4.6 Article

Effects of coping skills training and sertraline in patients with non-cardiac chest pain: A randomized controlled study

Journal

PAIN
Volume 152, Issue 4, Pages 730-741

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.08.040

Keywords

Non-cardiac chest pain; Pain; Pain catastrophizing; Coping skills training; Sertraline; Anxiety

Funding

  1. NIMH [R01 MH63429]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Non-cardiac chest pain (NCCP) is a common and distressing condition. Prior studies suggest that psychotropic medication or pain coping skills training (CST) may benefit NCCP patients. To our knowledge, no clinical trials have examined the separate and combined effects of CST and psychotropic medication in the management of NCCP. This randomized clinical trial examined the separate and combined effects of CST and antidepressant medication (sertraline) in participants with non-cardiac chest pain. A sample of individuals diagnosed with NCCP was randomly assigned to one of four treatments: (1) CST plus sertraline (CST + sertraline), (2) CST plus placebo (CST + placebo), (3) sertraline alone, or (4) placebo alone. Assessments of pain intensity, pain unpleasantness, anxiety, pain catastrophizing, depression, and physical disability were collected prior to treatment, and at 10- and 34-weeks following randomization. Data analyses revealed that CST and sertraline either alone or in combination significantly reduced pain intensity and pain unpleasantness. The combination of CST plus sertraline may have the greatest promise in that, when compared to placebo alone, it not only significantly reduced pain but also pain catastrophizing and anxiety. Overall, these findings support the importance of further research on the effects of CST and sertraline for non-cardiac chest pain. (C) 2011 Published by Elsevier B. V. on behalf of International Association for the Study of Pain.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available