Skip to content

Skills Training and Relief for Orofacial Pain

SKILLS TRAINING AND RELIEF FOR OROFACIAL PAIN: FEASIBILITY AND ACCEPTABILITY OF A SINGLE SESSION PAIN MANAGEMENT COURSE IN A TERTIARY OROFACIAL PAIN CLINIC

Status
Not yet recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07802067
Acronym
STAR
Enrollment
200
Registered
2026-09-03
Start date
2026-10-01
Completion date
2028-10-01
Last updated
2026-09-03

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

Conditions

Immediate Intervention, Waitlist Control

Keywords

Orofacial Pain, Empowered Relief, Psychological Intervention

Brief summary

Chronic orofacial pain conditions (COFP) are associated with substantial physical and psychological burden and are best treated with multidisciplinary approaches combining psychological interventions and comprehensive orofacial pain care. Yet, important barriers prevent access to psychological interventions for COFP (e.g., lack of providers, financial resources). This study will assess the feasibility and acceptability of adapting a single two-hour telehealth-delivered group course, Empowered Relief (ER), which was created for heterogenous chronic pain condition, into a multidisciplinary COFP clinic. ER addresses many existing barriers to assessing psychological interventions for COFP as it is deliverable via telehealth, in a group format, within a single session. This study hypothesizes that ER will demonstrate adequate feasibility and acceptability among patients with COFP. Participants will be recruited over a 6-month period from patients evaluated for an initial appointment at the University of Kentucky Orofacial Pain Clinic (UKOPC). A randomized waitlist control design will be used to inform a future efficacy trial. Specifically, new patients seeking an initial appointment at the UKOPC will be introduced to the study, and if they consent, they will be randomly assigned to participate in the next available ER course (i.e., immediate group) or the ER course offered the subsequent month (i.e., waitlist control group). All participants will provide feasibility and acceptability data after receiving the intervention. Those assigned to immediate group will provide biopsychosocial functioning and outcome data at one, two, and four weeks following the pain course. Those assigned to the immediate control group will provide data one, two, and four weeks before the intervention for a comparison group. Data from this study will inform design decisions for a future efficacy trial.

Detailed description

Chronic orofacial pain (COFP) is comprised of various disorders in the temporomandibular region causing pain that lasts more than three months and are associated with substantial physical and psychological burden. These disorders often co-occur with other conditions such as headache, general chronic pain, and psychiatric disorders (e.g, anxiety and depression; Hernández-Nuño de la Rosa et al., 2023). The etiology of COFP is complex, with environmental, psychosocial, emotional, and genetic factors contributing to the development, chronicity, and maintenance of these disorders (Hernández-Nuño de la Rosa et al., 2023). Regardless of etiology, COFPs are impactful, commonly resulting in interference with daily activities, reduced quality of life (QoL), and mental health difficulties (Miller et al., 2026). COFP disorders are therefore best treated with multidisciplinary approaches combining psychological interventions and comprehensive orofacial pain care. Numerous psychological interventions for chronic pain are available, drawing from numerous theoretical orientations. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is a goal focused intervention designed to teach patients skills in restructuring cognitive distortions and thought patterns while promoting self-efficacy, which have shown to reduce pain intensity and psychological distress (Miller et al., 2026; Nagi et al., 2025; Tan et al., 2017; Carlson, 2008). Many relaxation techniques use a self-management approach by encouraging patients' role in managing their condition by learning skills to implement within their daily routine (Aggarwal et al., 2019; Nicholas & Blyth, 2016). Carlson (2008) categorizes multiple methods of relaxation techniques ranging from brief, easily taught skills to structured therapist-led interventions. He categorizes multiple methods of relaxation techniques ranging from brief, easily taught skills (brief relaxation techniques) to structured therapist-led interventions such as Physical Self-Regulation, where a therapist trains the patient through breathing exercises, clenching awareness, postural relaxation, and postural reeducation (progressive relaxation training) (Carlson, 2008). Despite the multitude of empirically-supported psychological interventions available, they all share common obstacles; namely, that uptake of these interventions in COFP clinic is low due to lack of sufficient specialized orofacial pain treatment providers, financial resources, and mental health stigma, and patients not expecting to have clinical psychologists involved in their COFP management, which has historically been treated (with minimal success) by dental providers alone, among other obstacles. Additionally, while literature suggests the effectiveness of these interventions for COFP populations, patients are often met with access related issues. These treatments introduce barriers through financial costs associated with healthcare and travel, lack of geographic access, especially for patients in rural communities, and few professionally certified clinicians to provide services (Melanie et al., 2026: Ziadni et al., 2021). Consequently, there is also a lack of multimodal tertiary clinics available that offer treatments combining dental, psychological, and behavioral healthcare, leading patients to travel far distances for interdisciplinary treatments that can last hours across multiple sessions (Lagisetty et al., 2021). Geographic access also poses a significant issue because interdisciplinary COFP clinics are scarce, with many states not having any access to specialty care, despite their being empirical evidence for greater longitudinal outcomes in COFP patients (Miller et al., 2026; Esposito et al., 2026). Recent literature has identified Empowered Relief (ER), a virtual single-session, two-hour group-based intervention developed at Stanford University that overcomes many of the existing obstacles. ER introduces evidenced-based skills through a single session, two-hour course where patients develop tools that allow them to become self-sufficient in managing their chronic pain. The session can be held through a virtual format, providing accessible care and reducing patient travel or long stays. The training also provides space for multiple patients to receive care at one time as ER is hosted in a group format, allowing more patients to receive treatment over time. The effectiveness of ER was first demonstrated through a pilot study that included participants with various chronic pain conditions which indicated significant reduction in distress and improved participants' ability to use self-regulation strategies for pain management 4 weeks post intervention (Ziadni et al., 2021). Additionally, a randomized control study found that one session of ER was just as effective as eight weeks of traditional CBT for reducing pain catastrophizing and pain intensity in individuals with chronic lower back pain (Ziadni et al., 2021). Currently, no literature to date has investigated the feasibility and acceptability of ER in patients with COFP, indicating a gap in literature. The present study aims to fill this gap to work towards the identification of a low-cost and low-burden intervention for this underserved population.

Interventions

Empowered Relief (ER) is a single-session, 2-hour pain management course designed with the purpose of assisting individuals with chronic pain to gain skills for self-pain management. ER is taught through a PowerPoint presentation which includes pain education, self-regulatory skills (i.e., relaxation, cognitive reframing, and self-soothing), and mindfulness skills, all grounded in pain-CBT theory (Darnall et al., 2021). The intervention will be delivered by a certified Empowered Relief instructor.

Sponsors

University of Kentucky
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* Must be 18 years or older; have the ability to read, write, and speak English; have experienced pain longer than 3 months; be a treatment-seeking patient at the University of Kentucky Orofacial Pain Clinic (UKOPC), and have the technological ability to participate in telehealth treatment in Kentucky (e.g., technology, connection, earbuds or headphones, private space in Kentucky).

Exclusion criteria

* Because the UKOPC is a training clinic, participants will be excluded if they report current or recent suicidal or homicidal ideation or intent in the last 2 weeks and/or symptoms of mania, hypomania, or psychosis in the past 6 months.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Recruitment RateBaseline (week 0)The number of patients who are consented into the study from the UK Orofacial Pain Clinic per month
Retention RateFollow up outcome survey at one month (approximately)The number of patients who were consented into the study and completed the one month follow-up outcome survey
Client SatisfactionImmediate Intervention - approximately one week after consent and directly after pain management intervention attendance. Waitlist Control - approximately one month after consent and directly after pain management intervention attendance.Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ) 8 items on a 4 point likert scale. Higher scores on items 1, 3, 6, 7, likert scale equate to greater satisfaction. Higher scores on items 2, 4, 5, and 8 likert scale equate to lower satisfaction.
Empowered Relief Post Course SurveyImmediate Intervention - approximately one week after consent and directly after pain management intervention attendance. Waitlist Control - approximately one month after consent and directly after pain management intervention attendance.Empowered Relief Post-Course Survey 5 items on a 6 point Likert scale. Higher scores equate to greater satisfaction with Empowered Relief course, content, and practice.
Satisfaction with ClassImmediate Intervention - approximately one week after consent and directly after pain management intervention attendance. Waitlist Control - approximately one month after consent and directly after pain management intervention attendance.Satisfaction with Class (Empowered Relief) is a 11 item survey. Items 1 - 5 are on a 0 to 10 numeric scale with higher scores equating to greater satisfaction. Items 6 - 10 are on a 7 point Likert scale with higher scores equating to greater satisfaction. Item 11 is a closed-ended single select question which includes three answer options.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
PTSD SymptomsBaseline (Week 0)The PTSD Symptom Checklist (Past Month) (PCL-5) will assess if the participant has experienced a traumatic event as defined by the DSM-5-TR and if they have experienced PTSD symptoms in the past month related to the event. The PCL-5 is a 20 item questionnaire with each item rated on a 5-point likert scale ranging from 0 - 4. Higher scores equate to greater intensity and interference of PTSD symptoms.
Headache ImpactBaseline (Week 0), Two Week Follow Up (Week 2), One Month Follow up (Week 4)The Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) 6 item questionnaire evaluates pain intensity, life interference, and psychological distress due to headaches. Items are rated on a 5 point likert scale. Higher scores equate greater headache impact.
PTSD Symptoms (Past Two Weeks)Two Week Follow up (Week 2), One Month Follow up (Week 4)The PTSD Short Form (PCL-5-SF) are administered to participants who indicate having experienced a trauma. The PCL-5-SF is a 4 item questionnaire on a 5 point likert scale. Higher scores equate to greater PTSD symptoms.
Pain Self EfficacyBaseline (Week 0), Two Week Follow Up (Week 2), One Month Follow Up (Week 4)The Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ-2) includes two items with a 6 point likert scale. Lower scores equate to less pain self-efficacy.
Pain CatastrophizingBaseline (Week 0), Two Week Follow Up (Week 2), One Month Follow Up (Week 4)The University of Washington Concerns About Pain Scale (UW-CAP-6) evaluates participants pain catastrophizing and negative thoughts in regard to their chronic pain. UW-CAP-6 short form includes 6 items rated on a 5 point likert scale with higher scores equating to greater levels of pain catastrophizing.
Acceptance of Chronic PainBaseline (Week 0), Two Week Follow Up (Week 2), One Month Follow Up (Week 4)The Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ-8) is an 8 item questionnaire that evaluates participants acceptance of their chronic pain condition. Items are rated on a 7 point likert scale with higher scores equating to greater pain acceptance.
Pain InterferenceBaseline (Week 0), Two Week Follow Up (Week 2), One Month Follow-Up (Week 4)The PROMIS Pain Interference Short Form (PROMIS 4a) evaluates how much pain interferes with their daily life. The PROMIS 4a includes 4 items rated on a 5 point likert scale with higher scores equating to pain having greater interference on their life.
Anxiety and DepressionBaseline (Week 0), Two Week Follow Up (Week 2), One Month Follow-Up (Week 4)The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4) is a brief questionnaire evaluating the participants anxiety and depression with 4 items rated on a 4 point likert scale with higher scores equating to greater levels of distress.
FatigueBaseline (Week 0), Two Week Follow Up (Week 2), One Month Follow-Up (Week 4)The PROMIS-FAT-4 is a brief questionnaire that evaluates participants level and impact of fatigue with 4 items on a 5 point likert scale with higher scores equating to greater severity of fatigue.
Satisfaction with LifeBaseline (Week 0), Two Week Follow Up (Week 2), One Month Follow-Up (Week 4)The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) evaluates participants judgement of satisfaction with the conditions of their life with 5 items rated on a 7 point likert scale with higher scores equating to greater satisfaction with their life's conditions.
Jaw FunctionBaseline (Week 0), Two Week Follow Up (Week 2), One Month Follow-Up (Week 4)The Jaw Functional Limitation Scale (JFLS) short form evaluates participants jaw function limitations with 8 items on an 11 point numeric scale with higher scores equating to greater jaw function limitation.
Insomnia SeverityBaseline (Week 0), Two Week Follow Up (Week 2), One Month Follow-Up (Week 4)The Insomnia Severity Index (ISI-brief) evaluates the participants experience with sleep and the the severity and impact of insomnia if present. The brief ISI measure includes 7 items on a 5 point likert scale with higher scores equating to greater impact and severity of insomnia symptoms.

Countries

United States

Contacts

CONTACTKathleen E Wakeman, M.S.
kewa246@uky.edu508-759-8037
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORKathleen E Wakeman, M.S.

University of Kentucky

STUDY_CHAIRIan Boggero, PhD

University of Kentucky

Outcome results

None listed

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