University of Southampton
Southampton, Hampshire, SO17 1BJ, United Kingdom
NCT Number: NCT06368362
Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation (CBM-I) trains participants to interpret ambiguous information as neutral or benign, rather than interpret it as being related to pain. The goal of this randomised controlled trial was to explore the feasibility and potential clinical benefits of CBM-I in people with chronic pain and also healthy, pain-free individuals.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year–70 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Southampton, Hampshire, SO17 1BJ, United Kingdom
This study investigated whether Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation (CBM-I) could reduce negative emotional response to pain and to pain-related images, and whether reductions in interpretation bias (IB) and fear of pain mediated this effect. Participants with chronic musculoskeletal pain (N = 41) were randomised to benign CBM-I or no CBM-I, and healthy participants (N = 41) were randomised to benign CBM-I or pain-related CBM-I. After CBM-I, the study assessed pain-related IB and fear of pain, as well as negative emotional response to exercise-induced pain and images of musculoskeletal pain.
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Chronic pain group Inclusion criteria
Healthy group Inclusion criteria
Benign cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation (CBM-I) trains participants to interpret ambiguous information as neutral or benign rather than pain-related.
Pain-related cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation (CBM-I) trains participants to interpret ambiguous information as pain-related.
Time frame: Immediately post-intervention
Sensory and emotional pain words from the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) were presented, grouped as they are on the MPQ. Participants chose one word from each group most representing the pain experienced performing a dynamic arm exercise (rotating their arms in small circles forwards for 10 seconds then backwards for 10 seconds, repeating the process as many times as possible).
Participants rated each word from 0 (not at all representative) to 10 (extremely representative) or indicated if none represented their exercise pain. Emotional response to exercise pain was calculated from intensity and representativeness scores. For intensity, words were assigned a numeric score according to MPQ instructions and summed for emotional and sensory words. For representativeness, mean rating of representativeness was calculated for sensory and emotional pain words. The sensory score was subtracted from the emotional score to compute emotional response to pain relative to the sensory experience.
Time frame: Immediately post-intervention
Participants were presented twenty pain-related images, and asked to rate the extent to which they felt negative emotions while viewing the image. After a fixation cross presented for 500 ms, a pain-related picture was presented for 6000 ms. This was followed by another cross presented for 500 ms then numbers from 0 (not at all negative) to 10 (very negative) was displayed. Participants were instructed to look at the picture on the screen then to rate their negative emotion from 0 (not at all negative) to 10 (very negative). The mean rating of emotional response to pain-related images was calculated for each participant.
Time frame: Immediately post-intervention
Fear of Pain Questionnaire - III. A 30-item scale (0 - Not at all, to 5 - Extreme), including three subscales: major pain (e.g., a car accident), minor pain (e.g. biting your tongue), and medical pain (e.g. an injection), with 10 items in each subscale. Higher scores indicate higher levels of pain-related fear.
Time frame: Baseline
Anxiety subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). A seven-item subscale of the 14-item HADS (ranging from 0 - 3, or 3 - 0), with higher scores indicating higher levels of anxiety.
Time frame: Baseline
Depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). A seven-item subscale of the 14-item HADS (ranging from 0 - 3, or 3 - 0), with higher scores indicating higher levels of depression.
Time frame: Immediately post-intervention
Sensory and emotional pain words from the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) were presented, grouped as they are on the MPQ. Participants chose one word from each group that was most representative of their average experience of clinical musculoskeletal pain. Participants rated each word on a scale from 0 (not at all representative) to 10 (extremely representative), or indicated if none of the words were representative of their pain. Indices of emotional response to musculoskeletal pain were calculated from intensity and representativeness scores. For intensity, words were assigned a numeric score according to the MPQ scoring instructions and these were summed for emotional and sensory words separately. For representativeness, the mean rating of representativeness was calculated for sensory and affective/evaluative (emotional) pain words separately. The sensory score was subtracted from the emotional score to determine the emotional response to pain relative to the sensory experience.
Time frame: Baseline
Pain severity subscale of the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form, assessing pain at its worst and least in the last 24 hours, on average, and right now on a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as you can imagine).
Time frame: Baseline
Pain interference subscale of the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form. A seven-item subscale which assesses the extent to which pain has interfered with general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life over the past 24 hours on a scale of 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes).
Time frame: Immediately post-intervention
Assessed via Ambiguous Scenarios Task. The training phase presents ambiguous scenarios with a fragment of the last word shown, which participants completed. In the pain-related modification condition, the final word gave the scenario a pain-related meaning. In the benign modification condition, the final word gave the scenario a neutral meaning. The test phase assesses whether participants interpret new ambiguous scenarios as pain-related or benign, with participants rating the similarity of four endings (two pain-related and two neutral) to the original scenario from 1 (very different in meaning) to 4 (very similar in meaning). The mean score for benign target endings was subtracted from the mean score for negative endings to give an index of interpretation bias (a positive index indicates pain-related interpretation bias). To assess visual imagery, participants rated how easily they could imagine themselves as the protagonist in the scenarios from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely).
University of Southampton
Other
The Effectiveness and Mediators of Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation in the Reduction of Negative Emotional Response to Pain in Individuals With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT06940986
Agnosia, Chronic Pain
Fairbanks, Alaska, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT07145788
Agnosia, Chronic Pain
Stuttgart, Auerbachstraße 112, Germany
View Trial DetailsNCT07426497
Chronic Pain, Coccydynia
Istanbul, Sisli, Turkey (Türkiye)
View Trial DetailsNCT06931158
Chronic Low-back Pain, Chronic Pain
Providence, Rhode Island, United States
View Trial Details