4.3 Review

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for adults with chronic pain: Outcome domains, design quality, and efficacy

Journal

JOURNAL OF CONTEXTUAL BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE
Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 217-227

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/J.JCBS.2014.10.001

Keywords

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy; Chronic pain; Randomized controlled trials; Outcomes; Review

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) is a form of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy that includes a specific therapeutic process, psychological flexibility, and focuses on behavior change rather than symptom reduction. One relatively well-developed research area includes ACT applied to chronic pain. The current systematic review examines outcome domains included as primary, secondary and process variables in controlled trials of ACT-based pain treatment studies, and also summarizes evidence for efficacy. The review of outcome domains is to establish whether these are in-line with recommendations, consistent with the theory underlying ACT, and optimal for further development. A systematic search identified 1034 articles and ten studies were selected as eligible for review. Overall, 15 outcome domains were assessed using 39 different measurement tools across the ten RCTs. The outcome domains assessed in the reviewed trials were, to an extent, in-line with recognized guidelines. Six of the ten studies identified primary and secondary outcomes; one included just one outcome and three did not categorize outcomes. All ten trials included a measure of some aspect of psychological flexibility; however these were not always formally identified as process variables. Pain and emotional functioning were the most frequently measured outcome domains. A review of outcome results suggests that ACT is efficacious particularly for enhancing general, mostly physical functioning, and for decreasing distress, in comparison to inactive treatment comparisons. It is recommended that future RCTs (a) formally define outcomes as primary, secondary and process variables, (b) consider including measures of physical or social functioning, rather than pain and emotional functioning, as primary outcomes, (c) address existing risks of bias, such as reporting bias, and (d) include more components of psychological flexibility, such as cognitive delusion and self-related variables. (C) 2014 Association for Contextual Behavioral Science. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available