Chronic Spinal PainNCT02098005

Pain Neuroscience Education Combined With Cognition-targeted Motor Control Training

A study testing modern neuroscience approach in people with Chronic Spinal Pain, run by University Ghent at 3 sites in Belgium.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record

Search all trials

Trial summary

Who is it for?: Ages 18 to 65 years
Conditions the study is for: Chronic Spinal Pain
What is being tested?: modern neuroscience approach
Could I receive a placebo?: No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people: 120 participants
Where: 3 sitesBelgium
Study dates: Jan 2014to Apr 2016
Phase: Interventional
Are there results?: None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

Ages 18 to 65 years
All sexes
No healthy volunteers
Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

Nonspecific spinal pain of at least 3 months' duration, at least 3 days per week
Aged between 18 and 65 years
Seeking care because of neck pain or low back pain
Living or working within a radius of 50 km around the therapy location
Not starting new treatments or medication and continuing their usual care 6 weeks prior to and during study participation (to obtain a steady state)
Nonspecific failed back surgery > 3 years are permitted

Show all 9Show fewer

Not undertaking exercise (> 3 metabolic Equivalents) 3 days before the experiment
Refraining from analgesics 48h prior to assessments.
Abstaining from caffeine, alcohol or nicotine 24h prior to assessment

Who cannot join

Neuropathic pain
Chronic widespread pain
Being pregnant or having given birth in the preceding year
Contra-indications related to MRI imaging
History of specific spinal surgery

Trial locations and contacts

3 sites in 1 country.

Belgium3 sites

Ghent University Hospital
Ghent, 9000
Universiteit Gent (UGent), Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dpt. Of Rehabilitation Sciences and Physiotherapy, BE-9000 Gent (Belgium)
Ghent, 9000
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Faculty of Physical Education & Physiotherapy, Dpt. of Rehabilitation Sciences & Physiotherapy
Jette, 1090

Other trials in Belgium

About this study

Official title: A Modern Neuroscience Approach to Chronic Spinal Pain: Pain Neuroscience Education Combined With Cognition-targeted Motor Control Training

Chronic spinal pain (CSP) includes chronic low back pain, failed back surgery, chronic whiplash associated disorders, chronic non-traumatic neck pain, etc. The current investigators and others have provided evidence for impaired motor control of spinal muscles in patients with CSP. In addition, there is increasing evidence that central mechanisms, i.e. hyperexcitability of the central nervous system and brain abnormalities (e.g. decreased brain matter density) play a role in CSP. Hence, treatments for CSP should not only address the spinal muscles and joints, but also the brain. Therefore, a modern neuroscience approach, comprising of pain neuroscience education followed by cognition-targeted motor control training, can be applied.

The scientific objective entails examining the effectiveness of the modern neuroscience approach vs. usual care evidence-based physiotherapy for reducing pain and improving functioning in Flemish patients with CSP. A secondary objective entails examining the effectiveness of the modern neuroscience approach vs. usual care evidence-based physiotherapy for altering brain's structure and function (magnetic Resonance Imaging) in Flemish patients with CSP. Therefore, a multi-center triple-blind randomized controlled trial will be conducted.

To comply with this scientific objective, 120 CSP patients will be recruited and subjected to the baseline assessment. The baseline assessment includes the assessment of pain (including symptoms of central sensitization and conditioned pain modulation), the assessment of restrictions in functioning, brain imaging, the evaluation of motor control and muscle properties, spinal mobility, and psychosocial correlates. Baseline analysis will provide descriptive statistics and will lead to calculate correlation between the different outcome measures and predictors of pain and dysfunctioning. In a next step, included patients will be randomized to the experimental or control group. Those in the experimental group will receive neuroscience education combined with cognition-targeted motor control training. Those in the control group will be subjected to a control intervention, including back/neck school and general exercises. After the neuroscience education has been given, the experimental subjects will fill in the neurophysiology of pain test. Several follow-up assessments will take place. Part of the assessment (functionality (PDI questionnaire) and psychosocial correlates (Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), pain vigilance and awareness questionnaire (PVAQ), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), Illness Perception Questionnaire revised (IPQ-R)) will be re-evaluated after the first 3 sessions. The complete 'baseline' assessment will be repeated in the month following the treatment complement, rounding up the short-term follow-up assessment. Six months after the baseline assessment, pain, functioning and psychological correlates are assessed in an intermediate online assessment. One year after baseline assessment the complete assessment is repeated for the last time, unless the intermediate assessment indicates that treatment effects are no longer present. Both short and long term treatment effects can be studied and predictors for therapy success can be unraveled. Also correlations between changes in different outcome measures can provide relevant and innovative information.

The proof of principal suggests a strong effect reported by large effect sizes for pain and disability compared to usual care.

Conditions: Chronic Spinal Pain
Being tested: usual care evidence-based physiotherapy, modern neuroscience approach

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

usual care evidence-based physiotherapyOther
Arm 1 (i.e., the control group) will be subjected to a control intervention, including back/neck school and general exercises. 3 sessions of education (session 1: group session; session 2: online module; session 3: individual session) will be given by a physiotherapist, followed by 15 sessions of traditional physiotherapy and general exercises. The 18 sessions will be spread over a period of 3 months.
modern neuroscience approachOther
Arm 2 (i.e., the experimental group) will receive pain neuroscience education (3 sessions of education), followed by 15 sessions of cognition-targeted motor control training (15 sessions). The 18 sessions will be spread over a period of 3 months.

Study groups in NCT02098005
Study group	Role	What they receive
Usual care	Active comparator	usual care evidence-based physiotherapy Receives: Other: usual care evidence-based physiotherapy
modern neuroscience approach	Experimental	modern neuroscience approach Receives: Other: modern neuroscience approach

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

Pain assessment (questionnaire)
questionnaire: numerical rating scale (NRS), central sensitization inventory (CSI), medical outcomes short form 36 health service (SF-36)
Measured: at baseline
Pain assessment (physical testing)
Physical testing: pressure pain threshold (PTT), cold pressor test (CPT)
Measured: at baseline
Functional assessment (questionnaires)
Questionnaires: PDI, SF-36
Measured: at baseline
Pain assessment (questionnaire)
questionnaire: numerical rating scale (NRS), central sensitization inventory (CSI), medical outcomes short form 36 health service (SF-36) Time Frame: after 18 treatment sessions
Measured: at 3 months
Pain assessment (questionnaire)
questionnaire: numerical rating scale (NRS), central sensitization inventory (CSI), medical outcomes short form 36 health service (SF-36)
Measured: at 6 months
Pain assessment (questionnaire)
questionnaire: numerical rating scale (NRS), central sensitization inventory (CSI), medical outcomes short form 36 health service (SF-36)
Measured: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Pain assessment (physical testing)
Physical testing: pressure pain threshold (PTT), cold pressor test (CPT) Time Frame: after 18 treatment sessions
Measured: at 3 months
Pain assessment (physical testing)
Physical testing: pressure pain threshold (PTT), cold pressor test (CPT)
Measured: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Functional assessment (questionnaires)
Questionnaires: PDI, SF-36 Timeframe: after 3 treatment sessions (PDI)
Measured: at 1 week
Functional assessment (questionnaires)
Questionnaires: PDI, SF-36 Time Frame: after 18 treatment sessions
Measured: at 3 months
Functional assessment (questionnaires)
Questionnaires: PDI, SF-36
Measured: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Functional assessment (questionnaires)
Questionnaires: PDI, SF-36
Measured: at 6 months

Secondary outcomes (18)

Gray and white matter structure
Gray and white matter structure and function in brain areas involved in pain processing and sensorimotor control.
Gray matter density - gray matter volumes - cortical thickness - surface area. Integrity of the white matter circuitry (tractography) - structural white matter connectivity - fractional anisotropy Intrinsic brain activity (cortex and nuclei) - functional connectivity
Measured: at baseline
Motor Control
1. Postural steadiness
2. Habitual standing posture
3. Spinal range of motion
4. Sensorimotor control
5. Proprioception: position-reposition accuracy ii. Neuromuscular control (patients' ability to perform the skill of activation of specific, deep stabilizing muscles iii. Movement control of the spine
Measured: at baseline
Psychological correlates
Psychological correlates: PCS, PVAQ, TSK, IPQ-R
Measured: at baseline
Neurophysiology of pain test (questionnaire)
Time Frame: after 3 treatment sessions Questionnaire: Dutch Neurophysiology of Pain Test (patient version)
Measured: at 1 week
Psychological correlates
Psychological correlates: PCS, PVAQ, TSK, IPQ-R Time Frame: after 3 treatment sessions
Measured: at 1 week
Psychological correlates
Psychological correlates: PCS, PVAQ, TSK, IPQ-R Time Frame: after 18 treatment sessions
Measured: at 3 months
Psychological correlates
Psychological correlates: PCS, PVAQ, TSK, IPQ-R
Measured: at 6 months
Psychological correlates
Psychological correlates: PCS, PVAQ, TSK, IPQ-R
Measured: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Muscle properties
1. Isometric muscle strength of spinal flexor and extensor muscles
2. Endurance of spinal flexor and extensor muscles
Measured: at baseline
Muscle properties
1. Isometric muscle strength of spinal flexor and extensor muscles
2. Endurance of spinal flexor and extensor muscles
Time Frame: after 18 treatment sessions
Measured: at 3 months
Muscle properties
1. Isometric muscle strength of spinal flexor and extensor muscles
2. Endurance of spinal flexor and extensor muscles
Measured: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Motor Control
1. Postural steadiness
2. Habitual standing posture
3. Spinal range of motion
4. Sensorimotor control
5. Proprioception: position-reposition accuracy ii. Neuromuscular control (patients' ability to perform the skill of activation of specific, deep stabilizing muscles iii. Movement control of the spine
Measured: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Motor Control
1. Postural steadiness
2. Habitual standing posture
3. Spinal range of motion
4. Sensorimotor control
5. Proprioception: position-reposition accuracy ii. Neuromuscular control (patients' ability to perform the skill of activation of specific, deep stabilizing muscles iii. Movement control of the spine
Time Frame: after 18 treatment sessions
Measured: at 3 months
Gray and white matter structure
Gray and white matter structure and function in brain areas involved in pain processing and sensorimotor control.
Gray matter density - gray matter volumes - cortical thickness - surface area. Integrity of the white matter circuitry (tractography) - structural white matter connectivity - fractional anisotropy Intrinsic brain activity (cortex and nuclei) - functional connectivity
Measured: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Gray and white matter function
Gray and white matter structure and function in brain areas involved in pain processing and sensorimotor control.
Gray matter density - gray matter volumes - cortical thickness - surface area. Integrity of the white matter circuitry (tractography) - structural white matter connectivity - fractional anisotropy Intrinsic brain activity (cortex and nuclei) - functional connectivity
Time Frame: after 18 treatment sessions
Measured: at 3 months
Gray and white matter structure
Gray and white matter structure and function in brain areas involved in pain processing and sensorimotor control.
Gray matter density - gray matter volumes - cortical thickness - surface area. Integrity of the white matter circuitry (tractography) - structural white matter connectivity - fractional anisotropy Intrinsic brain activity (cortex and nuclei) - functional connectivity
Time Frame: after 18 treatment sessions
Measured: at 3 months
Gray and white matter function
Gray and white matter structure and function in brain areas involved in pain processing and sensorimotor control.
Gray matter density - gray matter volumes - cortical thickness - surface area. Integrity of the white matter circuitry (tractography) - structural white matter connectivity - fractional anisotropy Intrinsic brain activity (cortex and nuclei) - functional connectivity
Measured: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Gray and white matter function
Gray and white matter structure and function in brain areas involved in pain processing and sensorimotor control.
Gray matter density - gray matter volumes - cortical thickness - surface area. Integrity of the white matter circuitry (tractography) - structural white matter connectivity - fractional anisotropy Intrinsic brain activity (cortex and nuclei) - functional connectivity
Measured: at baseline

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

Jan 2014Apr 2016

First posted27 Mar 2014 (estimated)
Study startJan 2014
Primary completionApr 2016
Study completionApr 2016

Resources

Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
Publications (7)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
Other trials for Chronic Spinal PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
More trials run by University GhentThe sponsor's other registered studies.
What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design

Study type: Interventional
Phase: Phase N/A
Primary purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomised
Intervention model: Parallel groups
Masking: Triple blind
Who is masked: Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment: 120 participants (actual)

IDs, dates and publications

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02098005
Sponsor's protocol ID: EC/2013/1133
Status last verified: May 2017
First submitted: 17 Mar 2014
Last updated: 8 May 2017
Results posted: No
Data monitoring committee: No

Publications

Van Bogaert W, Liew BXW, Fernandez-de-Las-Penas C, Valera-Calero JA, Varol U, Coppieters I, Kregel J, Nijs J, Meeus M, Cagnie B, Danneels L, Malfliet A. Exploring Interactions Between Sex, Pain Characteristics, Disability, and Quality of Life in People With Chronic Spinal Pain: A Structural Equation Model. J Pain. 2024 Mar;25(3):791-804. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2023.10.010. Epub 2023 Oct 21.
PubMed 37871684
Van Bogaert W, Coppieters I, Kregel J, Nijs J, De Pauw R, Meeus M, Cagnie B, Danneels L, Malfliet A. Influence of Baseline Kinesiophobia Levels on Treatment Outcome in People With Chronic Spinal Pain. Phys Ther. 2021 Jun 1;101(6):pzab076. doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzab076.
PubMed 33611503
Willaert W, Malfliet A, Coppieters I, Lenoir D, De Pauw R, Danneels L, Roussel N, Meeus M, Cagnie B, Nijs J, Kregel J. Does Pain Neuroscience Education and Cognition-Targeted Motor Control Training Improve Cervical Motor Output? Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. Pain Pract. 2020 Jul;20(6):600-614. doi: 10.1111/papr.12884. Epub 2020 Apr 20.
PubMed 32187789
Lenoir D, Coppieters I, Willaert W, Kregel J, Danneels L, Cagnie B, Meeus M, Nijs J, Malfliet A. Do sociodemographic features, pain sensitivity or pain catastrophizing relate to clinic-based adherence to physiotherapy in people suffering from chronic spinal pain? Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2019 Dec;44:102066. doi: 10.1016/j.msksp.2019.102066. Epub 2019 Sep 26.
PubMed 31605983
Malfliet A, Kregel J, Coppieters I, De Pauw R, Meeus M, Roussel N, Cagnie B, Danneels L, Nijs J. Effect of Pain Neuroscience Education Combined With Cognition-Targeted Motor Control Training on Chronic Spinal Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Neurol. 2018 Jul 1;75(7):808-817. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.0492.
PubMed 29710099
Malfliet A, Kregel J, Meeus M, Roussel N, Danneels L, Cagnie B, Dolphens M, Nijs J. Blended-Learning Pain Neuroscience Education for People With Chronic Spinal Pain: Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial. Phys Ther. 2018 May 1;98(5):357-368. doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzx092.
PubMed 29669079
Dolphens M, Nijs J, Cagnie B, Meeus M, Roussel N, Kregel J, Malfliet A, Vanderstraeten G, Danneels L. Efficacy of a modern neuroscience approach versus usual care evidence-based physiotherapy on pain, disability and brain characteristics in chronic spinal pain patients: protocol of a randomized clinical trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014 May 8;15:149. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-149.
PubMed 24885889

Want to know more?

The sponsor has not listed a contact. The official record may have more details.

Talk to your doctor first and take this page with you. Only the study team can confirm whether you can join.

Questions to ask the study team

What is the study trying to find out?
What would I need to do, and how often would I visit?
Could I receive a placebo instead of the treatment?
What are the possible risks and benefits for me?
Will it cost me anything? Are travel or time paid for?
Can I keep seeing my own doctor during the study?
What happens when the study ends?

See locations

Not yet recruitingObservational study
SERENITY Study of Chronic Pain Interference in Adults
Chronic Low Back Pain, Spinal Cord Injury
Recruiting
Virtual Reality-Based Hypnotherapy for Pain, Sleep, and Mood in Spinal Cord Injury
Spinal Cord Injuries (SCI), Chronic Pain
Not yet recruiting
Virtual Pain Education for Spinal Cord Stimulation Patients
Chronic Pain, Chronic Pain Due to Injury
Active, not recruiting
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Chronic Neuropathic Pain
Chronic Neuropathic Pain, Post-Stroke Pain
Active, not recruiting
A 5-year Superion™ IDS Clinical Outcomes Post-Approval Evaluation (SCOPE)
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

All Chronic Spinal Pain trials

Study at a glance

From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 May 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.

Official title: A Modern Neuroscience Approach to Chronic Spinal Pain: Pain Neuroscience Education Combined With Cognition-targeted Motor Control Training
ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02098005
Acronym / sponsor ID: EC/2013/1133
Conditions: Chronic Spinal Pain
Study type: Interventional
Recruitment status: Completed
Enrolment: 120 participants (actual)
Lead sponsor: University GhentUniversity, hospital or other
Collaborators: Agentschap voor Innovatie door Wetenschap en Technologie, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, University Hospital, Ghent
Study start: Jan 2014
Primary completion: Apr 2016 (actual)
Study completion: Apr 2016 (actual)
First posted: 27 Mar 2014 (estimated)
Results: Not posted in the source record

Clinical summary

The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.

The proof of principal suggests a strong effect reported by large effect sizes for pain and disability compared to usual care.

Study design

Primary purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomised
Intervention model: Parallel groups
Masking: Triple blind (participant, investigator, outcomes assessor)
Number of arms: 2

Arm	Type	Receives
Usual care	Active comparator	Other: usual care evidence-based physiotherapyusual care evidence-based physiotherapy
modern neuroscience approach	Experimental	Other: modern neuroscience approachmodern neuroscience approach

Who may qualify

Ages: 18 to 65 years
Sex: All
Healthy volunteers: Not accepted
Age groups: Adult, Older adult

Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)

Nonspecific spinal pain of at least 3 months' duration, at least 3 days per week
Aged between 18 and 65 years
Seeking care because of neck pain or low back pain
Living or working within a radius of 50 km around the therapy location
Not starting new treatments or medication and continuing their usual care 6 weeks prior to and during study participation (to obtain a steady state)

Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)

Neuropathic pain
Chronic widespread pain
Being pregnant or having given birth in the preceding year
Contra-indications related to MRI imaging
History of specific spinal surgery

Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Interventions

Intervention	Type	Arms
usual care evidence-based physiotherapyArm 1 (i.e., the control group) will be subjected to a control intervention, including back/neck school and general exercises. 3 sessions of education (session 1: group session; session 2: online module; session 3: individual session) will be given by a physiotherapist, followed by 15 sessions of traditional physiotherapy and general exercises. The 18 sessions will be spread over a period of 3 months.	Other	Usual care
modern neuroscience approachArm 2 (i.e., the experimental group) will receive pain neuroscience education (3 sessions of education), followed by 15 sessions of cognition-targeted motor control training (15 sessions). The 18 sessions will be spread over a period of 3 months.	Other	modern neuroscience approach

Primary outcome

Pain assessment (questionnaire)
Time frame: at baseline
questionnaire: numerical rating scale (NRS), central sensitization inventory (CSI), medical outcomes short form 36 health service (SF-36)
Pain assessment (physical testing)
Time frame: at baseline
Physical testing: pressure pain threshold (PTT), cold pressor test (CPT)
Functional assessment (questionnaires)
Time frame: at baseline
Questionnaires: PDI, SF-36
Pain assessment (questionnaire)
Time frame: at 3 months
questionnaire: numerical rating scale (NRS), central sensitization inventory (CSI), medical outcomes short form 36 health service (SF-36) Time Frame: after 18 treatment sessions
Pain assessment (questionnaire)
Time frame: at 6 months
questionnaire: numerical rating scale (NRS), central sensitization inventory (CSI), medical outcomes short form 36 health service (SF-36)
Pain assessment (questionnaire)
Time frame: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
questionnaire: numerical rating scale (NRS), central sensitization inventory (CSI), medical outcomes short form 36 health service (SF-36)
Pain assessment (physical testing)
Time frame: at 3 months
Physical testing: pressure pain threshold (PTT), cold pressor test (CPT) Time Frame: after 18 treatment sessions
Pain assessment (physical testing)
Time frame: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Physical testing: pressure pain threshold (PTT), cold pressor test (CPT)
Functional assessment (questionnaires)
Time frame: at 1 week
Questionnaires: PDI, SF-36 Timeframe: after 3 treatment sessions (PDI)
Functional assessment (questionnaires)
Time frame: at 3 months
Questionnaires: PDI, SF-36 Time Frame: after 18 treatment sessions
Functional assessment (questionnaires)
Time frame: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Questionnaires: PDI, SF-36
Functional assessment (questionnaires)
Time frame: at 6 months
Questionnaires: PDI, SF-36

18 secondary outcomes

Gray and white matter structure
Time frame: at baseline
Motor Control
Time frame: at baseline
Psychological correlates
Time frame: at baseline
Neurophysiology of pain test (questionnaire)
Time frame: at 1 week
Psychological correlates
Time frame: at 1 week
Psychological correlates
Time frame: at 3 months
Psychological correlates
Time frame: at 6 months
Psychological correlates
Time frame: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Muscle properties
Time frame: at baseline
Muscle properties
Time frame: at 3 months
Muscle properties
Time frame: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Motor Control
Time frame: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Motor Control
Time frame: at 3 months
Gray and white matter structure
Time frame: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Gray and white matter function
Time frame: at 3 months
Gray and white matter structure
Time frame: at 3 months
Gray and white matter function
Time frame: at 12 months (except when no treatment effects would be found at 6 months: go/no go principle)
Gray and white matter function
Time frame: at baseline

Results and safety

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

Research links

Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 May 2017.
Derived from this study: PubMed 37871684Van Bogaert W, Liew BXW, Fernandez-de-Las-Penas C, Valera-Calero JA, Varol U, Coppieters I, Kregel J, Nijs J, Meeus M, Cagnie B, Danneels L, Malfliet A. Exploring Interactions Between Sex, Pain Characteristics, Disability, and Quality of Life in People With Chronic Spinal Pain: A Structural Equation Model. J Pain. 2024 Mar;25(3):791-804. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2023.10.010. Epub 2023 Oct 21.
Derived from this study: PubMed 33611503Van Bogaert W, Coppieters I, Kregel J, Nijs J, De Pauw R, Meeus M, Cagnie B, Danneels L, Malfliet A. Influence of Baseline Kinesiophobia Levels on Treatment Outcome in People With Chronic Spinal Pain. Phys Ther. 2021 Jun 1;101(6):pzab076. doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzab076.
Derived from this study: PubMed 32187789Willaert W, Malfliet A, Coppieters I, Lenoir D, De Pauw R, Danneels L, Roussel N, Meeus M, Cagnie B, Nijs J, Kregel J. Does Pain Neuroscience Education and Cognition-Targeted Motor Control Training Improve Cervical Motor Output? Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. Pain Pract. 2020 Jul;20(6):600-614. doi: 10.1111/papr.12884. Epub 2020 Apr 20.
Derived from this study: PubMed 31605983Lenoir D, Coppieters I, Willaert W, Kregel J, Danneels L, Cagnie B, Meeus M, Nijs J, Malfliet A. Do sociodemographic features, pain sensitivity or pain catastrophizing relate to clinic-based adherence to physiotherapy in people suffering from chronic spinal pain? Secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2019 Dec;44:102066. doi: 10.1016/j.msksp.2019.102066. Epub 2019 Sep 26.
Derived from this study: PubMed 29710099Malfliet A, Kregel J, Coppieters I, De Pauw R, Meeus M, Roussel N, Cagnie B, Danneels L, Nijs J. Effect of Pain Neuroscience Education Combined With Cognition-Targeted Motor Control Training on Chronic Spinal Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Neurol. 2018 Jul 1;75(7):808-817. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.0492.
Derived from this study: PubMed 29669079Malfliet A, Kregel J, Meeus M, Roussel N, Danneels L, Cagnie B, Dolphens M, Nijs J. Blended-Learning Pain Neuroscience Education for People With Chronic Spinal Pain: Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial. Phys Ther. 2018 May 1;98(5):357-368. doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzx092.
Derived from this study: PubMed 24885889Dolphens M, Nijs J, Cagnie B, Meeus M, Roussel N, Kregel J, Malfliet A, Vanderstraeten G, Danneels L. Efficacy of a modern neuroscience approach versus usual care evidence-based physiotherapy on pain, disability and brain characteristics in chronic spinal pain patients: protocol of a randomized clinical trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014 May 8;15:149. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-149.

Related trials for Chronic Spinal Pain

Not yet recruitingObservational study
SERENITY Study of Chronic Pain Interference in Adults
Chronic Low Back Pain, Spinal Cord Injury
Recruiting
Virtual Reality-Based Hypnotherapy for Pain, Sleep, and Mood in Spinal Cord Injury
Spinal Cord Injuries (SCI), Chronic Pain
Not yet recruiting
Virtual Pain Education for Spinal Cord Stimulation Patients
Chronic Pain, Chronic Pain Due to Injury
Active, not recruiting
Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Chronic Neuropathic Pain
Chronic Neuropathic Pain, Post-Stroke Pain
Active, not recruiting
A 5-year Superion™ IDS Clinical Outcomes Post-Approval Evaluation (SCOPE)
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Referral and contact

AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.

Lieven Danneels, MD, PhD principal investigator

University Ghent

Jo Nijs, MD, PhD principal investigator

Vrije Universiteit Brussel

3 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing modern neuroscience approach in people with Chronic Spinal Pain, run by University Ghent at 3 sites in Belgium.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 9 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 May 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 3 sites in Belgium. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Pain assessment (questionnaire) (time frame: at baseline). The study lists 12 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02098005, which also lists 7 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 May 2017; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 6 Nov 2026.