Background: More could be known about baseline factors related to desirable Intensive Interdisciplinary Pain Treatment (IIPT) outcomes. This study examined how baseline characteristics (age, gender, child pain catastrophizing (PCS-C), pain interference, pain intensity, anxiety, depression, paediatric health-related quality of life (PedsQLTM), and parent catastrophizing (PCS-P)) were associated with discharge and 3-month follow-up scores of PCS-C, pain intensity, and pain interference. Methods: PCS-C, pain intensity, and pain interference T-scores were acquired in 45 IIPT patients aged 12-18 at intake (baseline), discharge, and 3-month follow-up. Using available and imputed data, linear mixed models were developed to explore associations between PCS-C, pain intensity, and pain interference aggregated scores at discharge and follow-up with baseline demographics and a priori selected baseline measures of pain, depression, anxiety, and PCS-C/P. Results: PCS-C and pain interference scores decreased over time compared to baseline. Pain intensity did not change significantly. Baseline PCS-C, pain interference, anxiety, depression, and PedsQLTM were associated with discharge/follow-up PCS-C (available and imputed data) and pain interference scores (available data). Only baseline pain intensity was significantly associated with itself at discharge/follow-up. Conclusions: Participants who completed the IIPT program presented with reduced PCS-C and pain interference over time. Interventions that target pre-treatment anxiety and depression may optimize IIPT outcomes.

Fragility fractures, in particular vertebral fractures, are associated with high morbidity, including chronic pain and reduced health-related quality of life. We aimed to investigate the short- and long-term effects of patient education, including interdisciplinary themes, with or without physical training or mindfulness/medical yoga for patients with established spinal osteoporosis in primary care. Osteoporotic persons aged sixty years or older with one or more vertebral fractures were randomized to theory only, theory and physical exercise, or theory and mindfulness/medical yoga and were scheduled to once a week for ten weeks. Participants were followed up by clinical tests and questionnaires. Twenty-one participants completed the interventions and the one-year follow-up. Adherence to interventions was 90%. Pooled data from all participants showed significant improvements after intervention on pain during the last week and worst pain, and reduced painkiller use (any painkillers at baseline 70% [opioids 25%] vs. post-intervention 52% [opioids 14%]). Significant improvements were seen regarding RAND-36 social function, Qualeffo-41 social function, balance, tandem walking backwards, and theoretical knowledge. These changes were maintained at the 1-year follow-up. Patient group education combined with supervised training seems to have positive effects on pain, and physical function in persons with established spinal osteoporosis. The improved quality of life was maintained at the 1-year follow-up.

Given the increasing incidence and prevalence of chronic pain, effective treatments for chronic pain are needed. This study aimed to investigate the role of cognitive and behavioral pain coping regarding the prediction of treatment outcomes among inpatients with chronic primary pain participating in an interdisciplinary multimodal treatment program.
At intake and discharge, 500 patients with chronic primary pain completed questionnaires on pain intensity, pain interference, psychological distress, and pain processing.
Patients\' symptoms, cognitive and behavioral pain coping improved significantly after treatment. Similarly, separate cognitive and behaviroal coping skills improved significantly after treatment. Hierarchical linear models revealed no significant associations of pain coping with reductions in pain intensity. Whereas the overall level and improvements in cognitive pain coping predicted reductions in pain interference and psychological distress, the overall level and improvements in behavioral pain coping were associated with reductions in pain interference alone.
Since pain coping seems to influence both pain interference and psychological distress, improving cognitive and behavioral pain coping during an interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment seems to be a key component in the successful treatment of inpatients with chronic primary pain, enabling them to function better physically and mentally despite their chronic pain. Clinically, it might be worth fostering and exercising cognitive restructuring as well as action planning in treatment to reduce both pain interference and psychological distress levels post-treatment. In addition, practicing relaxation techniques might help reduce pain interference post-treatment, whereas making experiences of personal competence might help reduce psychological distress post-treatment.

UNASSIGNED: There is considerable diversity of outcome selections and methodologies for handling the multiple outcomes across all systematic reviews (SRs) of Interdisciplinary Pain Treatment (IPT) due to the complexity. This diversity presents difficulties for healthcare decision makers. Better recommendations about how to select outcomes in SRs (with or without meta-analysis) are needed to explicitly demonstrate the effectiveness of IPT.
UNASSIGNED: This overview systematically collates the reported outcomes and measurements of IPT across published SRs and identifies the methodological characteristics. Additionally, we provide some suggestions on framing the selection of outcomes and on conducting SRs of IPT.
UNASSIGNED: Three electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Epistemonikos) and the PROSPERO registry for ongoing SR were supplemented with hand-searching ending on 30 September 2021.
UNASSIGNED: We included 18 SRs with data on 49007 people from 356 primary randomised controlled trials (RCTs); eight were followed by meta-analysis and ten used narrative syntheses of data. For all the SRs, pain was the most common reported outcome (72%), followed by disability/functional status (61%) and working status (61%). Psychological well-being and quality of life were also reported in half of the included SR (50%). The core outcome domains according to VAPAIN, IMMPACT, and PROMIS were seldom met. The methodological quality varied from critically low to moderate according to AMSTAR2. The AMSTAR2 rating was negatively correlated to the number of outcome domains in PROMIS, and VAPAIN was positively correlated with IMMPACT and PROMIS, indicating the intercorrelations between the reported outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: This systematic overview showed wide-ranging disparity in reported outcomes and applied outcome domains in SRs evaluating IPT interventions for chronic pain conditions. The intercorrelations between the reported outcomes should be appropriately handled in future research. Some approaches are discussed as well.

BACKGROUND: Interdisciplinary pain treatment (IPT) is a complex intervention; its outcomes are very diverse, as are the methodologies for handling those outcomes. This diversity may hamper evidence-based decision making. Presently, there is no gold standard recommendation of how to select reported outcomes in published systematic reviews and meta-analyses to explicitly demonstrate the effectiveness of IPT.
OBJECTIVE: In this systematic overview, we aim to evaluate the reported outcome domains and measurements across published systematic reviews and meta-analyses and to identify any methods, considerations, and discussion regarding the handling of the chosen outcome domains and measurements.
METHODS: This article describes the protocol for a systematic overview of the outcomes reported in published systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized control trials for the effectiveness of IPT versus any control. To this end, we searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Epistemonikos databases from inception to December 2019. Two independent investigators screened the titles, the abstracts of the identified records, and the full texts of the potentially eligible systematic reviews and meta-analyses, performed data extraction according to predefined forms, and rated the quality of the included systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The quality of the included systematic reviews and meta-analyses will be rated with AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) 2. Data will be analyzed descriptively and stratified by AMSTAR 2.
RESULTS: We introduced the rationale and design of a systematic overview to summarize and map the chosen IPT outcome domains and the methods of handling these outcomes reported in published systematic reviews and meta-analyses. As of December 2019, we collected 5229 systematic reviews, of which 147 (2.81%) were examined in-depth for eligibility. Topline results are anticipated by September 2020.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study will be published as soon as they are available. Our results will fill a gap in the related literature and will be used to inform the development of a set of recommendations that can be applied in systematic reviews and hopefully serve as a gold standard.
UNASSIGNED: PRR1-10.2196/17795.

Studies have shown that pain acceptance is associated with a better pain outcome. The current study explored whether changes in pain acceptance in the very early treatment phase of an interdisciplinary cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT)-based treatment program for chronic pain predict pain outcomes. A total of 69 patients with chronic, non-malignant pain (at least 6 months) were treated in a day-clinic for four-weeks. Pain acceptance was measured with the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ), pain outcomes included pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale, NRS) as well as affective and sensory pain perception (Pain Perception Scale, SES-A and SES-S). Regression analyses controlling for the pre-treatment values of the pain outcomes, age, and gender were performed. Early changes in pain acceptance predicted pain intensity at post-treatment measured with the NRS (B = -0.04 (SE = 0.02); T = -2.28; p = 0.026), affective pain perception at post-treatment assessed with the SES-A (B = -0.26 (SE = 0.10); T = -2.79; p = 0.007), and sensory pain perception at post-treatment measured with the SES-S (B = -0.19 (SE = 0.08); T = -2.44; p = 0.017) . Yet, a binary logistic regression analysis revealed that early changes in pain acceptance did not predict clinically relevant pre-post changes in pain intensity (at least 2 points on the NRS). Early changes in pain acceptance were associated with pain outcomes, however, the impact was beneath the threshold defined as clinically relevant.

Chronic pain is a major public health concern, and widespread use of prescription opioids for chronic pain has contributed to the escalating problem of opioid use disorder. Interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation programs (IPRPs) can be highly effective in discontinuing opioids in patients with chronic pain while also improving functional status. This study sought to examine self-report and performance-based functional outcomes of 2 cohorts of patients enrolled in a 3-week IPRP: patients engaged in interdisciplinary pain treatment and physician-supervised opioid taper versus nonopioid users engaged in interdisciplinary treatment. Immediate and long-term treatment outcomes were assessed using a series of 2 (group: opioid use, no opioid use) × 2 (period: pretreatment, post-treatment) and 2 (group: opioid use, no opioid use) × 2 (period: pretreatment, 6 months post-treatment) mixed model analyses of variance. Group × Period interactions were nonsignificant whereas period effects were significant for all outcomes in directions indicating improvement (Ps < .001) at discharge from the program and at 6 months, irrespective of opioid use status. Results support the assertion that IPRPs lead to significant improvements in subjective as well as objective indices of function, irrespective of opioid use status. Implications for our findings are discussed.
This article provides support for the effectiveness of interdisciplinary, rehabilitative models of care in improving physical and emotional functioning of patients with chronic pain while simultaneously discontinuing opioid use. The reach of this work is substantial, because opioid dependency and chronic pain are public health problems in the United States.

The characterization of subtypes of chronic pain patients based on their pain coping profiles may contribute to a better understanding of the pain syndrome, to more specific indications of established treatment options as well as to further development of therapeutic interventions.
The aim of this study was to examine whether different subgroups of chronic pain patients emerge when using the German pain coping questionnaire (FESV) to identify homogeneous subgroups of pain coping patterns. Furthermore, the aim was to examine whether these pain coping subgroups differ in terms of sociodemographic characteristics, as well as pain and treatment-related aspects.
A total of 166 inpatients with a chronic pain disorder according to ICD-10 F45.41 were examined as part of the routine assessment within an interdisciplinary pain treatment program. Cognitive and behavioral pain coping and pain-related psychological impairment were measured with the FESV as components of pain coping. Using cluster analyses, homogeneous patient subgroups were generated on the basis of pain coping data. The resulting subgroups were subsequently compared regarding sociodemographic characteristics, pain-related impairment, global psychological distress, depression, anxiety, perceived stress, utilization of social support and motivation for psychotherapy.
The results revealed three distinct subgroups regarding pain coping patterns: (1) high impairment and high coping, (2) low impairment and high coping and (3) high impairment and low coping. The subgroups differed significantly in almost all characteristics, except for pain duration and pain intensity. The categorization into the abovementioned pain coping subtypes may assist clinicians in tailoring pain treatment to the needs and characteristics of the individual patients.

Most patients with chronic pain receive multimodal treatment. There is scant literature to guide us, but when approaching combination pharmacotherapy, the practitioner and patient must weigh the benefits with the side effects; many medications have modest effect yet carry significant side effects that can be additive. Chronic pain often leads to depression, anxiety, and deconditioning, which are targets for treatment. Structured interdisciplinary programs are beneficial but costly. Interventions have their place in the treatment of chronic pain and should be a part of a multidisciplinary treatment plan. Further research is needed to validate many common combination treatments.