Do quality of life, anxiety, depression and acceptance improve after interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation? A multicentre matched control study of acceptance and commitment therapy-based versus cognitive–behavioural therapy-based programmes

OBJECTIVE: Interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation (IPR) usually employs a cognitive–behavioural therapeutic (CBT) approach. However, there is growing support for chronic pain treatments based on acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT). Most studies of ACT and CBT for chronic pain have evaluated their effects after psychological interventions, not after IPR. We compared the results of an ACT-based IPR programme with two CBT-based IPR programmes. METHODS: We used a retrospective multicentre pretest–posttest design with matched patient groups at three centres. Data were collected from the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation before and after IPR participation. Participants completed the EQ-5D health-related quality of life questionnaire, the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire, (CPAQ) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Analyses were performed to compare the effects of the different interventions. RESULTS: Neither EQ-5D nor HADS depression scores were affected by the psychological approach used. The score changes on both CPAQ subscales (activity engagement and pain willingness) indicated significant improvements between admission and discharge at all centres. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate the effectiveness of using psychological approaches to manage chronic pain. Both CBT and ACT had a beneficial effect on most of the assessed health-related parameters.