Chronic PainCOGMONCT05785455
Pain Education, Motivational Interviewing and Exercise in Chronic Neck Pain
A study testing COGMO Intervention in people with Chronic Pain and Neck Pain, run by Gerencia de Atención Primaria, Madrid at 1 site in Spain.
Trial summary
Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention (COGMO intervention) compared with routine clinical practice in primary care physiotherapy to improve the intensity, severity of pain, and cervical disability in patients with chronic neck pain. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Chronic Pain, Neck Pain
- What is being tested?
- COGMO Intervention
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 142 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSpain
- Study dates
- 1 Apr 2023to 14 May 2024
- 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
- Age between 18 and 65 years.
- Diagnosed with chronic neck pain, according to the death of the IASP (International Association for the Study of Pain) with duration of pain greater than 3 months and referred to Physiotherapy by their Family doctor.
- Score on the Neck Disability Index (IDC) questionnaire equal to or greater than 20% (10/50).
- Pain intensity at the moment in the cervical region equal to or greater than 30mm on the visual analog scale.
- Sign informed consent
Who cannot join
- Neuropathies and/or radiculopathies, other pathologies or comorbidities that may contraindicate the therapies to be applied, severe depression, rheumatic, inflammatory diseases, cancer, suspected fibromyalgia, systemic diseases, serious psychological disorders, neck pain secondary to an accident of traffic.
- Criteria for referral to surgery or failed spinal surgery.
- Inability to read, understand and complete questionnaires; o understand and follow verbal commands.
- Have received physical therapy in the last 3 months.
- Have any pending legal action (for example: compensation for injury).
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Spain1 site
Gerencia de Atención Primaria de la Comunidad de Madrid
Madrid, 28035
About this study
Official title: Efficacy Of Pain Neuroscience Communication, Motivational Interviewing And Cognitive Exercise Therapy In Patients With Chronic Neck Pain
Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention (COGMO intervention) compared with routine clinical practice in primary care physiotherapy to improve the intensity, severity of pain, and cervical disability in patients with chronic neck pain.
Methodology: Design: Pragmatic cluster randomized trial with 12-month follow-up. The unit of randomization is the physiotherapist and the unit of analysis the patient.
Read more
Scope: Madrid Primary Care health centers. Subjects: Patients 18-65 years old, with neck pain (> 3 months), moderate-severe (>30 mm in visual pain scale). Sample size: 142 patients (71 per branch).
Sampling: consecutive of patients who are referred from the family doctor to the Primary Care physiotherapist. Intervention: COGMO Intervention Group (3 components: pain neuroscience communication, motivational interviewing and cognition targeted exercise therapy). Control group: Health education program. Variables: Main: Decrease in intensity of pain: yes / no (> = 30mm on the visual pain scale). Secondary: Related to pain (severity of pain, modulation conditioned to pain, temporal summation, decrease in the disability index, related to psycho-emotional-social aspects: decrease in fear / avoidance behaviour, decrease in kinesiophobia (TSK) and Catastrophism (PCS). Quality of life (Euroqol). Sociodemographic, other treatments, adherence to intervention. Data collection: Baseline visit and 3 follow-up visits (3,6,12 months).
Statistical analysis: Intention-to-treat analysis. Difference in the percentage of subjects who achieve success in the main variable at 12 months in the COGMO group compared to control group. A GEE logit model to adjust for other factors.
Read the detailed description
Data management
Typology, format and ownership of data: The data to be collected are individual patient variables that will be collected after inclusion in the study and signing of the informed consent. The variables have been detailed in the methodology section and in Annex 1 (questionnaires). The information will be collected through a clinical interview and complementary examination tests.
Repository and data access procedures. Security: The information collected will be incorporated by the researchers into an electronic data collection notebook (CRDe), which will assign a unique code to each patient, and in which there will be no reference to the identity of the subjects. Each researcher will keep the list of their included patients, with the link between code and affiliation on a secure site. Access to the CRDe will be done with a user ID and password, and it will be hosted on the research/innovation server of the Primary Care Assistance Management/ Primary Care Biosanitary Research and Innovation Foundation (FIIBAP) in Madrid. The results will be disseminated in scientific forums, congresses, scientific publications and in social media, maintaining the confidentiality and rights of the participants. In no case will data that allows them to be identified be published. In order to maximize access and reuse of scientific data generated by the project, the results and the anonymized database will be published openly, always within the framework of legal regulations.
Ethical and legal aspects: The trial will respect the basic ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, justice and non-maleficence and will follow the standards of Good Clinical Practice and the principles set forth in the latest declaration of Helsinki and the Oviedo Convention (1997). ). Study subjects will be fully informed of the study, and will only be included if they provide written informed consent, clearly detailing post-hoc data use. With regard to the treatment, communication and transfer of data, it will be done in accordance with the provisions of the RGPD (EU Regulation) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of April 27, 2016 and the LOPDGDD 3/2018, of December 5th.
Hypothesis
Conceptual hypothesis: In patients with chronic neck pain, a complex multicomponent intervention (based on pain neuroscience education, motivational interviewing and cognitive exercise therapy: "COGMO intervention") performed by primary care physical therapists will increase. the proportion of patients with clinical improvement in pain intensity, compared with a standard exercise health education programme.
Operative hypothesis: In patients with chronic neck pain, a complex "COGMO" intervention will achieve an absolute difference in the percentage of patients who achieve a clinical improvement in pain intensity (at least 30mm in the long-term VAS: 12 months), which will be at least 25% more, in the intervention group compared to the group control.
Objectives
Main goal
Evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention "COGMO Intervention" based on education in neuroscience of pain, motivational interviewing and cognitive exercise therapy compared with practice routine clinical practice in physiotherapy (health education with exercises), to improve the intensity of pain, in patients wit Chronic Neck Pain at 12 months of follow-up.
Secondary Objectives
To evaluate the effectiveness of the COGMO intervention against usual therapy with health education at 3, 6 and 12 months to improve: o Pain: intensity, severity, total and distal mechanical hyperalgesia, pain conditioned modulation, changes in pain-free joint range of motion (ROM) and motor control. o Psychosocial aspects: depressive symptoms, anxiety, kinesophobia, catastrophism, fear of pain. o Patient-reported outcomes (PROMS): health-related quality of life. To describe the adherence to the COGMO intervention and the degree of satisfaction of the patients with the therapy received in both groups.
Methodology
Design: Pragmatic randomized cluster clinical trial with 12-month follow-up. The unit of randomization is the physiotherapy professional and the unit of analysis is the patient.
Population: Patients with chronic neck pain under follow-up in Primary Care Centers (PCC).
Scope: 14 PCC of the Community of Madrid (Arroyo de la Vega, Valdelasfuentes, Colmenar Viejo Sur, Dr. Castroviejo, Ciudades, Isabel II, Barrio del Pilar, Colmenar de Oreja, La Cabrera, Mirasierra, Ibiza, Miraflores, Espronceda and Los Yébenes.
Sample size: According to two systematic reviews, chronic neck pain with manual physiotherapy treatment improves by 11% compared to 29% in the control group. Expecting to find a difference in percentages of patients who achieve a clinically significant decrease in pain (at least 30 mm on the visual scale), of 25% more patients in the COGMO intervention group than in the control group, for a level of confidence 95% and 80% power, 58 subjects would be needed in each group. Considering that the average size of the cluster of patients per physiotherapist is 6 patients, and for an intercalate correlation coefficient of 0.02, the design effect will be. of 1.1 [(DE=1+(6-1)*0.02=1.1, (58+58)*DE(1.1)] the necessary sample size would be 128 patients, overestimating due to possible losses of 10%, the final size is 142 patients (71 per branch).
Sampling: consecutive of the patients included in the waiting list of patients referred to the Unit of Physiotherapy in each health center.
Recruitment: Of professionals: the research team already has an associated clinical group of at least 29 physiotherapists. Patients: They will be selected from the list of patients (provided by the health service) who meet the inclusion criteria for each professional's quota. Subsequently, each physiotherapist offer. Consecutively, the participation of patients from the received list, until completing a number of 5-6 per physiotherapist. When the patient agrees to participate, the physiotherapist will inform. in detail about the study, confirm. inclusion/exclusion criteria and patient acceptance with the signing of the informed consent. If the patient does not accept, data on age, sex and reason for refusal will be collected.
The patient recruitment period is estimated at one year and the follow-up of each patient lasts 12 months. from the end of the COGMO or EPS intervention.
Randomization: The randomization unit is the physical therapists who will participate in the study and the analysis are the patients. It will be done. using the module for assigning subjects to treatment of the program Epidat 4.1, considering as treatment the intervention to study COGMO and as control the project of EPS exercises. To obtain the same number of professionals in each group (intervention and control) it will be used. the option of balanced groups. Once the physiotherapist has been assigned to a study group, all patients recruited by him/her will be included in that group. The assignment will be. carried out centrally by the Research Support Unit of the AP Madrid Healthcare Management. It will be done. after each physiotherapist has included and made the selection of patients and the external evaluators have collected the variables of the baseline visit. Subsequently, each MF will receive. the information of the study group to which it has been assigned.
Physiotherapists assigned to the intervention group will receive training in the intervention and those in the control group will access the project. At the end of the trial, interested physiotherapists in the control group will be able to receive training in the COGMO intervention.
Blinding: Due to the characteristics of the study, it is not possible to blind patients or physiotherapists. who will deliver the COGMO intervention or control. The assessors of the outcome variables will be blinded. In addition, at the end of each evaluation they will be examined. the success of blinding the assessor by asking him to indicate the participant group assignment, including percent certainty (50% certainty equals pure guess).
The people in charge of the analysis of results will be blinded to the group assignment.
- Conditions
- Chronic Pain, Neck Pain
- Being tested
- COGMO Intervention, Usual Care
- Keywords
- Chronic pain, Pain neuroscience education, Exercise therapy, Neck pain, Motivational interviewing
- Medical subject headings
- Chronic Pain, Neck Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
COGMO InterventionOther
Group sessions in which each patient, after motivational interviewing sessions will follow a goup education in pain neuroscince program followed by a cognition targeted exercise therapy
Usual CareOther
Usual Primary Care health education and treatment for patients with chronic neck pain
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Usual care | Active comparator | Subjects will receive a health education program during 5 group sessions of 60 minutes, taught by physical therapists without training in pain neuroscience education.
All patients will receive 5 sessions, regardless of the group they belong to. Group education sessions will be in groups (of 5-6 patients), respecting the safety distance. Group sessions will be held in person, in small groups, at the health center, on a weekly basis. Both groups will receive online monitoring of the exercise program. An image with more information about the intervention and control is attached in Annex 2. Receives: Other: Usual Care |
| COGMO Intervention | Experimental | Each subject will receive. a first individual session to assess their beliefs about pain and coping strategies, combining motivational interviewing and pain neuroscience education techniques, followed by 4 group sessions of 60 minutes, focused on the neurophysiology of pain and self-efficacy techniques in pain control, emphasizing . in two-way communication and followed by cognition targeted exercise therapy. These sessions will be taught by physiotherapists with specific training in motivational interviewing, pain neuroscience education and cognition targeted exercise Receives: Other: COGMO Intervention |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Pain Intensity
The visual analog scale (VAS). This is a 100-mm line with "no pain" on the left side of the line and "worst pain imaginable" on the right side. The patient marks the intensity of her pain on a flat line, which allows observing the result obtained on the 100 mm line, being able to quantify her pain in this way. A score of less than 30 mm is considered mild pain, between 31 and 54 mm, moderate, and 55 mm, severe.
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Secondary outcomes (14)
Change in Pain Severity
To assess the severity of pain, it will be used. the Spanish version of the chronic pain grading scale (EGDC), which is divided into two subscales (the first evaluates the intensity of pain and the second the disability perceived with the first subscale). The Spanish version has proven to be valid and reliable for assessing the severity of chronic pain. The total score that can be obtained ranges from 0 to 70 points, and can generate 5 graduation levels, from less serious to more serious
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Neck Disability
Validated version in Spanish of the "Neck Disability Index". It measures the level of disability perceived by the patient as a consequence of their neck pain. It consists of 10 elements, related to functional activities of daily living, pain intensity, concentration capacity, work capacity and headache. . The total score ranges from 0 (good function) to 50 (disability). In general, a score between 5 and 14 is considered a mild disability, between 15 and 24 moderate disabilities and 25 severe disabilities.
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Strait State Anxiety
We will use the version adapted to Spanish of the State Scale (STAI-E) of the "State-Trait Anxiety Inventory" (STAI). The total scores for each of the subscales range between 0 and 60 points. Specifically, STAI-E is suitable for assessing state anxiety in a wide variety of clinical situations. In addition, it has good reliability and previously demonstrated validity.
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Chage in Pain Related Anxiety
abbreviated version of the PASS scale ("The Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale"). It consists of 20 items that measure 4 anxiety components before pain: fear, escape/avoidance, cognitive anxiety, and physiological anxiety. Patients rate each of the items using a 6-point Likert scale; be 0 never and 5 always. The total score ranges from 0 to 100.
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Catastrophizing
Spanish version of the "Catastrophizing Pain Scale" (PCS). It consists of 13 elements that eval.an catastrophic cognitive-emotional processes with respect to pain and collect the three main dimensions of catastrophism - rumination, increase (exaggeration of the unpleasantness of pain and pain). They are evaluated on a Likert scale. The total score range is between 0 and 52. The Spanish version of the PCS has shown good internal consistency
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Kinesiophobia
TAMPA SCALE OF KINESIOPHOBIA, TSK-11: allows to know the degree of fear of movement or re-injury. The validated Spanish version of the 11-position scale has a total score of 11 to 44 points and has two subscales: activity avoidance and harm. This scale has been shown to have good validity and reliability
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Fear of Pain
Questionnaire, FPQ-III: The purpose is to evaluate the emotional components of pain, the fears and apprehensions of an individual in the face of a varied nature of stimuli and situations that can cause pain. It will be used. The short version FPQ-SF (Short Form) of 9 points. The total score of the questionnaire fluctuate. between 30 and 150 points
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Depression
BECK DEPRESSION INVENTORY-II (BDI-II) It is the most widely used questionnaire worldwide and nationally to assess depression. We used the Spanish adaptation of the Beck II Depression Inventory. The total score ranges from 0 to 63 points. Regarding the cut-off point, a specific one cannot be established, since it depends on the population studied and the purpose of the study, but it ranges between 12 and 19 to indicate the presence of depressive symptoms. It has been seen that a change of 5 points in the Beck Depression Inventory can be a reasonable estimate of a CID
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Quality of Life
The quality of life of patients is measured. with the EuroQoL-5D questionnaire (EQ-5D), 5 factors: mobility, personal care, daily activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression, with a theoretical range of 1 to 5 in each factor that responds to five levels of severity, in which higher scores represent more serious health conditions. A second element consisting of a vertical VAS with a theoretical range from 0 (the worst imaginable health state) to 100 points (the best imaginable health state). The EQ-5D has presented good psychometric characteristics
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Fatigue after deep neck flexors Test
The deep neck flexor strength test (DNFR) and the fatigue visual analog scale (FVAS) were used. to measure the resistance and the subjective sensation of fatigue in the deep flexors of the neck.
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Cervical Range of Motion
It will be evaluated using the CROM (Cervical Range of Motion) device. It consists of 3 inclinometers attached to a lightweight plastic frame, secured with Velcro straps for closure. The protocol used will be A sequence of 3 measurements, with an interval of 30 seconds between each measurement
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Pain Pressure Treshold
A digital algometer (FDX 25, Wagner Instruments, Greenwich, CT, USA) will be used, consisting of a rubber head (1 cm2), attached to a manometer
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Conditioned Pain Modulation
We will perform the provocation of accessory pain through the tourniquet test with a pneumatic cuff placed on the arm, inflated until the first sensation of pain, waiting 30 seconds, and the subject is asked to evaluate the level of subjective pain. in a GO
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Central Sensitization
CENTRAL SENSITIZATION INVENTORY (CSI): Used to identify symptoms related to central sensitization. Formed by 25 elements (maximum of 100). The results are interpreted: subclinical from 0 to 29; mild from 30 to 39; moderate from 40 to 49; severe from 50 to 59; and extreme from 60 to 100. The Spanish version will be used
Measured: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Mar 2023
- Study start1 Apr 2023
- Primary completion1 May 2024 (estimated)
- Study completion14 May 2024 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (28)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Chronic PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 142 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Gerencia de Atención Primaria, Madrid
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Collaborators
- Instituto de Salud Carlos III
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- María Adoración Prieto Aldana, 1st, Principal investigator, Gerencia de Atención Primaria de la Comunidad de Madrid
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05785455
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PI21/01261
- Acronym
- COGMO
- Status last verified
- Mar 2023
- First submitted
- 15 Nov 2022
- Last updated
- 9 May 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Due to the data protection law the information about individuals will be kept under a password in an electronic data protection website. After 2 years it may be made available under request.
Publications
Classification of chronic pain. Descriptions of chronic pain syndromes and definitions of pain terms. Prepared by the International Association for the Study of Pain, Subcommittee on Taxonomy. Pain Suppl. 1986;3:S1-226. No abstract available.
PubMed 3461421Hogg-Johnson S, van der Velde G, Carroll LJ, Holm LW, Cassidy JD, Guzman J, Cote P, Haldeman S, Ammendolia C, Carragee E, Hurwitz E, Nordin M, Peloso P; Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. The burden and determinants of neck pain in the general population: results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Feb 15;33(4 Suppl):S39-51. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31816454c8.
PubMed 18204398Palacios-Cena D, Alonso-Blanco C, Hernandez-Barrera V, Carrasco-Garrido P, Jimenez-Garcia R, Fernandez-de-las-Penas C. Prevalence of neck and low back pain in community-dwelling adults in Spain: an updated population-based national study (2009/10-2011/12). Eur Spine J. 2015 Mar;24(3):482-92. doi: 10.1007/s00586-014-3567-5. Epub 2014 Sep 11.
PubMed 25208501Hoving JL, Koes BW, de Vet HC, van der Windt DA, Assendelft WJ, van Mameren H, Deville WL, Pool JJ, Scholten RJ, Bouter LM. Manual therapy, physical therapy, or continued care by a general practitioner for patients with neck pain. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2002 May 21;136(10):713-22. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-136-10-200205210-00006.
PubMed 12020139Bogduk N. The anatomy and pathophysiology of neck pain. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2011 Aug;22(3):367-82, vii. doi: 10.1016/j.pmr.2011.03.008.
PubMed 21824580Gerrits MMJG, van Oppen P, van Marwijk HWJ, Penninx BWJH, van der Horst HE. Pain and the onset of depressive and anxiety disorders. Pain. 2014 Jan;155(1):53-59. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2013.09.005. Epub 2013 Sep 6.
PubMed 24012953Borghouts JAJ, Koes BW, Vondeling H, Bouter LM. Cost-of-illness of neck pain in The Netherlands in 1996. Pain. 1999 Apr;80(3):629-636. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(98)00268-1.
PubMed 10342424D'Sylva J, Miller J, Gross A, Burnie SJ, Goldsmith CH, Graham N, Haines T, Bronfort G, Hoving JL; Cervical Overview Group. Manual therapy with or without physical medicine modalities for neck pain: a systematic review. Man Ther. 2010 Oct;15(5):415-33. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2010.04.003. Epub 2010 Jun 9.
PubMed 20538501Gross A, Miller J, D'Sylva J, Burnie SJ, Goldsmith CH, Graham N, Haines T, Bronfort G, Hoving JL; COG. Manipulation or mobilisation for neck pain: a Cochrane Review. Man Ther. 2010 Aug;15(4):315-33. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2010.04.002. Epub 2010 May 26.
PubMed 20510644Gross A, Kay TM, Paquin JP, Blanchette S, Lalonde P, Christie T, Dupont G, Graham N, Burnie SJ, Gelley G, Goldsmith CH, Forget M, Hoving JL, Bronfort G, Santaguida PL; Cervical Overview Group. Exercises for mechanical neck disorders. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 28;1(1):CD004250. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004250.pub5.
PubMed 25629215Sterling M, Jull G, Wright A. Cervical mobilisation: concurrent effects on pain, sympathetic nervous system activity and motor activity. Man Ther. 2001 May;6(2):72-81. doi: 10.1054/math.2000.0378.
PubMed 11414776Fernandez-de-las-Penas C, Palomeque-del-Cerro L, Rodriguez-Blanco C, Gomez-Conesa A, Miangolarra-Page JC. Changes in neck pain and active range of motion after a single thoracic spine manipulation in subjects presenting with mechanical neck pain: a case series. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2007 May;30(4):312-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.03.007.
PubMed 17509440O'Leary S, Falla D, Hodges PW, Jull G, Vicenzino B. Specific therapeutic exercise of the neck induces immediate local hypoalgesia. J Pain. 2007 Nov;8(11):832-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2007.05.014. Epub 2007 Jul 19.
PubMed 17644487Oostendorp RA, Elvers H, Mikolajewska E, Laekeman M, van Trijffel E, Samwel H, Duquet W. Manual physical therapists' use of biopsychosocial history taking in the management of patients with back or neck pain in clinical practice. ScientificWorldJournal. 2015;2015:170463. doi: 10.1155/2015/170463. Epub 2015 Apr 5.
PubMed 25945358Crossley KM, Vicenzino B, Lentzos J, Schache AG, Pandy MG, Ozturk H, Hinman RS. Exercise, education, manual-therapy and taping compared to education for patellofemoral osteoarthritis: a blinded, randomised clinical trial. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2015 Sep;23(9):1457-64. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2015.04.024. Epub 2015 May 7.
PubMed 25960116
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 May 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Efficacy Of Pain Neuroscience Communication, Motivational Interviewing And Cognitive Exercise Therapy In Patients With Chronic Neck Pain
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05785455
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- COGMO / PI21/01261
- Conditions
- Chronic Pain, Neck Pain
- Keywords
- Chronic pain, Pain neuroscience education, Exercise therapy, Neck pain, Motivational interviewing
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 142 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Gerencia de Atención Primaria, MadridOther government
- Collaborators
- Instituto de Salud Carlos III
- Study start
- 1 Apr 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 May 2024 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 14 May 2024 (estimated)
- First posted
- 27 Mar 2023 (actual)
- 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.
Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention (COGMO intervention) compared with routine clinical practice in primary care physiotherapy to improve the intensity, severity of pain, and cervical disability in patients with chronic neck pain.
Methodology: Design: Pragmatic cluster randomized trial with 12-month follow-up. The unit of randomization is the physiotherapist and the unit of analysis the patient.
Scope: Madrid Primary Care health centers. Subjects: Patients 18-65 years old, with neck pain (> 3 months), moderate-severe (>30 mm in visual pain scale). Sample size: 142 patients (71 per branch).
Sampling: consecutive of patients who are referred from the family doctor to the Primary Care physiotherapist. Intervention: COGMO Intervention Group (3 components: pain neuroscience communication, motivational interviewing and cognition targeted exercise therapy). Control group: Health education program. Variables: Main: Decrease in intensity of pain: yes / no (> = 30mm on the visual pain scale). Secondary: Related to pain (severity of pain, modulation conditioned to pain, temporal summation, decrease in the disability index, related to psycho-emotional-social aspects: decrease in fear / avoidance behaviour, decrease in kinesiophobia (TSK) and Catastrophism (PCS). Quality of life (Euroqol). Sociodemographic, other treatments, adherence to intervention. Data collection: Baseline visit and 3 follow-up visits (3,6,12 months).
Statistical analysis: Intention-to-treat analysis. Difference in the percentage of subjects who achieve success in the main variable at 12 months in the COGMO group compared to control group. A GEE logit model to adjust for other factors.
Detailed description
Data management
Typology, format and ownership of data: The data to be collected are individual patient variables that will be collected after inclusion in the study and signing of the informed consent. The variables have been detailed in the methodology section and in Annex 1 (questionnaires). The information will be collected through a clinical interview and complementary examination tests.
Repository and data access procedures. Security: The information collected will be incorporated by the researchers into an electronic data collection notebook (CRDe), which will assign a unique code to each patient, and in which there will be no reference to the identity of the subjects. Each researcher will keep the list of their included patients, with the link between code and affiliation on a secure site. Access to the CRDe will be done with a user ID and password, and it will be hosted on the research/innovation server of the Primary Care Assistance Management/ Primary Care Biosanitary Research and Innovation Foundation (FIIBAP) in Madrid. The results will be disseminated in scientific forums, congresses, scientific publications and in social media, maintaining the confidentiality and rights of the participants. In no case will data that allows them to be identified be published. In order to maximize access and reuse of scientific data generated by the project, the results and the anonymized database will be published openly, always within the framework of legal regulations.
Ethical and legal aspects: The trial will respect the basic ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, justice and non-maleficence and will follow the standards of Good Clinical Practice and the principles set forth in the latest declaration of Helsinki and the Oviedo Convention (1997). ). Study subjects will be fully informed of the study, and will only be included if they provide written informed consent, clearly detailing post-hoc data use. With regard to the treatment, communication and transfer of data, it will be done in accordance with the provisions of the RGPD (EU Regulation) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of April 27, 2016 and the LOPDGDD 3/2018, of December 5th.
Hypothesis
Conceptual hypothesis: In patients with chronic neck pain, a complex multicomponent intervention (based on pain neuroscience education, motivational interviewing and cognitive exercise therapy: "COGMO intervention") performed by primary care physical therapists will increase. the proportion of patients with clinical improvement in pain intensity, compared with a standard exercise health education programme.
Operative hypothesis: In patients with chronic neck pain, a complex "COGMO" intervention will achieve an absolute difference in the percentage of patients who achieve a clinical improvement in pain intensity (at least 30mm in the long-term VAS: 12 months), which will be at least 25% more, in the intervention group compared to the group control.
Objectives
Main goal
Evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention "COGMO Intervention" based on education in neuroscience of pain, motivational interviewing and cognitive exercise therapy compared with practice routine clinical practice in physiotherapy (health education with exercises), to improve the intensity of pain, in patients wit Chronic Neck Pain at 12 months of follow-up.
Secondary Objectives
To evaluate the effectiveness of the COGMO intervention against usual therapy with health education at 3, 6 and 12 months to improve: o Pain: intensity, severity, total and distal mechanical hyperalgesia, pain conditioned modulation, changes in pain-free joint range of motion (ROM) and motor control. o Psychosocial aspects: depressive symptoms, anxiety, kinesophobia, catastrophism, fear of pain. o Patient-reported outcomes (PROMS): health-related quality of life. To describe the adherence to the COGMO intervention and the degree of satisfaction of the patients with the therapy received in both groups.
Methodology
Design: Pragmatic randomized cluster clinical trial with 12-month follow-up. The unit of randomization is the physiotherapy professional and the unit of analysis is the patient.
Population: Patients with chronic neck pain under follow-up in Primary Care Centers (PCC).
Scope: 14 PCC of the Community of Madrid (Arroyo de la Vega, Valdelasfuentes, Colmenar Viejo Sur, Dr. Castroviejo, Ciudades, Isabel II, Barrio del Pilar, Colmenar de Oreja, La Cabrera, Mirasierra, Ibiza, Miraflores, Espronceda and Los Yébenes.
Sample size: According to two systematic reviews, chronic neck pain with manual physiotherapy treatment improves by 11% compared to 29% in the control group. Expecting to find a difference in percentages of patients who achieve a clinically significant decrease in pain (at least 30 mm on the visual scale), of 25% more patients in the COGMO intervention group than in the control group, for a level of confidence 95% and 80% power, 58 subjects would be needed in each group. Considering that the average size of the cluster of patients per physiotherapist is 6 patients, and for an intercalate correlation coefficient of 0.02, the design effect will be. of 1.1 [(DE=1+(6-1)*0.02=1.1, (58+58)*DE(1.1)] the necessary sample size would be 128 patients, overestimating due to possible losses of 10%, the final size is 142 patients (71 per branch).
Sampling: consecutive of the patients included in the waiting list of patients referred to the Unit of Physiotherapy in each health center.
Recruitment: Of professionals: the research team already has an associated clinical group of at least 29 physiotherapists. Patients: They will be selected from the list of patients (provided by the health service) who meet the inclusion criteria for each professional's quota. Subsequently, each physiotherapist offer. Consecutively, the participation of patients from the received list, until completing a number of 5-6 per physiotherapist. When the patient agrees to participate, the physiotherapist will inform. in detail about the study, confirm. inclusion/exclusion criteria and patient acceptance with the signing of the informed consent. If the patient does not accept, data on age, sex and reason for refusal will be collected.
The patient recruitment period is estimated at one year and the follow-up of each patient lasts 12 months. from the end of the COGMO or EPS intervention.
Randomization: The randomization unit is the physical therapists who will participate in the study and the analysis are the patients. It will be done. using the module for assigning subjects to treatment of the program Epidat 4.1, considering as treatment the intervention to study COGMO and as control the project of EPS exercises. To obtain the same number of professionals in each group (intervention and control) it will be used. the option of balanced groups. Once the physiotherapist has been assigned to a study group, all patients recruited by him/her will be included in that group. The assignment will be. carried out centrally by the Research Support Unit of the AP Madrid Healthcare Management. It will be done. after each physiotherapist has included and made the selection of patients and the external evaluators have collected the variables of the baseline visit. Subsequently, each MF will receive. the information of the study group to which it has been assigned.
Physiotherapists assigned to the intervention group will receive training in the intervention and those in the control group will access the project. At the end of the trial, interested physiotherapists in the control group will be able to receive training in the COGMO intervention.
Blinding: Due to the characteristics of the study, it is not possible to blind patients or physiotherapists. who will deliver the COGMO intervention or control. The assessors of the outcome variables will be blinded. In addition, at the end of each evaluation they will be examined. the success of blinding the assessor by asking him to indicate the participant group assignment, including percent certainty (50% certainty equals pure guess).
The people in charge of the analysis of results will be blinded to the group assignment.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Usual care | Active comparator | Other: Usual CareSubjects will receive a health education program during 5 group sessions of 60 minutes, taught by physical therapists without training in pain neuroscience education. All patients will receive 5 sessions, regardless of the group they belong to. Group education sessions will be in groups (of 5-6 patients), respecting the safety distance. Group sessions will be held in person, in small groups, at the health center, on a weekly basis. Both groups will receive online monitoring of the exercise program. An image with more information about the intervention and control is attached in Annex 2. |
| COGMO Intervention | Experimental | Other: COGMO InterventionEach subject will receive. a first individual session to assess their beliefs about pain and coping strategies, combining motivational interviewing and pain neuroscience education techniques, followed by 4 group sessions of 60 minutes, focused on the neurophysiology of pain and self-efficacy techniques in pain control, emphasizing . in two-way communication and followed by cognition targeted exercise therapy. These sessions will be taught by physiotherapists with specific training in motivational interviewing, pain neuroscience education and cognition targeted exercise |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Age between 18 and 65 years.
- Diagnosed with chronic neck pain, according to the death of the IASP (International Association for the Study of Pain) with duration of pain greater than 3 months and referred to Physiotherapy by their Family doctor.
- Score on the Neck Disability Index (IDC) questionnaire equal to or greater than 20% (10/50).
- Pain intensity at the moment in the cervical region equal to or greater than 30mm on the visual analog scale.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Neuropathies and/or radiculopathies, other pathologies or comorbidities that may contraindicate the therapies to be applied, severe depression, rheumatic, inflammatory diseases, cancer, suspected fibromyalgia, systemic diseases, serious psychological disorders, neck pain secondary to an accident of traffic.
- Criteria for referral to surgery or failed spinal surgery.
- Inability to read, understand and complete questionnaires; o understand and follow verbal commands.
- Have received physical therapy in the last 3 months.
- Have any pending legal action (for example: compensation for injury).
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 |
|---|---|---|
| COGMO InterventionGroup sessions in which each patient, after motivational interviewing sessions will follow a goup education in pain neuroscince program followed by a cognition targeted exercise therapy | Other | COGMO Intervention |
| Usual CareUsual Primary Care health education and treatment for patients with chronic neck pain | Other | Usual care |
Primary outcome
Change in Pain Intensity
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
The visual analog scale (VAS). This is a 100-mm line with "no pain" on the left side of the line and "worst pain imaginable" on the right side. The patient marks the intensity of her pain on a flat line, which allows observing the result obtained on the 100 mm line, being able to quantify her pain in this way. A score of less than 30 mm is considered mild pain, between 31 and 54 mm, moderate, and 55 mm, severe.
14 secondary outcomes
Change in Pain Severity
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Neck Disability
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Strait State Anxiety
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Chage in Pain Related Anxiety
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Catastrophizing
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Kinesiophobia
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Fear of Pain
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Depression
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Quality of Life
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Fatigue after deep neck flexors Test
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Cervical Range of Motion
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Pain Pressure Treshold
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Conditioned Pain Modulation
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Change in Central Sensitization
Time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 May 2023.
- Background: PubMed 3461421Classification of chronic pain. Descriptions of chronic pain syndromes and definitions of pain terms. Prepared by the International Association for the Study of Pain, Subcommittee on Taxonomy. Pain Suppl. 1986;3:S1-226. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 18204398Hogg-Johnson S, van der Velde G, Carroll LJ, Holm LW, Cassidy JD, Guzman J, Cote P, Haldeman S, Ammendolia C, Carragee E, Hurwitz E, Nordin M, Peloso P; Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. The burden and determinants of neck pain in the general population: results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000-2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Feb 15;33(4 Suppl):S39-51. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31816454c8.
- Background: PubMed 25208501Palacios-Cena D, Alonso-Blanco C, Hernandez-Barrera V, Carrasco-Garrido P, Jimenez-Garcia R, Fernandez-de-las-Penas C. Prevalence of neck and low back pain in community-dwelling adults in Spain: an updated population-based national study (2009/10-2011/12). Eur Spine J. 2015 Mar;24(3):482-92. doi: 10.1007/s00586-014-3567-5. Epub 2014 Sep 11.
- Background: PubMed 12020139Hoving JL, Koes BW, de Vet HC, van der Windt DA, Assendelft WJ, van Mameren H, Deville WL, Pool JJ, Scholten RJ, Bouter LM. Manual therapy, physical therapy, or continued care by a general practitioner for patients with neck pain. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2002 May 21;136(10):713-22. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-136-10-200205210-00006.
- Background: PubMed 21824580Bogduk N. The anatomy and pathophysiology of neck pain. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2011 Aug;22(3):367-82, vii. doi: 10.1016/j.pmr.2011.03.008.
- Background: PubMed 24012953Gerrits MMJG, van Oppen P, van Marwijk HWJ, Penninx BWJH, van der Horst HE. Pain and the onset of depressive and anxiety disorders. Pain. 2014 Jan;155(1):53-59. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2013.09.005. Epub 2013 Sep 6.
- Background: PubMed 10342424Borghouts JAJ, Koes BW, Vondeling H, Bouter LM. Cost-of-illness of neck pain in The Netherlands in 1996. Pain. 1999 Apr;80(3):629-636. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(98)00268-1.
- Background: PubMed 20538501D'Sylva J, Miller J, Gross A, Burnie SJ, Goldsmith CH, Graham N, Haines T, Bronfort G, Hoving JL; Cervical Overview Group. Manual therapy with or without physical medicine modalities for neck pain: a systematic review. Man Ther. 2010 Oct;15(5):415-33. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2010.04.003. Epub 2010 Jun 9.
- Background: PubMed 20510644Gross A, Miller J, D'Sylva J, Burnie SJ, Goldsmith CH, Graham N, Haines T, Bronfort G, Hoving JL; COG. Manipulation or mobilisation for neck pain: a Cochrane Review. Man Ther. 2010 Aug;15(4):315-33. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2010.04.002. Epub 2010 May 26.
- Background: PubMed 25629215Gross A, Kay TM, Paquin JP, Blanchette S, Lalonde P, Christie T, Dupont G, Graham N, Burnie SJ, Gelley G, Goldsmith CH, Forget M, Hoving JL, Bronfort G, Santaguida PL; Cervical Overview Group. Exercises for mechanical neck disorders. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 28;1(1):CD004250. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004250.pub5.
- Background: PubMed 11414776Sterling M, Jull G, Wright A. Cervical mobilisation: concurrent effects on pain, sympathetic nervous system activity and motor activity. Man Ther. 2001 May;6(2):72-81. doi: 10.1054/math.2000.0378.
- Background: PubMed 17509440Fernandez-de-las-Penas C, Palomeque-del-Cerro L, Rodriguez-Blanco C, Gomez-Conesa A, Miangolarra-Page JC. Changes in neck pain and active range of motion after a single thoracic spine manipulation in subjects presenting with mechanical neck pain: a case series. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2007 May;30(4):312-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2007.03.007.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Due to the data protection law the information about individuals will be kept under a password in an electronic data protection website. After 2 years it may be made available under request.
Related trials for Chronic Pain
Recruiting
Empowered Relief® for Cancer Survivors With Chronic Pain
Chronic Pain Due to Cancer, Pain Catastrophizing
RecruitingObservational study
Pain Phenotypes in Individuals With Multiple Sclerosis
Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Lumbar Stabilization Exercises With and Without YTWL (Scapular Stabilization Exercises) on Reducing Chronic Low Back Pain and Related Disability. A Randomized Clinical Trial,
Chronic Non Specific Mechanical Low Back Pain
Not yet recruiting
Comparing Non-Medicine Strategies for Improving Low Back Pain
Chronic Low-back Pain (cLBP), High-Impact Chronic Pain (HICP)
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Pectoral Nerve Block (PECS) Using Magnesium Sulfate Added to Dexamethasone on Quality of Recovery and Chronic Post-Mastectomy Pain
Breast Cancer, Postoperative Pain
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.
María Adoración Prieto Aldana, 1st principal investigator
Gerencia de Atención Primaria de la Comunidad de Madrid
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing COGMO Intervention in people with Chronic Pain and Neck Pain, run by Gerencia de Atención Primaria, Madrid at 1 site in Spain.
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 5 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 May 2023. 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 Spain. 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?
Results are not available in the source record.
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?
Change in Pain Intensity (time frame: Up to 1 week before the intervention, up to 1 day after the intervention, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after intervention). 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 NCT05785455, which also lists 28 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 9 May 2023.