Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of two differently-designed psychological interventions for chronic pain.Design: 138 patients presenting chronic pain were randomly assigned to one of two experimental conditions: (1) Psychoeducational relaxation therapy (PRT, n = 84) or (2) PRT followed by acceptance and commitment therapy (PRT + ACT, n = 54).Main outcome measures: Pain intensity, quality of life (SF-36), anxiety and depression (HADS), stress (PSS), pain catastrophizing (PCS), chronic pain acceptance (CPAQ), and psychological inflexibility (PIPS) were assessed at three time-points: before therapy (T1); at the end of the therapy (T2); and 3- months after the end of the therapy (T3).Results: In T2, the PRT intervention showed more significant improvements in the measures of mental quality of life [F (1,92) = 7.478, P < .05] and depression [F (1, 92) = 5.804, P < .05] compared to the PRT + ACT intervention. The experimental groups did not differ in their outcome measures at T3.Conclusion: PRT appears to be an effective solution in the psychological care of chronic pain. The effectiveness of this type of intervention seems to have been underestimated. The addition of ACT sessions did not significantly impact the results, indicating that both designs of interventions are effective in the short term.
Keywords: Chronic pain; acceptance and commitment therapy; psychoeducation; relaxation.