Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2020 Jul;54(13):782-789.
doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2019-100780. Epub 2019 Oct 19.

Cognitive functional therapy compared with a group-based exercise and education intervention for chronic low back pain: a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT)

Mary O'Keeffe  1 , Peter O'Sullivan  2   3 , Helen Purtill  4   5   6 , Norma Bargary  4   5 , Kieran O'Sullivan  5   6   7   8
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Cognitive functional therapy compared with a group-based exercise and education intervention for chronic low back pain: a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT)

Mary O'Keeffe et al. Br J Sports Med. 2020 Jul.

Abstract

Background: One-size-fits-all interventions reduce chronic low back pain (CLBP) a small amount. An individualised intervention called cognitive functional therapy (CFT) was superior for CLBP compared with manual therapy and exercise in one randomised controlled trial (RCT). However, systematic reviews show group interventions are as effective as one-to-one interventions for musculoskeletal pain. This RCT investigated whether a physiotherapist-delivered individualised intervention (CFT) was more effective than physiotherapist-delivered group-based exercise and education for individuals with CLBP.

Methods: 206 adults with CLBP were randomised to either CFT (n=106) or group-based exercise and education (n=100). The length of the CFT intervention varied according to the clinical progression of participants (mean=5 treatments). The group intervention consisted of up to 6 classes (mean=4 classes) over 6-8 weeks. Primary outcomes were disability and pain intensity in the past week at 6 months and 12months postrandomisation. Analysis was by intention-to-treat using linear mixed models.

Results: CFT reduced disability more than the group intervention at 6 months (mean difference, 8.65; 95% CI 3.66 to 13.64; p=0.001), and at 12 months (mean difference, 7.02; 95% CI 2.24 to 11.80; p=0.004). There were no between-group differences observed in pain intensity at 6 months (mean difference, 0.76; 95% CI -0.02 to 1.54; p=0.056) or 12 months (mean difference, 0.65; 95% CI -0.20 to 1.50; p=0.134).

Conclusion: CFT reduced disability, but not pain, at 6 and 12 months compared with the group-based exercise and education intervention. Future research should examine whether the greater reduction in disability achieved by CFT renders worthwhile differences for health systems and patients.

Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT02145728).

Keywords: effectiveness; lower back; physiotherapy; randomised controlled trial.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: MO received payments in 2016 for providing a professional development workshop and lecture for clinicians in the individualised multidimensional intervention (CFT) examined in this trial. KO and PO receive payments for CFT workshops and lectures. MO, PO and KO have written editorials and viewpoints which encourage the use of CFT, or its principles, in clinical practice.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT flow diagram. CFT, cognitive functional therapy; CONSORT, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean disability for CFT (individualised) versus group. *Data are adjusted means from the linear mixed-effects models. Error bars show standard errors (SE).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mean pain intensity for CFT (individualised) versus group. *Data are adjusted means from the linear mixed-effects models. Error bars show standard errors (SE).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Maher C, Underwood M, Buchbinder R. Non-specific low back pain. The Lancet 2017;389:736–47. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30970-9 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hartvigsen J, Hancock MJ, Kongsted A, et al. . What low back pain is and why we need to pay attention. The Lancet 2018;391:2356–67. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30480-X - DOI - PubMed
    1. Foster NE, Anema JR, Cherkin D, et al. . Prevention and treatment of low back pain: evidence, challenges, and promising directions. The Lancet 2018;391:2368–83. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30489-6 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Buchbinder R, van Tulder M, Öberg B, et al. . Low back pain: a call for action. The Lancet 2018;391:2384–8. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30488-4 - DOI - PubMed
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Low back pain and sciatica in over 16s: assessment and management, 2016. Available: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng59 [Accessed June 2018]. - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources