Skip to content

Effectiveness of Pain Neuroscience Education Compared to a Conventional Education for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain

Effectiveness of Pain Neuroscience Education Compared to a Conventional Education for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain : A Randomized Monocentric Trial.

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04179708
Acronym
EVAL-PNE
Enrollment
88
Registered
2019-11-27
Start date
2020-01-06
Completion date
2024-02-10
Last updated
2025-12-23

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Chronic Low-back Pain

Keywords

Therapeutic Patient Education, Chronic Low Back Pain, Chronic Pain, Pain Neuroscience Education, Pain Neurophysiology Education, Pain biology education

Brief summary

The hypothesis is that pain biology education, combined with a rehabilitation program, reduces disability to 3 months, compared to conventional spinal physiology education.

Interventions

OTHERPain Neuroscience Education

Intervention description Patients participate in a back school program including initial and final assessment, educational activities and therapeutic activities (eg. Physiotherapy, balneotherapy, physical activity, spine ergonomics, and so on) spread over 5 days. The therapeutic activities are the same in experimental and control group, only the educational activities differ. The educational activities represent 4 hours of intervention, ½ hours of educative initial assessment and ½ hour of educative final assessment. The content of Pain Neuroscience Education (experimental group) focuses on deconstruction of patho-anatomical and biomechanical believes, and the explanation of pain from the biology. This framework allows the introduction of coping strategies (eg gradual exposure to exercise, activity and physical activity) and regulation strategy (eg fragmentation of activity, stress management, and so on).

assessment, educational activities and therapeutic activities (eg. Physiotherapy, balneotherapy, physical activity, spine ergonomics, and so on) spread over 5 days. The therapeutic activities are the same in experimental and control group, only the educational activities differ. The educational activities represent 4 hours of intervention, ½ hour of educative initial assessment and ½ hour of educative final assessment. The content of conventional education (control grou) focuses on patho-anatomical and biomechanical notions. This framework allows the introduction of protection strategies (eg education on good posture, good handling techniques, physical activity and therapeutic exercise in stretch and strenghten the spine in order to protect it).

Sponsors

Société Française de Physiothérapie (SFP).
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
University Hospital, Lille
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Low Back Pain since more than 1 year * Affiliated to Social Security Scheme * Rolland Moris ≥ 8 * Start Back ≥ 4

Exclusion criteria

* Suspicion or proven case of serious pathology such as recent vertebral fracture (less than 6 months), infection, malignant tumors and / or radiculopathy. * Have a history of rheumatic inflammatory disease * Have a true radiculalgia (with or without radiculopathy) * Have a scoliosis \> 30° (if it is considered as a predominant contributor of pain's persistence). * Rating of pain \> 8/10 * Have had lumbar surgery in the past 12 months * Have had an injection in the past 3 months * Patients under legal protection (guardianship, curatorship) * Pregnant patients * Patients who are not able to understand, read or speak french * Inability to receive informed information

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Functional disability level (Rolland Morris questionnaire).At 3 months

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Functional disability level (Rolland Morris questionnaire)at baseline (pre intervention), at 5 days (post intervention) and at 1 year
Functional disability level (Dallas questionnaire)at baseline (pre intervention), at 5 days (post intervention), at 3 months and at 1 year
Negatives believes level (Fear Avoidance and Belief Questionnaire)at baseline (pre intervention), at 5 days (post intervention), at 3 months and at 1 year
Catastrophism level (Pain Catastrophizing Questionnaire)at baseline (pre intervention), at 5 days (post intervention), at 3 months and at 1 year
Pain rating (Numeric scale)at baseline (pre intervention), at 5 days (post intervention), at 3 months and at 1 year
Anxiety and Depression level (Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale)at baseline (pre intervention), at 5 days (post intervention), at 3 months and at 1 year
Satisfaction level (18-item of Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire)At one year
semi-conductive interviewAt 3 months
Kinesiophobia level (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia)at baseline (pre intervention), at 5 days (post intervention), at 3 months and at 1 year

Countries

France

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026