Skip to main content
. 2018 Oct 1;2018(9):CD003968. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003968.pub5

Hechler 2014.

Study characteristics
Methods RCT. 2 arms. Assessed pretreatment, post‐treatment, 6 months, and 12 months
Participants End of treatment: n = 108
Start of treatment: n = 120
Sex: 87 F, 27 M
Mean age = 14 years (SD 2.85)
Source = clinic
Diagnosis = chronic pain (mixed conditions)
Mean years of pain = median of 18 months (intervention group) and 13.5 months (control group)
Interventions "Intensive interdisciplinary pain treatment"
"Wait‐list control"
Outcomes Primary pain outcome: mean pain intensity
Primary disability outcome: Paediatric Pain Disability Index
Primary depression outcome: Depression Inventory for Children and Adolescents (DIKJ)
Primary anxiety outcome: Pain‐Related Cognitions Questionnaire for Children (catastrophising subscale)

  1. Mean pain intensity

  2. Paediatric Pain Disability Index

  3. School absence

  4. Anxiety Questionnaire for Pupils

  5. Pain‐Related Cognitions Questionnaire for Children (Catastrophising subscale)

  6. Depression Inventory for Children and Adolescents (DIKJ)

  7. Questionnaire to assess the economic effects of chronic pain

  8. Utilisation of healthcare services

  9. Parental work absenteeism

  10. Work days lost

  11. Subjective financial burden
Notes COI: "The authors declare no conflict of interest."
Funding: "The present study was supported in part by the Robert Bosch Foundation GmbH (Grant 11.5.1344.0010.0). The Robert Bosch Foundation was not involved in (1) the study design; (2) collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; (3) the writing of the report; and (4) the decision to submit the paper for publication."
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk "Randomisation was conducted with a 1:1 approach and in blocks of 4 and blocks or 6 for both groups and was stratified for gender"
Comment: probably done
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk "The individual who carried out the randomization procedure was blinded to the treatment condition"
Comment: probably done
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes Unclear risk No description found in text
Comment: probably not done
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes Unclear risk Attrition was described; differences between completers and non‐completers were not described
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Data fully reported on request