Abstract
Previously, we demonstrated, in a randomized clinical trial, the effectiveness of a psychoeducational intervention to decrease pain intensity scores and increase patients' knowledge of cancer pain management with a sample of oncology patients with pain from bone metastasis. In the present study, we evaluated for changes in mood states (measured using the Profile of Mood States), quality of life (QOL; measured using the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36)), and pain's level of interference with function (measured using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)) from baseline to the end of the intervention first between the intervention and the standard care groups and then within the intervention group based on the patients' level of response to the intervention (i.e., patients were classified as non-responders, partial responders, or responders). No differences were found in any of these outcome measures between patients in the standard care and intervention groups. However, when patients in the intervention group were categorized using a responder analysis approach, significant differences in the various outcome measures were found among the three respondent groups. Differences in the physical and mental component summary scores on the SF-36 and the interference items on the BPI, among the three respondent groups, were not only statistically significant but also clinically significant. The use of responder analysis in analgesic trials may help to identify unique subgroups of patients and lead to the development of more effective psychoeducational interventions.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 55-63 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Pain |
| Volume | 129 |
| Issue number | 1-2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - May 1 2007 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Bone metastasis
- Cancer pain
- Mood states
- Pain interference with function
- Psychoeducational intervention
- Quality of life
- Responder analysis
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Neurology
- Clinical Neurology
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
Cite this
The use of a responder analysis to identify differences in patient outcomes following a self-care intervention to improve cancer pain management. / Miaskowski, Christine; Dodd, Marylin; West, Claudia; Paul, Steven M.; Schumacher, Karen; Tripathy, Debu; Koo, Peter.
In: Pain, Vol. 129, No. 1-2, 01.05.2007, p. 55-63.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - The use of a responder analysis to identify differences in patient outcomes following a self-care intervention to improve cancer pain management
AU - Miaskowski, Christine
AU - Dodd, Marylin
AU - West, Claudia
AU - Paul, Steven M.
AU - Schumacher, Karen
AU - Tripathy, Debu
AU - Koo, Peter
PY - 2007/5/1
Y1 - 2007/5/1
N2 - Previously, we demonstrated, in a randomized clinical trial, the effectiveness of a psychoeducational intervention to decrease pain intensity scores and increase patients' knowledge of cancer pain management with a sample of oncology patients with pain from bone metastasis. In the present study, we evaluated for changes in mood states (measured using the Profile of Mood States), quality of life (QOL; measured using the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36)), and pain's level of interference with function (measured using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)) from baseline to the end of the intervention first between the intervention and the standard care groups and then within the intervention group based on the patients' level of response to the intervention (i.e., patients were classified as non-responders, partial responders, or responders). No differences were found in any of these outcome measures between patients in the standard care and intervention groups. However, when patients in the intervention group were categorized using a responder analysis approach, significant differences in the various outcome measures were found among the three respondent groups. Differences in the physical and mental component summary scores on the SF-36 and the interference items on the BPI, among the three respondent groups, were not only statistically significant but also clinically significant. The use of responder analysis in analgesic trials may help to identify unique subgroups of patients and lead to the development of more effective psychoeducational interventions.
AB - Previously, we demonstrated, in a randomized clinical trial, the effectiveness of a psychoeducational intervention to decrease pain intensity scores and increase patients' knowledge of cancer pain management with a sample of oncology patients with pain from bone metastasis. In the present study, we evaluated for changes in mood states (measured using the Profile of Mood States), quality of life (QOL; measured using the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36)), and pain's level of interference with function (measured using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)) from baseline to the end of the intervention first between the intervention and the standard care groups and then within the intervention group based on the patients' level of response to the intervention (i.e., patients were classified as non-responders, partial responders, or responders). No differences were found in any of these outcome measures between patients in the standard care and intervention groups. However, when patients in the intervention group were categorized using a responder analysis approach, significant differences in the various outcome measures were found among the three respondent groups. Differences in the physical and mental component summary scores on the SF-36 and the interference items on the BPI, among the three respondent groups, were not only statistically significant but also clinically significant. The use of responder analysis in analgesic trials may help to identify unique subgroups of patients and lead to the development of more effective psychoeducational interventions.
KW - Bone metastasis
KW - Cancer pain
KW - Mood states
KW - Pain interference with function
KW - Psychoeducational intervention
KW - Quality of life
KW - Responder analysis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34147173857&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34147173857&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.pain.2006.09.031
DO - 10.1016/j.pain.2006.09.031
M3 - Article
C2 - 17257753
AN - SCOPUS:34147173857
VL - 129
SP - 55
EP - 63
JO - Pain
JF - Pain
SN - 0304-3959
IS - 1-2
ER -