Reasons for treatment non-response: a controlled study of patients’ views in pain rehabilitation

Axel D. Vitterso, Edmund Keogh, Jeremy Gauntlett-Gilbert

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Understanding successful and unsuccessful behavioural treatment for pain is essential. Aims: We carried out a retrospective survey of 130 people who had undergone pain rehabilitation based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, aiming to identify factors associated with non-response. Method: The sample was selected using the reliable change index to define ‘responders’ and ‘non-responders’ to key outcome measures. We surveyed a range of treatment-related, systemic, practical and personal factors that may have affected their treatment, and then compared ‘non-responders’ to ‘responders’, controlling for factors that might not be causal or specific to non-response. Results: Logistic regression analysis showed two themes that distinguished the groups, ‘People outside programme’ and ‘Emotional state’. Conclusions: These data have clinical implications, as such factors can be addressed directly or incorporated into an assessment of treatment ‘readiness’. This study introduced a novel methodology for the investigation of pain treatment response, which allowed a broad study of clinically relevant variables, but with greater rigour than conventional self-reports of ‘helpful factors’ in treatment.
LanguageEnglish
Pages238-243
Number of pages6
JournalBehavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy
Volume46
Issue number2
Early online date9 Oct 2017
DOIs
StatusPublished - 1 Mar 2018

Fingerprint

Rehabilitation
Pain
Acceptance and Commitment Therapy
Therapeutics
Self Report
Logistic Models
Regression Analysis
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

Keywords

  • Cognitive behavioral therapy
  • Acceptance and Commitment Therapy
  • Treatment Process
  • Outcome
  • Pain Management
  • Treatment Failure

Cite this

Reasons for treatment non-response: a controlled study of patients’ views in pain rehabilitation. / Vitterso, Axel D.; Keogh, Edmund; Gauntlett-Gilbert, Jeremy.

In: Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy , Vol. 46, No. 2, 01.03.2018, p. 238-243.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4c16a6aec78c4b9cbbe54f7c6b1742b8,
title = "Reasons for treatment non-response: a controlled study of patients’ views in pain rehabilitation",
abstract = "Background: Understanding successful and unsuccessful behavioural treatment for pain is essential. Aims: We carried out a retrospective survey of 130 people who had undergone pain rehabilitation based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, aiming to identify factors associated with non-response. Method: The sample was selected using the reliable change index to define ‘responders’ and ‘non-responders’ to key outcome measures. We surveyed a range of treatment-related, systemic, practical and personal factors that may have affected their treatment, and then compared ‘non-responders’ to ‘responders’, controlling for factors that might not be causal or specific to non-response. Results: Logistic regression analysis showed two themes that distinguished the groups, ‘People outside programme’ and ‘Emotional state’. Conclusions: These data have clinical implications, as such factors can be addressed directly or incorporated into an assessment of treatment ‘readiness’. This study introduced a novel methodology for the investigation of pain treatment response, which allowed a broad study of clinically relevant variables, but with greater rigour than conventional self-reports of ‘helpful factors’ in treatment.",
keywords = "Cognitive behavioral therapy, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, Treatment Process, Outcome, Pain Management, Treatment Failure",
author = "Vitterso, {Axel D.} and Edmund Keogh and Jeremy Gauntlett-Gilbert",
year = "2018",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S1352465817000595",
language = "English",
volume = "46",
pages = "238--243",
journal = "Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy",
issn = "1352-4658",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reasons for treatment non-response: a controlled study of patients’ views in pain rehabilitation

AU - Vitterso, Axel D.

AU - Keogh, Edmund

AU - Gauntlett-Gilbert, Jeremy

PY - 2018/3/1

Y1 - 2018/3/1

N2 - Background: Understanding successful and unsuccessful behavioural treatment for pain is essential. Aims: We carried out a retrospective survey of 130 people who had undergone pain rehabilitation based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, aiming to identify factors associated with non-response. Method: The sample was selected using the reliable change index to define ‘responders’ and ‘non-responders’ to key outcome measures. We surveyed a range of treatment-related, systemic, practical and personal factors that may have affected their treatment, and then compared ‘non-responders’ to ‘responders’, controlling for factors that might not be causal or specific to non-response. Results: Logistic regression analysis showed two themes that distinguished the groups, ‘People outside programme’ and ‘Emotional state’. Conclusions: These data have clinical implications, as such factors can be addressed directly or incorporated into an assessment of treatment ‘readiness’. This study introduced a novel methodology for the investigation of pain treatment response, which allowed a broad study of clinically relevant variables, but with greater rigour than conventional self-reports of ‘helpful factors’ in treatment.

AB - Background: Understanding successful and unsuccessful behavioural treatment for pain is essential. Aims: We carried out a retrospective survey of 130 people who had undergone pain rehabilitation based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, aiming to identify factors associated with non-response. Method: The sample was selected using the reliable change index to define ‘responders’ and ‘non-responders’ to key outcome measures. We surveyed a range of treatment-related, systemic, practical and personal factors that may have affected their treatment, and then compared ‘non-responders’ to ‘responders’, controlling for factors that might not be causal or specific to non-response. Results: Logistic regression analysis showed two themes that distinguished the groups, ‘People outside programme’ and ‘Emotional state’. Conclusions: These data have clinical implications, as such factors can be addressed directly or incorporated into an assessment of treatment ‘readiness’. This study introduced a novel methodology for the investigation of pain treatment response, which allowed a broad study of clinically relevant variables, but with greater rigour than conventional self-reports of ‘helpful factors’ in treatment.

KW - Cognitive behavioral therapy

KW - Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

KW - Treatment Process

KW - Outcome

KW - Pain Management

KW - Treatment Failure

U2 - 10.1017/S1352465817000595

DO - 10.1017/S1352465817000595

M3 - Article

VL - 46

SP - 238

EP - 243

JO - Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy

T2 - Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy

JF - Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy

SN - 1352-4658

IS - 2

ER -