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
. 2024 Jan 6;10(1):2.
doi: 10.1186/s40814-023-01430-y.

In-person cognitive behavioural therapy vs. usual care after surgical management of extremity fractures: an unsuccessful feasibility trial

Kyle Gouveia  1 , Sheila Sprague  2   3 , Jodi Gallant  1 , Gina Del Fabbro  1 , Jordan Leonard  1 , Sofia Bzovsky  1 , Paula McKay  1 , Jason W Busse  4   5 ; COPE Investigators
Collaborators, Affiliations

In-person cognitive behavioural therapy vs. usual care after surgical management of extremity fractures: an unsuccessful feasibility trial

Kyle Gouveia et al. Pilot Feasibility Stud. .

Abstract

Background: Extremity fractures are common, and most are managed operatively; however, despite successful reduction, up to half of patients report persistent post-surgical pain. Furthermore, psychological factors such as stress, distress, anxiety, depression, catastrophizing, and fear-avoidance behaviors have been associated with the development of chronic pain. The purpose of this pilot study was to examine the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to determine the effect of in-person cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) vs. usual care on persistent post-surgical pain among patients with a surgically managed extremity fracture.

Methods: Eligible patients were randomized to either in-person CBT or usual care. We used four criteria to judge the composite measure of feasibility: 1) successful implementation of CBT at each clinical site, 2) 40 patients recruited within 6 months, 3) treatment compliance in a minimum 36 of 40 participants (90%), and 4) 32 of 40 participants (80%) achieving follow-up at one year. The primary clinical outcome was persistent post-surgical pain at one year after surgery.

Results: Only two of the four participating sites were able to implement the CBT regimen due to difficulties with identifying certified therapists who had the capacity to accommodate additional patients into their schedule within the required timeframe (i.e., 8 weeks of their fracture). Given the challenges associated with CBT implementation, only one site was able to actively recruit patients. This site screened 86 patients and enrolled 3 patients (3.5%) over a period of three months. Participants were unable to comply with the in-person CBT, with no participants attending an in-person CBT session. Follow-up at one year could not be assessed as the pilot study was stopped early, three months into the study, due to failure to achieve the other three feasibility criteria.

Conclusion: Our pilot trial failed to demonstrate the feasibility of a trial of in-person CBT versus usual care to prevent persistent pain after surgical repair of traumatic long-bone fractures and re-enforces the importance of establishing feasibility before embarking on definitive trials. Protocol modifications to address the identified barriers include the delivery of our intervention as a therapist-guided, remote CBT program.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier NCT03196258); Registered June 22, 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03196258.

Keywords: Cognitive behavioral therapy; Extremity fractures; Persistent post-surgical pain.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

SS reports editorial or governing board for BMC Women’s Health, employment from Global Research Solutions Inc., and employment from McMaster University, outside the submitted work. All other authors have nothing to disclose. JWB is supported, in part, by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Canada Research Chair in the prevention and management of chronic pain.

References

    1. Moulin DE, Clark AJ, Speechley M, Morley-Forster PK. Chronic pain in Canada–prevalence, treatment, impact and the role of opioid analgesia. Pain Res Manag. 2002;7(4):179–184. doi: 10.1155/2002/323085. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Johannes CB, Le TK, Zhou X, Johnston JA, Dworkin RH. The prevalence of chronic pain in United States adults: results of an Internet-based survey. J Pain. 2010;11(11):1230–1239. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2010.07.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Blyth FM, March LM, Brnabic AJ, Jorm LR, Williamson M, Cousins MJ. Chronic pain in Australia: a prevalence study. Pain. 2001;89(2–3):127–134. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(00)00355-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Breivik H, Collett B, Ventafridda V, Cohen R, Gallacher D. Survey of chronic pain in Europe: prevalence, impact on daily life, and treatment. Eur J Pain. 2006;10(4):287–333. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2005.06.009. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Elliott AM, Smith BH, Penny KI, Smith WC, Chambers WA. The epidemiology of chronic pain in the community. Lancet. 1999;354(9186):1248–1252. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)03057-3. - DOI - PubMed

Associated data