Journal
TRIALS
Volume 19, Issue -, Pages -Publisher
BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-018-3044-2
Keywords
Chronic; Low back pain; Electrical acupuncture; Electroacupuncture; Sham acupuncture; Quantitative sensory testing; Temporal summation; Expectation; Conditioned pain modulation; Pressure pain threshold; Catastrophizing; Self-efficacy; PROMIS
Categories
Funding
- National Institute of Health (National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health) [P01-AT006651]
- National Center for Complementary & Integrative Health [P01AT006651, K23AT008477] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
- NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE [K24DA029262] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
Ask authors/readers for more resources
BackgroundChronic low back pain (CLBP) is the most common chronic pain condition and is often resistant to conventional treatments. Acupuncture is a popular alternative for treating CLBP but its mechanisms of action remain poorly understood. Evidence suggests that pain regulatory mechanisms (particularly the ascending and secondarily the descending pain modulatory pathways) and psychological mechanisms (e.g., expectations, pain catastrophizing and self-efficacy) may be involved in the pathogenesis of CLBP and its response to treatments. We will examine these mechanisms in the treatment of CLBP by electroacupuncture (EA).MethodsWe present the aims and methods of a placebo-controlled, participant-blinded and assessor-blinded mechanistic study. Adult patients with CLBP will be randomized to receiving 16 sessions of real (active) or sham (placebo) EA over the course of 8weeks. The primary pain regulatory measure for which the study was powered is temporal summation (TS), which approximates ascending pain facilitation. Conditioned pain modulation (CPM), representing a descending pain modulatory pathway, will be our secondary pain regulatory measure. The primary psychological measure is expectations of benefit, and the secondary psychological measures are pain catastrophizing and self-efficacy in managing pain. Main clinical outcomes are back pain bothersomeness on a 0-100 visual analog scale (primary), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (secondary), and relevant items from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information System (secondary). We hypothesize that compared to sham, real EA will lead to greater reduction in TS after 8 treatment sessions (4weeks); and that reduction in TS (and secondarily, increase in CPM) after 8 treatment sessions will mediate reduction in back pain bothersomeness from baseline to week 10 (clinical response) to EA. We also hypothesize that the three psychological factors are moderators of clinical response. With 100 treatment completers, the study is designed to have 80% power to detect a medium-sized between-group effect (d=0.5) on temporal summation.DiscussionTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first appropriately powered, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating mechanisms of EA in the treatment of CLBP.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02503475. Registered on 15 July 15 2015. Retrospectively registered.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available