Toward Thriving: A Set of Reflective Tools to Empower Chronic Pain Patients and Help Them Envision a Personal Path to Thriving.

Not Applicable

Completed

Brief Summary: The purpose of this study is to introduce and test the usefulness of a reflective process meant to empower people with chronic pain and help support participant's resiliency and thriving.

The study team hypothesizes that:

-Greater or equal to 80 percent of participants will report that the intervention was relatively easy to understand after orientation, low burden, potentially effective, and will have completed at least 2 of the 3 reflective tools.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria

Exclusion Criteria

Cancer (History of any bone-related cancer or cancer that metastasized to the bone; Currently in treatment for any cancer or plan to start cancer treatment in the next 12 months; History of any cancer treatment in the last 24 months)
Active substance abuse
Uncontrolled depression or psychosis
Visual or hearing difficulties that would preclude participation
Individuals started receiving disability or compensation within the past year, or currently involved in litigation
Current/planned (in the next 2 years) enrollment in another study of a device or investigational drug that would interfere with this study, this may include participation in a blinded trial.
Any other diseases or conditions that would make a patient unsuitable for study participation as determined by the site principal investigators. This would include but not be limited to severe psychiatric disorders, active suicidal ideations or history of suicide attempts, and an uncontrolled drug and/or alcohol addiction)

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Reflective process group	Self-guided at home activities	-

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Participants Engaged in the Interventions	Baseline (T1) to Exit Interview (T4), up to 68 days	The timepoints were as follows: consent and survey (T1), Kick-off Meeting (T2), Workshop (T3), and Exit Interview (T4). Participants had to attend the Kick-off Meeting (T2) to be considered engaged in the intervention. Participants who did not attend the Kick-off Meeting (T2) were withdrawn. Participants who did not attend the Workshop (T3) could still attend the Exit Interview (T4).

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at T4 Exit Interview	at T4 Exit Interview, up to 68 days	Participants completed the PGIC at the exit interview. The PGIC had one question with seven options ranging from -3 to 3: very much worse (-3), much worse (-2), minimally worse (-1), no change (0), minimally improved (1), much improved (2), very much improved (3). A higher score indicated greater improvement since the start of the study.
Change in Pain Interference Based on the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) 29 Version 2.0 Between Baseline (t1) and Approximately 68 Days (t4 Exit Interview)	Up to 68 days	There were 4 questions in this questionnaire. For each question, participants selected one of five options, ranging from "not at all" (1) to "very much" (5). Total scores ranged from 4 to 20 points, where higher scores indicated more pain interference. Since this survey was discussing the change in the pain interference, a negative score indicated less pain interfering with day-to-day activities.The change betwen the baseline (T1 and Exit Interview (t4) is reported.