A single case experimental design: how do different psychological outcome measures capture the experience of a client undergoing CBT for chronic pain

Abstract

Introduction:

Reports suggest that many people who experience chronic pain also experience associated mental health difficulties. Currently the first line psychotherapeutic intervention for people who experience anxiety and depression within the context of chronic pain is Cognitive Behaviour Therapy. Anecdotal clinical reports suggest that commonly used psychological outcome measures do not truly reflect the experience and improvement of clients who experience chronic pain following CBT. The present study therefore aimed to compare the outcomes of a CBT intervention within one client’s journey through CBT.

Methods:

A single case experimental design (SCED) was used to evaluate generic measures of mood, pain specific measures of wellbeing and client specific cognitions.

Results:

All outcome measures suggested that the CBT intervention had been at least somewhat successful. Results suggest that the more specific the measure was to the client’s experience; the more improvement was demonstrated on the measure.

Keywords

CBT chronic pain health psychology outcomes

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Naylor

Parsonage

McDaid

et al . Long-term conditions and mental health: the cost of co-morbidities. London: The Kings Fund, 2012.

NHS Choices. How to get NHS help for your pain, 2014. Available at: http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Pain/Pages/Longtermpain.aspx (accessed 24 September 2018).

Tsang

Von Korff

Lee

et al . Common chronic pain conditions in developed and developing countries: gender and age differences and comorbidity with depression-anxiety disorders. J Pain 2008; 9(10): 883–891.

NICE. Nice Clinical Guideline 91: depression in adults with a chronic physical health condition, 2009. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg91 (accessed 24 September 2018).

The British Pain Society. Guidelines for pain management programmes for adults. An evidence-based review prepared on behalf of the British Pain Society, 2013. Available at: https://www.britishpainsociety.org/static/uploads/resources/files/pmp2013_main_FINAL_v6.pdf (accessed 14 July 2018).

Eccleston

Williams

Morley

Psychological therapies for the management of chronic pain (excluding headache) in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; 11: CD007407.

Lowe

Decker

Muller

et al . Validation and standardization of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7) in the general population. Med Care 2008; 46: 266–274.

Kroenke

Spitzer

RL.

The PHQ-9: a new depression diagnostic and severity measure. Psychiatr Ann 2002; 32: 509–515.

NHS England.

Integrated IAPT Early Implementers, 2017. Available at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/mental-health/adults/iapt/mus/sites/ (accessed 24 September 2018).

10.

Cleeland

Ryan

KM.

Pain assessment: global use of the Brief Pain Inventory. Ann Acad Med Singapore 1994; 23(2): 129–138.

11.

Vlayen

JWS

de Jong

Geilen

,et al . Graded exposure in vivo in the treatment of pain-related fear: a replicated single-case experimental designs in four patients with chronic low back pain. Behav Res Ther 2001; 39: 151–166.

12.

Smith

JD.

Single-case experimental designs: a systematic review of published research and current standards. Psychol Methods 2012; 17(4): 510–550.

13.

Barlow

Nock

Hersen

Single case experimental designs: strategies for studying behaviour change, 3rd edn. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2008.

14.

Melzack

From the gate to the neuromatrix. Pain 1999; 82(Suppl. 6): S121–S126.

15.

Sullivan

MJL

. The Pain Catastrophising Scale: User Manual, 1995. Available at: http://sullivan-painresearch.mcgill.ca/pdf/pcs/PCSManual_English.pdf (accessed 24 September 2018).

16.

Nicholas

MK.

Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (Unpublished tool). London: Pain Management Centre, St. Thomas Hospital, 1988.

17.

Di Pietro

Catley

McAuley

et al . Rasch analysis supports the use of the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire. Phys Ther 2013; 94(1): 91–100.

18.

Jones

Weinrott

Vaught

RS.

Effects of serial dependence on the agreement between visual and statistical inference. J Appl Behav Anal 1978; 11: 277–283.

19.

Morgan

RK.

Single-case research methods for the behavioural and health sciences. London: SAGE, 2008.

20.

Parker

Vannest

An improved effect size for single-case research: nonoverlap of all pairs. Behav Ther 2009; 40(4): 357–367.

21.

Manolov

Solanas

Leiva

Comparing ‘visual’ effect size indices for single-case designs. Methodology 2010; 6: 49–58.

22.

Jacobson

Truax

Clinical significance: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. J Consult Clin Psychol 1991; 59: 12–19.

23.

Gyani

Shafran

Layard

et al . Enhancing recovery rates in IAPT services: lessons from analysis of year one data. Improving access to psychological therapies. London: NICE, 2011, 40–41, 71–75.

24.

Macey

Clarke

Golijani-Moghaddam

et al . Evaluating a person-centred chronic pain service using indices of reliable and clinically significant change. Eur J Person Cent Healthcare 2015; 3: 19–25.

25.

Mehlsen

Heegaard

Frostholm

A prospective evaluation of the chronic pain self-management programme in a Danish population of chronic pain patients. Patient Educ Counsel 2015; 98(5): 677–680.

26.

Hadi

McHugh

Closs

SJ.

Impact of chronic pain on patients’ quality of life: a comparative mixed-methods study. J Patient Exper. Epub ahead of print 5 July 2018. DOI: 10.1177/2374373518786013.

27.

Sideridis

GD.

Data smoothing: prediction of human behaviour, detection of behavioural patterns, and monitoring treatment effectiveness in single-subject behavioural studies. J Behav Educ 1997; 7: 191–203.