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
. 2024 Jun 3;7(6):e2415842.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.15842.

Emotional Awareness and Expression Therapy vs Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Chronic Pain in Older Veterans: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Emotional Awareness and Expression Therapy vs Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Chronic Pain in Older Veterans: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Brandon C Yarns et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: Chronic pain is common and disabling in older adults, and psychological interventions are indicated. However, the gold standard approach, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), produces only modest benefits, and more powerful options are needed.

Objectives: To evaluate whether emotional awareness and expression therapy (EAET) is superior to CBT for treatment of chronic pain among predominantly male older veterans and whether higher baseline depression, anxiety, or posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms-key targets of EAET-moderate treatment response.

Design, setting, and participants: This 2-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted from May 16, 2019, to September 14, 2023, in the US Department of Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System. The trial included a racially and ethnically diverse group of veterans aged 60 to 95 years with at least 3 months of musculoskeletal pain.

Interventions: Emotional awareness and expression therapy or CBT, conducted concurrently, each presented as one 90-minute individual session followed by eight 90-minute group sessions.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was Brief Pain Inventory pain severity (range, 0 to 10) from baseline to posttreatment (week 10, primary end point) and 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included Patient Reported Outcomes Institute Measurement System Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, General Life Satisfaction (NIH Toolbox), Pain Interference, and Sleep Disturbance Short Forms, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), and Satisfaction with Therapy and Therapist Scale-Revised. A subset of participants completed the PTSD Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition). All analyses were for the intention-to-treat population and included all randomized participants.

Results: Among 126 randomized participants (66 in the EAET group and 60 in the CBT group; mean [SD] age, 71.9 [5.9] years; 116 [92%] male), 111 (88%) completed posttreatment, and 104 (82%) completed the 6-month follow-up. The EAET was superior to CBT for the primary outcome of reduction in pain severity at posttreatment (estimate, -1.59 [95% CI, -2.35 to -0.83]; P < .001) and follow-up (estimate, -1.01 [95% CI, -1.78 to -0.24]; P = .01). A greater percentage of participants in EAET vs CBT had clinically significant (at least 30%) pain reduction (63% vs 17%; odds ratio, 21.54 [95% CI, 4.66-99.56]; P < .001) at posttreatment. In addition, EAET was superior to CBT on 50% pain reduction (35% vs 7%; odds ratio, 11.77 [95% CI, 2.38-58.25]; P = .002), anxiety (estimate, -2.49 [95% CI, -4.30 to -0.68]; P = .006), depression (estimate, -3.06 [95% CI, -5.88 to -0.25]; P = .03), general life satisfaction (estimate, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.36-2.10]; P = .005), PTSD symptoms (estimate, -4.39 [95% CI, -8.44 to -0.34]; P = .03), PGIC score (estimate, 1.46 [95% CI, 0.77-2.15]; P < .001), and global treatment satisfaction (estimate, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.12-0.45]; P < .001) at posttreatment. Higher baseline depression (estimate, -1.55 [95% CI, -0.37 to 2.73]; P < .001), anxiety (estimate, -1.53 [95% CI, -2.19 to -0.88]; P < .001), and PTSD symptoms (estimate, -1.69 [95% CI, -2.96 to -0.42]; P = .009) moderated greater reduction in pain severity after EAET but not CBT.

Conclusions and relevance: The results of this randomized clinical trial suggest that EAET may be a preferred intervention for medically and psychiatrically complex patients with pain. The societal burden of chronic pain could be improved by further incorporating the principles of EAET into mainstream clinical pain medicine.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03918642.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Drs Yarns and Melrose reported receiving grants from the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) during the conduct of the study. Dr Lumley reported receiving grants from the National Institute of Nursing Research outside the submitted work, receiving personal fees from Cognifisense, and conducting training of health professionals in the therapy tested in the submitted work and receiving fees for this training. Dr Sultzer reported receiving grants from the VA during the conduct of the study and receiving personal fees from Avanir Pharmaceuticals, Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co Ltd, and Novo Nordisk outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Flow of Participants through the Clinical Trial
CBT indicates cognitive behavioral therapy; EAET, emotional awareness and expression therapy.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Pain Severity Outcomes
A, Shading represents SEs. B, Vertical lines represent upper bound of the 95% CI. CBT indicates cognitive behavioral therapy; EAET, emotional awareness and expression therapy. aP < .001. bP = .01. cP = .002. eP < .001. eP = .006.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.. Moderation of Pain Severity Reduction between Treatment Conditions by Baseline Depression, Anxiety, and PTSD Symptom Scores
The interaction effect estimate is the difference in the differences-in-difference estimates between the 2 treatment conditions. CBT indicates cognitive-behavioral therapy; EAET, emotional awareness and expression therapy; PTSD, posttraumatic stress disorder.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Rikard SM, Strahan AE, Schmit KM, Guy GP Jr. Chronic pain among adults—United States, 2019-2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2023;72(15):379-385. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm7215a1 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gibson SJ, Lussier D. Prevalence and relevance of pain in older persons. Pain Med. 2012;13(suppl 2):S23-S26. doi:10.1111/j.1526-4637.2012.01349.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Whitlock EL, Diaz-Ramirez LG, Glymour MM, Boscardin WJ, Covinsky KE, Smith AK. Association between persistent pain and memory decline and dementia in a longitudinal cohort of elders. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(8):1146-1153. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.1622 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Macfarlane GJ, Barnish MS, Jones GT. Persons with chronic widespread pain experience excess mortality: longitudinal results from UK Biobank and meta-analysis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(11):1815-1822. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-211476 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Domenichiello AF, Ramsden CE. The silent epidemic of chronic pain in older adults. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2019;93:284-290. doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2019.04.006 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data