AzTrials
AzTrials

Chronic Low-back PainVANISHNCT04236804

VANISH for Chronic Low Back Pain

A study testing Flowly (TMC-CP01) in people with Chronic Low-back Pain, run by Ajay Wasan, MD, Msc at 1 site in United States.

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

The program, called TMC-CP01, will use a combination of virtual reality, biofeedback, and psychological exercises to manage pain associated with Chronic Low Back Pain. Chronic pain affects an estimated 100 million Americans, around one-third of the U.S. population. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Chronic Low-back Pain
What is being tested?
Flowly (TMC-CP01)
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
20 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
17 Jun 2020to 1 Jan 2024
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

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 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Females or males 18 years of age and older at screening
  • Diagnosis of Chronic Lower Back Pain (CLBP) and a >50mg MME daily opioid dosage
  • Able to provide informed consent, adhere to the study visit schedule, and complete all study assessments
  • Signed informed consent form

Who cannot join

  • Subjects who, in the opinion of the study site principal investigator, have a psychotic disorder, dementia, or other issue which may make accurate data reporting difficult
  • Subjects who do not speak fluent English
  • Patient refusal

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • UPMC Pain Medicine At Centre Commons

    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15206

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: VANISH (Virtual Autonomic Neuromodulation Induced Systemic Healing) for Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP)

The program, called TMC-CP01, will use a combination of virtual reality, biofeedback, and psychological exercises to manage pain associated with Chronic Low Back Pain. Chronic pain affects an estimated 100 million Americans, around one-third of the U.S. population. One of the most prevalent conditions under chronic pain is Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP). About 27% of chronic pain patients experience CLBP. It is the leading cause of disability in the world and 31 million Americans suffer from CLBP. The most common analgesic tool for pain patients, especially for LBP patients, is opioids. However, opioid users are subject to drug tolerance and physical dependence, which decreases efficacy and increases risk of complication. Long-term users often require doses up to ten times their original dose to achieve equivalent analgesia and, after months of exposure, patients' risk of addiction increases.

This project aims to introduce a digital intervention to standard CLBP management with a virtual reality-enabled pain management system that will improve pain management and decrease daily dosages of opioids.

Read the detailed description

TMC-CP01 is a treatment based on the VANISH (Virtual Autonomic Neuromodulation Induced Systemic Healing) system and method, which combines existing technologies and therapies into Virtual Reality (VR) to help people learn to auto-regulate the way their body feels. TMC-CP01 is designed specifically for pain management and is tailored for low back pain. The treatment utilizes virtual reality and biofeedback to train patients to auto-regulate themselves and improve their pain over time. By providing patients an accessible and effective alternative pain management tool, patients can avoid opioid use, dependency, and resulting complications due to opioids. Change in daily opioid dose, expressed in morphine equivalents, is the primary outcome. TMC-CP01 uses virtual reality as a platform to enable and optimize biofeedback training and psychological exercises.

Virtual Reality, alone is a proven method for pain management both through distraction and through active pain control mechanisms. Due to its stimulating nature, VR has the power to claim the majority of a user's attention and distract them from other stimuli such as pain. Because it is so visually engaging, VR is a powerful tool for visualization, which can be used to optimize and enhance visualization of biofeedback. VR can also affect users' emotions and perception by providing a sense of presence and psychological engagement. With recent developments in portable head mounted display (HMD) technology, VR has become accessible to people on a much broader and more affordable scale and it represents an ideal platform to develop a non-invasive pain management tool for chronic pain. Biofeedback is at the heart of TMC-CP01 and is the main mechanism by which patients learn to control their physiology. By allowing patients to visualize their physiological processes, patients gain a greater mind-body awareness and can learn to auto-regulate physiological functions that previously seemed out of their control.

Being tested
Flowly (TMC-CP01)
Keywords
Virtual Autonomic Neuromodulation Induced Systemic Healing, TMC-CP01

What participants receive

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

  • Flowly (TMC-CP01)Device

    Also called Virtual Reality

    TMC-CP01 is a device designed specifically for pain management and is tailored for low back pain. The treatment utilizes virtual reality and biofeedback to train patients to auto-regulate themselves and improve their pain over time guidelines.

Study groups in NCT04236804
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
TMC-CP01 InterventionExperimentalTen patients will be randomly assigned to receive the TMC-CP01 intervention every day for 8 weeks in addition to their current opioid prescription and tapering guidelines.
Receives: Device: Flowly (TMC-CP01)
Standard of CareNo interventionTen patients will be randomly assigned to receive their current opioid prescription and tapering guidelines, as standard of care.

What is being measured

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

  1. Assessment of Opioid Use Via Subject Report

    Daily dose of oral opioids recorded as morphine equivalents will be collected

    Measured: Week 0

Secondary outcomes (43)
  1. Assessment of Opioid Use Via Subject Report

    The amount and dosing of opioid medications taken by each subject will be recorded throughout the study. The lower the average daily morphine milligram equivalent [MME], the better the outcomes. Outcomes will be measured over the span of the study and compared between the two groups.

    Measured: Week 4

  2. Assessment of Opioid Use Via Subject Report

    The amount and dosing of opioid medications taken by each subject will be recorded throughout the study. The lower the average daily morphine milligram equivalent [MME], the better the outcomes. Outcomes will be measured over the span of the study and compared between the two groups.

    Measured: Week 8

  3. Flowly (TMC-CP01) Virtual Reality Intervention Feasibility Via Change From Baseline in Heart Rate Variability (HRV) at 8 Weeks

    HRV will be modulated by conforming respiration and heart rate to optimal breathing patterns. The games are designed to guide subjects' physiology to a more optimal state for pain reduction using biofeedback. Resonant breathing is breathing that activates the coordinated function of oscillating body systems. This breathing increases your Heart Rate Variability. Greater Heart Rate Variability (a higher HRV score) at rest indicates better outcomes. Outcomes will be measured over the span of the study and compared between the two groups.

    Measured: 8 Weeks

  4. Change From Baseline in Opioid Cravings Using the Craving Index at 8 Weeks

    The Craving Index questionnaire on the Flowly app assesses opioid cravings using 6 qualitatively scaled questions, ranging from 'none' (minimum score: 0) to 'the greatest possibility' (maximum score: 5 per question, total score: 30). Lower scores indicate less frequent opioid cravings, suggesting better outcomes. Measurements were assessed weekly, and the analysis focused on comparing scores between baseline and 8 weeks to evaluate changes in cravings between the two groups.

    Measured: weekly, up to 8 weeks

  5. Change From Baseline in Physical Function Using PROMIS Physical Function Short Form T-score at 8 Weeks

    The investigators used the PROMIS Physical Function Short Form T-score to assess key patient-centered outcomes related to physical function. This assessment includes 4 physical function-related questions, each scored on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = unable to do, 5 = without any difficulty). The raw total score ranges from a minimum of 4 to a maximum of 20.

    Responses were converted to T-scores, where the mean in the general population is 50 with a standard deviation of 10. Higher T-scores indicate better physical function, while lower T-scores suggest worse physical function. Clinically relevant thresholds may indicate that lower scores are associated with greater physical disability.

    Measurements were conducted at baseline and Week 8, with the analysis focused on comparing changes in physical function between the two groups.

    Measured: Assessed weekly, change from baseline and Week 8 reported

  6. Change From Baseline in Fatigue Using PROMIS Fatigue Short Form T-score at 8 Weeks

    The investigators used the PROMIS Fatigue Short Form T-score to assess key patient-centered outcomes related to fatigue. This assessment includes 4 fatigue-related questions, each scored on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). The raw total score ranges from a minimum of 4 to a maximum of 20.

    Responses were converted to T-scores, where the mean in the general population is 50 with a standard deviation of 10. Higher T-scores indicate greater fatigue, while lower T-scores suggest less fatigue, which reflects better outcomes. Clinically relevant thresholds suggest that elevated T-scores may indicate increased fatigue severity.

    Measurements were conducted at baseline and Week 8, with the analysis focused on comparing changes in fatigue levels between the two groups.

    Measured: Baseline and Week 8

  7. Change From Baseline in Pain Interference Using the PROMIS Pain Interference Short Form at 8 Weeks

    The investigators used the PROMIS Pain Interference Short Form to assess how pain impacts daily activities. This measure includes 5 pain-related questions, each scored on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). The raw total score (range: 5 to 25) was converted to a standardized T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10).

    Higher T-scores indicate greater pain interference, while lower T-scores suggest less interference (better outcomes). A T-score of 60+ may indicate clinically significant pain interference, while 40 or lower suggests minimal interference.

    Measurements were conducted over the study, with scores compared between baseline and 8 weeks to assess changes in pain interference.

    Measured: Assessed weekly, change from baseline and Week 8 reported

  8. Change From Baseline in Pain Intensity Using the PROMIS Pain Intensity Item at 8 Weeks

    The investigators used the PROMIS Pain Intensity Item to assess patients' self-reported pain levels. This measure consists of one question, scored on an 11-point Likert scale (0 = no pain, 10 = worst imaginable pain). The raw score was converted to a standardized T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10).

    Higher T-scores indicate greater pain intensity, while lower T-scores suggest less pain (better outcomes). A T-score of 60+ may indicate clinically significant pain, while 40 or lower suggests mild or minimal pain.

    Measurements were conducted throughout the study, with scores compared between baseline and 8 weeks to assess changes in pain intensity.

    Measured: Assessed weekly, change from baseline and Week 8 reported

  9. Change From Baseline in Sleep Disturbance Using the PROMIS Sleep Disturbance Short Form at 8 Weeks

    The investigators used the PROMIS Sleep Disturbance Short Form to assess patient-reported sleep difficulties. This measure includes 4 items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). The raw score (range: 4 to 20) was converted to a T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10).

    Higher T-scores indicate greater sleep disturbance (worse outcomes), while lower T-scores suggest better sleep quality. A T-score of 60+ may indicate clinically significant sleep disturbance, while 40 or lower suggests minimal issues.

    Measurements were conducted throughout the study, with scores compared between baseline and 8 weeks to assess changes in sleep disturbance.

    Measured: Assessed weekly, change from baseline and Week 8 reported

  10. Change From Baseline in Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities Using the PROMIS Short Form at 8 Weeks

    The investigators used the PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities Short Form to assess social participation. This measure includes 4 items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = never, 5 = always). The raw score (range: 4 to 20) was converted to a T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10).

    Higher T-scores indicate greater ability to engage in social roles and activities (better outcomes), while lower scores suggest more social restrictions. A T-score below 40 may indicate clinically significant limitations in social participation.

    Measurements were conducted throughout the study, with scores compared between baseline and 8 weeks to assess changes in social participation.

    Measured: Assessed weekly, change from baseline and Week 8 reported

  11. Change From Baseline in Depression Using the PROMIS Short Form at 8 Weeks

    The investigators used the PROMIS Depression Short Form to assess depressive symptoms. This measure includes 4 items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = never, 5 = always). The raw score (range: 4 to 20) was converted to a T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10).

    Higher T-scores indicate greater levels of depression (worse outcomes), while lower scores reflect fewer depressive symptoms. A T-score above 60 suggests clinically significant depression, while a T-score below 50 reflects better mental health relative to the general population.

    Measurements were conducted throughout the study, with scores compared between baseline and 8 weeks to assess changes in depressive symptoms.

    Measured: Assessed weekly, change from baseline and Week 8 reported

  12. Change From Baseline in Anxiety Using the PROMIS Short Form at 8 Weeks

    The investigators used the PROMIS Anxiety Short Form to assess anxiety symptoms. This measure includes 4 items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = never, 5 = always). The raw score (range: 4 to 20) was converted to a T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10).

    Higher T-scores indicate greater levels of anxiety (worse outcomes), while lower scores reflect reduced anxiety symptoms. A T-score above 60 suggests clinically significant anxiety, while a T-score below 50 reflects better emotional health relative to the general population.

    Measurements were conducted throughout the study, with scores compared between baseline and 8 weeks to assess changes in anxiety symptoms.

    Measured: Assessed weekly, change from baseline and Week 8 reported

  13. Change From Baseline in Loneliness Using the PROMIS Emotional Support Short Form at 8 Weeks

    The investigators used the PROMIS Emotional Support Short Form to assess patient-centered outcomes related to loneliness. This measure includes 4 items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = never, 5 = always). The raw score (range: 4 to 20) was converted to a T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10).

    Higher T-scores indicate greater loneliness (worse outcomes), while lower scores suggest better emotional support. A T-score above 60 suggests clinically significant loneliness, while a T-score below 50 reflects better perceived emotional support relative to the general population.

    Measurements were conducted throughout the study, with scores compared between baseline and 8 weeks to assess changes in loneliness.

    Measured: Assessed weekly, change from baseline and Week 8 reported

  14. Assessment of Feelings About Pain

    The investigators will use the PainDetect Questionnaire, a validated tool to assess patients' perceptions and feelings about pain. The questionnaire includes 15 multiple-choice questions and a drawing of localized pain, yielding a total score that ranges from 0 (minimum) to 38 (maximum). Lower scores indicate less neuropathic pain and suggest better outcomes.

    Measured: Week 0

  15. Assessment of Feelings About Pain

    The investigators will use the PainDetect Questionnaire, a validated tool to assess patients' perceptions and feelings about pain. The questionnaire includes 15 multiple-choice questions and a drawing of localized pain, yielding a total score that ranges from 0 (minimum) to 38 (maximum). Lower scores indicate less neuropathic pain and suggest better outcomes.

    Measured: Week 4

  16. Assessment of Feelings About Pain

    The investigators will use the PainDetect Questionnaire, a validated tool to assess patients' perceptions and feelings about pain. The questionnaire includes 15 multiple-choice questions and a drawing of localized pain, yielding a total score that ranges from 0 (minimum) to 38 (maximum). Lower scores indicate less neuropathic pain and suggest better outcomes.

    Measured: Week 8

  17. Assessment of Salivary Cortisol Levels

    The investigators will measure subjects' salivary cortisol levels using validated laboratory techniques. Cortisol levels are reported in micrograms per deciliter (mcg/dL) and have no predefined minimum or maximum values. Lower cortisol levels indicate better outcomes.

    Measured: Week 0

  18. Assessment of Salivary Cortisol Levels

    The investigators will measure subjects' salivary cortisol levels using validated laboratory techniques. Cortisol levels are reported in micrograms per deciliter (mcg/dL) and have no predefined minimum or maximum values. Lower cortisol levels indicate better outcomes.

    Measured: Week 4

  19. Assessment of Salivary Cortisol Levels

    The investigators will measure subjects' salivary cortisol levels using validated laboratory techniques. Cortisol levels are reported in micrograms per deciliter (mcg/dL) and have no predefined minimum or maximum values. Lower cortisol levels indicate better outcomes.

    Measured: Week 8

  20. Assessment of Opioid Use Via Urinalysis

    The amount of opiates found in the urine of each subject will be recorded throughout the study. The lower the detected morphine milligram equivalent [MME], the better the outcomes. Outcomes will be measured over the span of the study and compared between the two groups.

    Measured: Week 0

  21. Assessment of Opioid Use Via Urinalysis

    The amount of opiates found in the urine of each subject will be recorded throughout the study. The lower the detected morphine milligram equivalent [MME], the better the outcomes. Outcomes will be measured over the span of the study and compared between the two groups.

    Measured: Week 4

  22. Assessment of Opioid Use Via Urinalysis

    The amount of opiates found in the urine of each subject will be recorded throughout the study. The lower the detected morphine milligram equivalent [MME], the better the outcomes. Outcomes will be measured over the span of the study and compared between the two groups.

    Measured: Week 8

  23. Assessment of Withdrawal Symptoms Using Opiate Withdrawal Scale

    The Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS) will assess subjects' withdrawal symptoms using 16 multiple-choice questions, each scored from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). The total score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 64. Lower scores indicate better outcomes and fewer withdrawal symptoms.

    Measured: Week 0

  24. Assessment of Withdrawal Symptoms Using Opiate Withdrawal Scale

    The Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS) will assess subjects' withdrawal symptoms using 16 multiple-choice questions, each scored from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). The total score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 64. Lower scores indicate better outcomes and fewer withdrawal symptoms.

    Measured: Week 4

  25. Assessment of Withdrawal Symptoms Using Opiate Withdrawal Scale

    The Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale (SOWS) will assess subjects' withdrawal symptoms using 16 multiple-choice questions, each scored from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). The total score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 64. Lower scores indicate better outcomes and fewer withdrawal symptoms.

    Measured: Week 8

  26. Assessment of Beliefs About Pain Using Pain Catastrophizing Scale

    The Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) will assess subjects' beliefs about pain using 13 multiple-choice questions, each scored from 1 (not at all) to 5 (all the time). The total score ranges from a minimum of 13 to a maximum of 65. Lower scores indicate better outcomes and less catastrophizing about pain.

    Measured: Week 0

  27. Assessment of Beliefs About Pain Using Pain Catastrophizing Scale

    The Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) will assess subjects' beliefs about pain using 13 multiple-choice questions, each scored from 1 (not at all) to 5 (all the time). The total score ranges from a minimum of 13 to a maximum of 65. Lower scores indicate better outcomes and less catastrophizing about pain.

    Measured: Week 4

  28. Assessment of Beliefs About Pain Using Pain Catastrophizing Scale

    The Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) will assess subjects' beliefs about pain using 13 multiple-choice questions, each scored from 1 (not at all) to 5 (all the time). The total score ranges from a minimum of 13 to a maximum of 65. Lower scores indicate better outcomes and less catastrophizing about pain.

    Measured: Week 8

  29. Assessment of Treatment Expectancy Using the Treatment Expectancy Short Form at Week 0

    The Treatment Expectancy Short Form assesses subjects' expectations and confidence in their treatment using 6 items, each scored on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). The raw score (range: 6 to 30) is converted to a T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10) for standardized interpretation.

    Higher T-scores indicate greater treatment expectancy, suggesting more positive beliefs about treatment efficacy. Lower T-scores reflect greater skepticism or uncertainty. A T-score above 60 may indicate high confidence in treatment, while a T-score below 40 suggests low expectancy.

    Measured: Week 0

  30. Assessment of Treatment Expectancy Using the Treatment Expectancy Short Form at Week 4

    The Treatment Expectancy Short Form assesses subjects' expectations and confidence in their treatment using 6 items, each scored on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). The raw score (range: 6 to 30) is converted to a T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10) for standardized interpretation.

    Higher T-scores indicate greater treatment expectancy, suggesting more positive beliefs about treatment efficacy. Lower T-scores reflect greater skepticism or uncertainty. A T-score above 60 may indicate high confidence in treatment, while a T-score below 40 suggests low expectancy.

    Measured: Week 4

  31. Assessment of Treatment Expectancy Using the Treatment Expectancy Short Form at Week 8

    The Treatment Expectancy Short Form evaluates subjects' expectations and confidence in their treatment using 6 items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). The raw score (range: 6 to 30) is converted to a T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10) for standardized interpretation.

    Higher T-scores indicate greater treatment expectancy, suggesting more positive beliefs about treatment efficacy. Lower T-scores reflect greater skepticism or uncertainty. A T-score above 60 may indicate high confidence in treatment, while a T-score below 40 suggests low expectancy.

    Measured: Week 8

  32. Assessment of Positive Outlook Using the Positive Outlook Short Form at Week 0

    The Positive Outlook Short Form measures subjects' perceptions and feelings about the future using 6 items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). The raw score (range: 6 to 30) is converted to a T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10) for standardized interpretation.

    Higher T-scores indicate greater optimism and a more positive outlook, suggesting better psychological well-being. Lower T-scores reflect greater pessimism or concerns about the future. A T-score above 60 may indicate high optimism, while a T-score below 40 suggests low optimism or increased negative expectations.

    Measured: Week 0

  33. Assessment of Positive Outlook Using the Positive Outlook Short Form at Week 4

    The Positive Outlook Short Form measures subjects' perceptions and feelings about the future using 6 items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). The raw score (range: 6 to 30) is converted to a T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10) for standardized interpretation.

    Higher T-scores indicate greater optimism and a more positive outlook, suggesting better psychological well-being. Lower T-scores reflect greater pessimism or concerns about the future. A T-score above 60 may indicate high optimism, while a T-score below 40 suggests low optimism or increased negative expectations.

    Measured: Week 4

  34. Assessment of Positive Outlook Using the Positive Outlook Short Form at Week 8

    The Positive Outlook Short Form evaluates subjects' perceptions and expectations about the future using 6 items, each rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). The raw score (range: 6 to 30) is converted to a T-score (mean = 50, SD = 10) for standardized interpretation.

    Higher T-scores indicate greater optimism and a more positive outlook, suggesting better psychological well-being. Lower T-scores reflect greater pessimism or concerns about the future. A T-score above 60 may indicate high optimism, while a T-score below 40 suggests low optimism or increased negative expectations.

    Measured: Week 8

  35. Assessment of Recent Behaviors Using the Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM)

    The Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM) questionnaire assesses recent behaviors using 17 multiple-choice questions, with scores ranging from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 68. Lower scores suggest better outcomes and less likelihood of opioid misuse.

    Measured: Week 0

  36. Assessment of Recent Behaviors Using the Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM)

    The Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM) questionnaire assesses recent behaviors using 17 multiple-choice questions, with scores ranging from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 68. Lower scores suggest better outcomes and less likelihood of opioid misuse.

    Measured: Week 4

  37. Assessment of Recent Behaviors Using the Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM)

    The Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM) questionnaire assesses recent behaviors using 17 multiple-choice questions, with scores ranging from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 68. Lower scores suggest better outcomes and less likelihood of opioid misuse.

    Measured: Week 8

  38. Assessment of Task Absorption Using the Tellegen Absorption Scale (TAS) at Week 0

    The Tellegen Absorption Scale (TAS) assesses an individual's ability to become deeply engaged in a task or an aspect of their environment. The scale consists of 34 true-or-false items, where each "true" response is scored as 1, and each "false" response is scored as 0.

    The total score ranges from 0 to 34, with higher scores indicating a greater capacity for absorption and immersive engagement. This measure evaluates attentional focus and deep engagement in activities, which may be relevant for assessing response to virtual reality interventions.

    Measured: Week 0

  39. Assessment of Task Absorption Using the Tellegen Absorption Scale (TAS) at Week 4

    The Tellegen Absorption Scale (TAS) assesses an individual's ability to become deeply engaged in a task or an aspect of their environment. The scale consists of 34 true-or-false items, where each "true" response is scored as 1, and each "false" response is scored as 0.

    The total score ranges from 0 to 34, with higher scores indicating a greater capacity for absorption and immersive engagement. This measure evaluates attentional focus and deep engagement in activities, which may be relevant for assessing response to virtual reality interventions.

    Measured: Week 4

  40. Assessment of Task Absorption Using the Tellegen Absorption Scale (TAS) at Week 8

    The Tellegen Absorption Scale (TAS) assesses an individual's ability to become deeply engaged in a task or an aspect of their environment. The scale consists of 34 true-or-false items, where each "true" response is scored as 1, and each "false" response is scored as 0.

    The total score ranges from 0 to 34, with higher scores indicating a greater capacity for absorption and immersive engagement. This measure evaluates attentional focus and deep engagement in activities, which may be relevant for assessing response to virtual reality interventions.

    Measured: Week 8

  41. Change in Pain Level Before vs After Intervention Via Flowly App

    Subjects rated their current pain level using the 0-10 Visual Analog Scale (VAS) within the Flowly app, where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents the worst imaginable pain. Pain scores were recorded immediately before and after each VR session, which took place daily throughout the study.

    For analysis, pain scores were assessed at baseline and at Week 8. The Week 8 value represents the average of daily post-session scores recorded during the final week of the study. The change in pain levels was calculated by comparing the baseline value to the Week 8 average.

    Higher scores indicate greater pain intensity, while lower scores suggest better outcomes (i.e., pain reduction).

    Measured: Baseline and Week 8 (Week 8 value is the average of daily scores from that week)

  42. Change in Anxiety Level From Baseline to 8 Weeks Via Flowly App

    Subjects rated their current anxiety level using the 0-10 Visual Analog Scale (VAS) within the Flowly app, where 0 represents no anxiety and 10 represents the worst imaginable anxiety. Anxiety scores were recorded immediately before and after each VR session, which took place daily throughout the study.

    For analysis, anxiety scores were assessed at baseline and at Week 8. The Week 8 value represents the average of daily post-session scores recorded during the final week of the study. The change in anxiety levels was calculated by comparing the baseline value to the Week 8 average.

    Higher scores indicate greater anxiety levels, while lower scores suggest better outcomes (i.e., anxiety reduction).

    Measured: Baseline and Week 8 (Week 8 value is the average of daily scores from that week)

  43. Change in Depression Level From Baseline to 8 Weeks Via Flowly App

    Subjects rated their current depression level using the 0-10 Visual Analog Scale (VAS) within the Flowly app, where 0 represents no depression and 10 represents the worst imaginable depression. Depression scores were recorded immediately before and after each VR session, which took place daily throughout the study.

    For analysis, depression scores were assessed at baseline and at Week 8. The Week 8 value represents the average of daily post-session scores recorded during the final week of the study. The change in depression levels was calculated by comparing the baseline value to the Week 8 average.

    Higher scores indicate greater depression levels, while lower scores suggest better outcomes (i.e., depression reduction).

    Measured: Baseline and Week 8 (Week 8 value is the average of daily scores from that week)

Timeline

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

  1. First posted22 Jan 2020
  2. Study start17 Jun 2020
  3. Primary completion1 Jan 2024
  4. Study completion1 Jan 2024

Resources

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
None (open label)
Enrolment
20 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04236804
Sponsor's protocol ID
STUDY19050295
Other IDs
1R44DA049630-01
Acronym
VANISH
Status last verified
Mar 2025
First submitted
6 Dec 2019
Last updated
11 Apr 2025
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
Individual data sharing
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Flowly (TMC-CP01) in people with Chronic Low-back Pain, run by Ajay Wasan, MD, Msc at 1 site in United States.

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 4 inclusion and 3 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 11 Apr 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. 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?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 11 Apr 2025). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

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?

Assessment of Opioid Use Via Subject Report (time frame: Week 0). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
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 11 Apr 2025.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in