Pain Clinical Trials in Tacoma, WA

Chronic pain is a prevalent, disabling problem affecting as many as 50% of men and 75% of women Veterans. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is the current gold standard treatment for chronic pain. However, while some individuals do respond to CBT, many individuals do not obtain meaningful benefit. As a result, the average response to CBT treatment in groups of individuals with chronic pain is only modest. To address the need for effective treatments, the investigators have developed and adapted Complementary and Integrative Health (CIH) interventions such as Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) and Hypnotic Cognitive Therapy (HYP-CT) for chronic pain management. Research shows these treatments are beneficial alternatives to CBT. However, as with CBT, response to these treatments varies, and the investigators' preliminary data suggests outcome variability is explained by a number of baseline patient factors. Research is now needed to advance knowledge regarding the pre-treatment patient factors (i.e., predictive markers) that moderate treatment outcome (i.e., patient factors that interact with treatment condition to predict outcome). The findings from this research will provide an empirical basis for developing patient-treatment matching algorithms to prospectively match a given individual to the evidence-based treatment most likely to be beneficial for them. The investigators have initiated a program of research to identify the factors that predict response to psychosocial pain treatments, including HYP-CT, MBCT, and CBT. Preliminary findings suggest that predictive markers such as brain activity (e.g., alpha and beta power, as measured by EEG), and the traits of mindfulness, hypnotizability, and catastrophizing, will predict who benefits most from different treatments. For example, post hoc analyses show that those who are "well-matched" to HYP-CT, based on the identified baseline moderators, achieve twice the amount of pain reduction with treatment, compared to those who are not well- matched. To confirm these findings, prospective research is now needed. The findings from this study will provide a foundation upon which to develop an assessment battery to identify critical values on which to base algorithms for a priori matching of individual patients to different treatments. This has the potential to substantially boost the typically modest average effect sizes that are achieved when using a more traditional "one size fits all" approach. Read Less

This study will be sequential, randomization trial where patients with chronic low back pain are initially randomized to receive 1 of 2 treatments (physical therapy OR Move 2 Health). This will be Phase I of the study intervention. Patients who do not respond to treatment after 6 weeks will undergo a subsequent sequential randomization. This will be Phase II of the study intervention. Patients in Phase II will be randomized to receive 1 of 2 treatments (addition of physical therapy or Move 2 Health, whichever one they did not receive OR the MORE Mindfulness intervention). Patients will be followed for 1 year after enrollment. Read Less

This trial will recruit veterans with chronic pain (N = 160) who are prescribed buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). We seek to: (1) examine the efficacy of an integrated treatment to reduce pain interference and substance misuse (Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and Mindfulness-Based Relapse Prevention [ACT + MBRP]) compared to an education control (EC) consisting of a protocol-based series of education sessions concerning chronic pain, opioids, and buprenorphine use and (2) examine how theoretically-relevant treatment mechanisms of pain acceptance, engagement in values-based action, and opioid craving are related to treatment outcomes. Interventions will be delivered via the VA Video Connect telehealth modality. Read Less

This study will compare the effectiveness of two pain management pathways (standard vs. enriched) for patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery in the Military Health System (MHS). Effectiveness will be based on post-surgery patient-centered outcomes and extent of opioid use. The study design is a 2-arm, parallel group, individual-randomized trial. Read Less

Rationale: Low back pain (LBP), or myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) of the low back, accounts for approximately 2.63 million visits in the United States, or 2.3 percent of annual Emergency Department (ED) visits. An estimated 100 billion dollars per year is lost from LBP. Approximately one-third of this is direct costs. Previous studies have established the safety of trigger point injections (TPI). However, the results of these studies are highly heterogeneous regarding TPI's ability to treat pain or improve functional outcomes. The two most promising TPI studies conducted in the ED have been published in the last two years. They both suffered from a small sample size. Additionally, they suffered from a combination of limitations including: lack of randomization, inconsistent medical management, lack of a follow-up assessment, and lack of patient centered functional outcomes. These studies were both two armed and either compared standard medical management to TPI with local anesthetic or TPI with local anesthetic to TPI with Normal Saline (NS). One of these studies concluded that TPI is generally beneficial. The other concluded that TPI with NS is superior. Research Hypothesis: The investigators hypothesize that standard therapy (ST) plus TPI with 8 mL of 0.5 percent Bupivacaine is superior to ST alone or ST plus TPI with 8 mL of NS for the treatment of the pain associated with MPS of the low back. Significance: This will be the first TPI study to compare ST, to TPI with local anesthetic, and TPI with NS for LBP conducted in an ED. It will also be the first TPI study to incorporate a patient centered functional outcome and patient follow-up after discharge from an ED. TPI's are a popular treatment modality for LBP among many Emergency Medicine Providers. However, to date, there is limited evidence for or against it. The investigators are hopeful that this study will answer whether or not trigger point injections are benefiting patients and, if so, which type of TPI is most beneficial. Read Less