Active clinical trials for "Chronic Pain"

Chronic pain is a prevalent, disabling problem affecting as many as 50% of men and 75% of women Veterans. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is the current gold standard treatment for chronic pain. However, while some individuals do respond to CBT, many individuals do not obtain meaningful benefit. As a result, the average response to CBT treatment in groups of individuals with chronic pain is only modest. To address the need for effective treatments, the investigators have developed and adapted Complementary and Integrative Health (CIH) interventions such as Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) and Hypnotic Cognitive Therapy (HYP-CT) for chronic pain management. Research shows these treatments are beneficial alternatives to CBT. However, as with CBT, response to these treatments varies, and the investigators' preliminary data suggests outcome variability is explained by a number of baseline patient factors. Research is now needed to advance knowledge regarding the pre-treatment patient factors (i.e., predictive markers) that moderate treatment outcome (i.e., patient factors that interact with treatment condition to predict outcome). The findings from this research will provide an empirical basis for developing patient-treatment matching algorithms to prospectively match a given individual to the evidence-based treatment most likely to be beneficial for them. The investigators have initiated a program of research to identify the factors that predict response to psychosocial pain treatments, including HYP-CT, MBCT, and CBT. Preliminary findings suggest that predictive markers such as brain activity (e.g., alpha and beta power, as measured by EEG), and the traits of mindfulness, hypnotizability, and catastrophizing, will predict who benefits most from different treatments. For example, post hoc analyses show that those who are "well-matched" to HYP-CT, based on the identified baseline moderators, achieve twice the amount of pain reduction with treatment, compared to those who are not well- matched. To confirm these findings, prospective research is now needed. The findings from this study will provide a foundation upon which to develop an assessment battery to identify critical values on which to base algorithms for a priori matching of individual patients to different treatments. This has the potential to substantially boost the typically modest average effect sizes that are achieved when using a more traditional "one size fits all" approach.

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide, with approximately 18.1 million new cases and 9.6 million deaths reported in 2018. Cancer-related pain is experienced by 50-70% of patients, with a higher prevalence at advanced disease stages (66.4%). Since the development of WHO's cancer pain guidelines, several studies have reported good relief of symptoms and suffering for a majority of patients. Recent reports suggest that up to 50% of patients still report insufficient pain control. Patients with cancer often present with multiple symptoms and functional decline. Evidence supports multidisciplinary approaches to address symptoms and suffering, including early palliative care referral From review literatures we found that the telemedicine group had significantly higher quality of life than the usual care group. In addition, the telemedicine group had lower anxiety and depression scores than the usual care group. Therefore, we will conduct the non-randomized controlled study of using telemedicine comparing to conventional in-person at OPD in hospitalized cancer pain patients. The purpose of this study is to assess the pain interference by using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and to compare between the in-person group and the telemedicine group. To assess the cost-effectiveness of telemedicine for reducing symptoms associated with cancer and its treatment.

This is a multicenter prospective study of patients who currently have stably implanted spinal cord simulators. Patients will be randomly assigned to turn on or off their spinal cord stimulators for two week intervals up to six weeks after enrollment, and on the final day of study participation, for one hour intervals, in a multi-crossover design.

Reducing opioid prescribing and improving outcomes in patients with chronic pain would benefit our nation. Neither addiction nor chronic pain spares any race, gender, or particular socio-economic status. This study is investigating a potentially inexpensive way of providing a previously costly service (the intensive chronic pain rehabilitation program), which is why insurers stopped covering it. Although it is unusual for an application from an academic institution to include a startup company (PainSTakers, LLC) as the curriculum provider, this is actually a long-term strength of this program, and the reason NIH recommended this route. It ensures that 4PCP will ultimately sustain itself rather than require government support for its continuation. Support for this application is not to provide the curriculum, but to determine if it is effective in the outcomes expected to be found. The curriculum is being provided freely only as an incentive for practitioners to participate in the research portion of the study. If the study is able to demonstrate its clinical effectiveness, the next step will be to show a positive economic impact for health care institutions and for health insurers who may then wish to support the program for their practitioners and their patients.

The goal of this clinical trial is to develop an pharmacist-led preoperative opioid taper intervention for patients undergoing total knee or hip replacement who are on chronic opioids before their surgery. The main questions it aims to answer are: Is the intervention feasible and acceptable to patients? Does the intervention result in a decrease in opioid dose during the preoperative period? Participants will meet with a clinical pharmacist, who will provide some basic education on pain and opioids, and will propose an opioid taper schedule. The pharmacist will then follow-up with the participant by phone each week until surgery to assess progress and adjust the taper as necessary.

Building upon existing evidence on loneliness and pain research, conversational voice assistant (CVA)technology and personalized persuasion, we have assembled an interdisciplinary and inter-institutional team of researchers to conduct a 12-week randomized control pilot with older adults that live alone and self-report pain. Participants will interact with a standard or a personally enhanced loneliness routine delivered through a CVA. We will explore intervention feasibility and examine the efficacy of both standard and personalized interventions on loneliness and secondary outcomes. Inclusion: 1) men and women 60 years of age; 2) live alone (single-family home, independent, or assisted living); 3) self-report have experienced or currently experiencing musculoskeletal pain; and 4) wireless internet access via a broadband Internet connection. Exclusion: 1) memory loss as evidenced by poor performance on the Mini Cog; 2) inability to speak English; 3) prior study participation; 4) prior use or current use of a conversational voice assistant; and 5) not willing to engage with the voice assistant. Our proposed study is comprised of 1) a one week pre-study session for participant equipment set-up, training, and baseline pre- study data collection; 2) a 12-week randomized trial of the standard or the enhanced CVA delivered interventions; and 3) a one-week post-study data collection.

This study will include 20 healthy subjects with intact skin on their lower legs that meet inclusion criteria. Participants will serve as their own control, by heating one leg and not the other. The radiofrequency device consists of a 4 by 6 inch heating pad connected to a temperature controller. Subjects will receive weekly treatments for 4 weeks, and will be re-evaluated 4 weeks after the last treatment to assess any tissue changes that continue after the treatments have concluded.

The purpose of this study is to demonstrate safety and efficacy of a new spinal cord stimulation paddle electrode which is able to target the dorsal horns, dorsal nerve roots, and dorsal columns. The research electrode ("Study Electrode") is designed to answer basic physiological clinical research questions. It may inform future device therapy development, but the Study Electrode is not a product that will be marketed or sold. The Investigators believe the protocol is a Non-Significant Risk study answering basic physiological research questions, which may be performed under hospital IRB approval.

Over 100 million Americans suffer from chronic pain resulting in annual cost of roughly $635 billion. Limited treatments are available for this widespread disease. The data supporting these treatments lack generalizability to patients with more serious medical and psychological comorbidities who are often excluded from explanatory efficacy trials. Our work aims to integrate randomized comparative effectiveness research with patient care. The investigators will randomize the patients and collect data using an open-source learning healthcare system already in use in our department to monitor patients' progress: Collaborative Health Outcomes Information Registry (CHOIR). Collaborative Health Outcomes Information Registry uses the National Institute of Health Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System item banks for comparative metrics through computer adaptive testing. The investigators will leverage the advantage of this novel system to compare effectiveness of duloxetine and desipramine in decreasing pain in patients with chronic pain. The investigators will also compare adherence of patients to these two commonly used medications over a period of six months. This will evaluate feasibility of integrating randomized comparative effectiveness research with patient care in subspecialty clinics. Collaborative Health Outcomes Information Registry can then be applied for numerous future trials to advance our knowledge in perioperative and pain medicine.

This study seeks to explore the efficacy of immersive multimedia experiences as a practical adjunctive therapeutic intervention in the self-management of the chronic pain associated with cancer patients. A comparative controlled interventional trial and qualitative interpretative-descriptive exploration will be undertaken with 100 cancer patients who are experiencing chronic pain. Participants will be randomly assigned to either a virtual reality (VR) therapy group or a 2D computer based multimedia control group (50 subjects in each). They will undertake either a series of VR interventions, or 2D computer based multimedia control sessions in their own homes over a period of a month. The intervention will be used daily for a month to enable customization to the therapy and record data over a long enough period of time to account for any individual short-term changes in pain. The VR sessions will consist of using a VR head mounted display (HMD) and computer to explore interactive immersive environments. The control group will be exposed to similar 2D computer based multimedia experiences (without a VR headset) that on home computers. Pre, during, and post pain test scores and quality of sleep assessments will be recorded using standardized tools. In addition to the primary study, a sub-study will be conducted where ten of the subjects who demonstrated the most improvement in their pain using the VR experience will be selected and invited to explore for any measurable changes in neurological activity using pre and post exposure electroencephalography (EEG).