Abstract: Cognitive functional therapy (CFT) is a fad new method for managing for chronic back pain, is found to be in no way superior to conventional treatments for managing pain A new study finds.

Source: University of New South Wales

A comprehensive review of the relatively novel treatment options to treat the chronic back painfulness – Cognitive Functional Therapy – has discovered that it’s not much superior to traditional treatments as evidenced by previous research.

The review’s leader was Jack Devonshire, a PhD student at UNSW Sydney and Neuroscience Research Australia (NeuRA). He examined studies on Cognitive Functional Therapy (CFT) as a treatment option for chronic back pain that was, for the purpose of his study could be defined as pain that occurs over a period of 3 months or more the area that lies between the 12th rib as well as the buttock crease.

CFT has seen a rise in popularity and is gaining recognition from practitioners since its first clinical trial in 2013, that was based on the theory created in 2005. There have been numerous trials conducted around the world using CFT since, according to Mr. Devonshire.

“CFT integrates treatments that can aid in managing persistent lower back pain, including exercise, pain education and lifestyle coaching into a system of care guided by the current knowledge of a person’s complete painful experience” Dr. Xie says.

“The therapy seeks to develop the biopsychosocial model in order to offer health professionals with what we call a “clinical reasoning framework” that can be used to develop strategies for managing this condition that is chronic.”

Global CFT is a hot topic of interest

While the practice is being integrated into health systems in both the UK and Finland in addition to having a number of online courses for training for healthcare professionals but there’s still not been an extensive analysis of the studies on the therapy.

“So we made the decision to conduct an systematic review and meta-analysis. This is the most reliable method of evidence, to review studies from the past to determine how effective the treatment works in terms of disability, pain and safety” Mr. Devonshire says.

A new and effective solution for treating chronic back pain targets the nerve system.

After looking through all the studies that meet the criteria for research, Mr. Devonshire along with his co-authors concluded that the efficiency of CFT is still unknown as of now and the group has called for more trials with blinded participants – people who do not know if the treatment being offered is real or not – and research that involves larger numbers of participants.

The study also found that no adverse reactions were observed among patients following treatment with CFT treatment. Image is available in the public domain.

“The findings of our study showed that CFT could not decrease disability and pain intensity for people suffering from long-term lower back pain, as compared to exercise and manual therapy in the final stage of treatment or after the 12-month follow-up.” Mr. Devonshire states.

“This is vital because we need the exercise physiologists and physiotherapists along with other professionals that treat those suffering from lower back discomfort to be equipped with the most current details on the effective treatments . This is especially important since the process of learning how to provide CFT in the role of a therapy can be very intensive, requiring an average of 106 hours of instruction to deliver the treatment properly.”

Researchers also discovered that no adverse reactions were recorded among patients following CFT treatment. CFT treatment.

Mr. Devonshire states that the certainty of the systematic review of researchers was limited by the differences between study control studies, small sample sizes , and a high probability of bias across the studies included, affecting the credibility of the conclusions of these research studies. The group is looking at future studies that can improve current research findings through clinical studies on CFT.

The Chronic Pain Research News

Author: Lachlan Gilbert

Source:University of New South Wales

ContactLachlan Gilbert University of New South Wales

Image Image is in the public domain.

The Original ResearchClosed access.

“Effectiveness in cognitive therapy to reduce disability and pain in patients with chronic low back pain in a comprehensive review, meta-analysis and systematic study” from Jack Devonshire et al. Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy


Check out

The effectiveness of Cognitive Functional Therapy in reduction of disability and pain in lower back pain in a comprehensive review, meta-analysis and systematic analysis

Objective: To determine whether or not cognitive functional therapy (CFT) is a viable treatment for adults suffering from long-term lower back (LBP) pain. (LBP)

Design: Intervention systematic review with meta-analysis.

LITERATURE RESEARCH: CINERAL, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, EU clinical trials register (to March 2022).

STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials that evaluate CFT for adults suffering from LBP.

Data SYNTHESIS: The primary outcomes were disability and pain intensity. The secondary outcomes were psychological state and satisfaction of patients, overall improvement as well as adverse events. The risk of bias could be evaluated through The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Evidence reliability was assessed by using methods such as the Grading of Recommendations Assessment development and evaluation approach. Random-effects meta-analysis with the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman adjustment was used to estimate pooled effects.

Results: Fifteen trials were included (nine ongoing, one of which was terminated) and five included results (n=507 with 262 CFT and 245 control). There was only a small amount of confidence about the effectiveness of CFT when compared with manual therapy and the core exercises (two studies with n=265) to reduce pain intensity (mean difference -1.02/10 95 percent CI -14.75 between 12.70 and 12.70) as well as impairment (mean difference -6.95/100 (95 percent 95% CI -58.58 up to 44.68). Narrative Synthesis showed mixed results in terms of disabilities, pain intensity, as well as secondary results. There was no report of adverse events. The studies were all judged to be highly prone to the risk of bias.

Conclusion: CFT may not be as effective as other interventions that are commonly used to reduce disability and pain for patients suffering from chronic LBP. The efficacy of CFT is in doubt and will be until studies of higher quality are made available.