale ranges from 0 to 10. 0 = "no pain", 10 = "pain as bad as you can imagine". Higher scores indicate worse outcome, lower scores indicate better outcome. Item range = (0,10). |
baseline, 12 weeks
|
|
Change in Brief Pain Inventory Interference (from baseline to 12 weeks)
Time Frame: baseline, 12 weeks
|
Note: This is a secondary outcome (change from 0 to 6 weeks is a primary outcome). Measures self reported pain interference (over past 24 hours). BPI Pain Interference: Item 9 on BPI measures interference with daily living. There are 7 items embedded within and each is scored on 11-point scales from 0 = "does not interfere" to 10 = "completely interferes" for interference with activities of daily living. Pain interference score is calculated as an average of the 7 items, with a range from 0 to 10. Higher scores represent worse outcomes. |
baseline, 12 weeks
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Cynthia J Thomson, PhD, University of the Fraser Valley
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996 Mar;34(3):220-33. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003.
- Treede RD, Rief W, Barke A, Aziz Q, Bennett MI, Benoliel R, Cohen M, Evers S, Finnerup NB, First MB, Giamberardino MA, Kaasa S, Kosek E, Lavand'homme P, Nicholas M, Perrot S, Scholz J, Schug S, Smith BH, Svensson P, Vlaeyen JWS, Wang SJ. A classification of chronic pain for ICD-11. Pain. 2015 Jun;156(6):1003-1007. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000160. No abstract available.
- Cleeland CS, Ryan KM. Pain assessment: global use of the Brief Pain Inventory. Ann Acad Med Singap. 1994 Mar;23(2):129-38.
- Gatchel RJ, Peng YB, Peters ML, Fuchs PN, Turk DC. The biopsychosocial approach to chronic pain: scientific advances and future directions. Psychol Bull. 2007 Jul;133(4):581-624. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.581.
- Schopflocher D, Taenzer P, Jovey R. The prevalence of chronic pain in Canada. Pain Res Manag. 2011 Nov-Dec;16(6):445-50. doi: 10.1155/2011/876306.
- Kean J, Monahan PO, Kroenke K, Wu J, Yu Z, Stump TE, Krebs EE. Comparative Responsiveness of the PROMIS Pain Interference Short Forms, Brief Pain Inventory, PEG, and SF-36 Bodily Pain Subscale. Med Care. 2016 Apr;54(4):414-21. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000497.
- Pfeifer AC, Uddin R, Schroder-Pfeifer P, Holl F, Swoboda W, Schiltenwolf M. Mobile Application-Based Interventions for Chronic Pain Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness. J Clin Med. 2020 Nov 5;9(11):3557. doi: 10.3390/jcm9113557.
- Osman A, Barrios FX, Kopper BA, Hauptmann W, Jones J, O'Neill E. Factor structure, reliability, and validity of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale. J Behav Med. 1997 Dec;20(6):589-605. doi: 10.1023/a:1025570508954.
- Borm GF, Fransen J, Lemmens WA. A simple sample size formula for analysis of covariance in randomized clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007 Dec;60(12):1234-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.02.006. Epub 2007 Jun 6.
- Ashar YK, Gordon A, Schubiner H, Uipi C, Knight K, Anderson Z, Carlisle J, Polisky L, Geuter S, Flood TF, Kragel PA, Dimidjian S, Lumley MA, Wager TD. Effect of Pain Reprocessing Therapy vs Placebo and Usual Care for Patients With Chronic Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Psychiatry. 2022 Jan 1;79(1):13-23. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.2669.
- Morone NE, Greco CM. Mind-body interventions for chronic pain in older adults: a structured review. Pain Med. 2007 May-Jun;8(4):359-75. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2007.00312.x.
- Devan H, Farmery D, Peebles L, Grainger R. Evaluation of Self-Management Support Functions in Apps for People With Persistent Pain: Systematic Review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Feb 12;7(2):e13080. doi: 10.2196/13080.
- Roelofs J, Goubert L, Peters ML, Vlaeyen JW, Crombez G. The Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia: further examination of psychometric properties in patients with chronic low back pain and fibromyalgia. Eur J Pain. 2004 Oct;8(5):495-502. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2003.11.016.
- Thomson CJ, Pahl H, Giles LV. Randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of a multimodal mobile application for the treatment of chronic pain. Can J Pain. 2024 Aug 19;8(1):2352399. doi: 10.1080/24740527.2024.2352399. eCollection 2024.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Estimated)
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimated)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimated)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- 101806
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
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
-
University Rovira i VirgiliMinisterio de Ciencia e Innovación, SpainNot yet recruitingChronic Post-operative Pain | Chronic Postsurgical Pain | Chronic Post-surgical Pain | Chronic Postoperative PainSpain
-
Pain ConcernThe Thistle Foundation; Health and Social Care Alliance Scotland (the ALLIANCE) and other collaboratorsCompletedChronic Pain | Chronic Pain Syndrome | Chronic Pain, Widespread | Chronic Pain Due to Trauma | Chronic Pain Due to Malignancy (Finding) | Chronic Pain Due to Injury | Chronic Pain Post-Procedural | Chronic Pain HipUnited Kingdom
-
Washington D.C. Veterans Affairs Medical CenterRecruitingChronic Back Pain | Chronic Pain (back / Neck)United States
-
Bjorn AngKarolinska Institutet; The Swedish Research Council; Göteborg University; Forte; Dalarna...Not yet recruitingPain Management | Pain, Chronic | Chronic Pain, WidespreadSweden
-
The University of Texas Health Science Center,...RecruitingJoint Pain | Chronic Knee Pain | Chronic Pain (Back / Neck) | Chronic Pain ManagementUnited States
-
University of Alabama, TuscaloosaPatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; East Carolina University; Whatley...CompletedPain | Chronic Pain | Chronic Pain Syndrome | Widespread Chronic Pain | Chronic Pain Due to InjuryUnited States
-
Dow University of Health SciencesRecruitingLow Back Pain | Chronic Low-back Pain | Low Back Pain, Mechanical | Mechanical Low Back Pain | Pain, Chronic | Pain, Back | Lower Back Pain Chronic | CLBP - Chronic Low Back PainPakistan
-
Massachusetts General HospitalCompletedChronic Low Back Pain | Chronic Neck PainUnited States
-
University of FaisalabadNot yet recruiting
-
Universidade do Vale do ParaíbaCAPES Foundation - Ministry of Education, Brazil.Enrolling by invitationChronic Low Back Pain | Chronic Shoulder Pain | Chronic Knee PainBrazil
Clinical Trials on Mind-body mobile application and guided movement
-
University of the Fraser ValleyCompletedChronic Pain | Migraine | Chronic Pain SyndromeCanada
-
Montefiore Medical CenterNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS); Hureka TechnologiesNot yet recruitingInflammatory Bowel Diseases | Crohn's Disease | Ulcerative ColitisUnited States
-
Carmel Medical CenterCompletedWellbeing of Healthcare Providersin Frontline COVID-19 DepartmentsIsrael
-
University of Colorado, BoulderCompletedEating Disorders in AdolescenceUnited States
-
Dr Elizabeth PapathanassoglouNicosia General HospitalUnknownCritical Illness | Stress | Inflammatory ResponseCyprus
-
Istanbul University - CerrahpasaNot yet recruitingAcademic Acheivement | Attention | Students | Breathing Exercises | Exam Anxiety
-
Atlas UniversityNot yet recruiting
-
Baskent UniversityRecruitingPremenstrual Syndrome | Nursing | Guided ImageryTurkey (Türkiye)
-
Menekşe Nazlı AKERCompleted