Fifteen Years of Explaining Pain: The Past, Present, and Future

被引:545
作者
Moseley, G. Lorimer [1 ,2 ]
Butler, David S. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ S Australia, Sansom Inst Hlth Res, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
[2] Neurosci Res Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[3] Neuroorthopaed Inst, Adelaide, SA, Australia
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Pain education; cognitive intervention; chronic pain; therapeutic neuroscience education; pain biology education; LOW-BACK-PAIN; RANDOMIZED-CONTROLLED-TRIAL; NEUROPHYSIOLOGY EDUCATION; NEUROSCIENCE EDUCATION; MANAGEMENT; PEOPLE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jpain.2015.05.005
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
The pain field has been advocating for some time for the importance of teaching people how to live well with pain. Perhaps some, and maybe even for many, we might again consider the possibility that we can help people live well without pain. Explaining Pain (EP) refers to a range of educational interventions that aim to change one's understanding of the biological processes that are thought to underpin pain as a mechanism to reduce pain itself. It draws on educational psychology, in particular conceptual change strategies, to help patients understand current thought in pain biology. The core objective of the EP approach to treatment is to shift one's conceptualization of pain from that of a marker of tissue damage or disease to that of a marker of the perceived need to protect body tissue. Here, we describe the historical context and beginnings of EP, suggesting that it is a pragmatic application of the biopsychosocial model of pain, but differentiating it from cognitive behavioral therapy and educational components of early multidisciplinary pain management programs. We attempt to address common misconceptions of EP that have emerged over the last 15 years, highlighting that EP is not behavioral or cognitive advice, nor does it deny the potential contribution of peripheral nociceptive signals to pain. We contend that EP is grounded in strong theoretical frameworks, that its targeted effects are biologically plausible, and that available behavioral evidence is supportive. We update available meta-analyses with results of a systematic review of recent contributions to the field and propose future directions by which we might enhance the effects of EP as part of multimodal pain rehabilitation. Perspective: EP is a range of educational interventions. EP is grounded in conceptual change and instructional design theory. It increases knowledge of pain-related biology, decreases catastrophizing, and imparts short-term reductions in pain and disability. It presents the biological information that justifies a biopsychosocial approach to rehabilitation. (C) 2015 by the American Pain Society
引用
收藏
页码:807 / 813
页数:7
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]   The meaning of pain influences its experienced intensity [J].
Arntz, A ;
Claassens, L .
PAIN, 2004, 109 (1-2) :20-25
[2]   The empirical status of cognitive-behavioral therapy: A review of meta-analyses [J].
Butler, AC ;
Chapman, JE ;
Forman, EM ;
Beck, AT .
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2006, 26 (01) :17-31
[3]  
Butler D, 2013, EXPLAIN PAIN, V2nd, P135
[4]   Misconceived Causal Explanations for Emergent Processes [J].
Chi, Michelene T. H. ;
Roscoe, Rod D. ;
Slotta, James D. ;
Roy, Marguerite ;
Chase, Catherine C. .
COGNITIVE SCIENCE, 2012, 36 (01) :1-61
[5]   Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science [J].
Clark, Andy .
BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, 2013, 36 (03) :181-204
[6]   Pain neurophysiology education for the management of individuals with chronic low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Clarke, Clare Louise ;
Ryan, Cormac Gerard ;
Martin, Denis J. .
MANUAL THERAPY, 2011, 16 (06) :544-549
[7]  
Cousins MC, 2010, THE 7 30 REPORT
[8]  
Dobson KS, 2001, HANDBOOK OF COGNITIVE-BEHAVIORAL THERAPIES, SECOND EDITION, P3
[9]  
Eccleston C, 2009, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI [10.1002/14651858.CD007407.pub2, 10.1002/14651858.CD007407.pub3]
[10]   The lived experience of cardiac disease [J].
Margolis, Stephen A. .
AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF GENERAL PRACTICE, 2022, 51 (09) :645-645