Gamified Web-Delivered Attentional Bias Modification Training for Adults With Chronic Pain: Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: Attentional bias to pain-related information has been implicated in pain chronicity. To date, research investigating attentional bias modification training (ABMT) procedures in people with chronic pain has found variable success, perhaps because training paradigms are typically repetitive and monotonous, which could negatively affect engagement and adherence. Increasing engagement through the gamification (ie, the use of game elements) of ABMT may provide the opportunity to overcome some of these barriers. However, ABMT studies applied to the chronic pain field have not yet incorporated gamification elements. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the effects of a gamified web-delivered ABMT intervention in a sample of adults with chronic pain via a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. METHODS: A final sample of 129 adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain, recruited from clinical (hospital outpatient waiting list) and nonclinical (wider community) settings, were included in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 3-arm trial. Participants were randomly assigned to complete 6 web-based sessions of nongamified standard ABMT (n=43), gamified ABMT (n=41), or a control condition (nongamified sham ABMT; n=45) over a period of 3 weeks. Active ABMT conditions trained attention away from pain-related words. The gamified task included a combination of 5 game elements. Participant outcomes were assessed before training, during training, immediately after training, and at 1-month follow-up. Primary outcomes included self-reported and behavioral engagement, pain intensity, and pain interference. Secondary outcomes included anxiety, depression, cognitive biases, and perceived improvement. RESULTS: Results of the linear mixed model analyses suggest that across all conditions, there was an overall small to medium decline in self-reported task-related engagement between sessions 1 and 2 (P<.001; Cohen d=0.257; 95% CI 0.13-0.39), sessions 1 and 3 (P<.001; Cohen d=0.368; 95% CI 0.23-0.50), sessions 1 and 4 (P<.001; Cohen d=0.473; 95% CI 0.34-0.61), sessions 1 and 5 (P<.001; Cohen d=0.488; 95% CI 0.35-0.63), and sessions 1 and 6 (P<.001; Cohen d=0.596; 95% CI 0.46-0.73). There was also an overall small decrease in depressive symptoms from baseline to posttraining assessment (P=.007; Cohen d=0.180; 95% CI 0.05-0.31) and in pain intensity (P=.008; Cohen d=0.180; 95% CI 0.05-0.31) and pain interference (P<.001; Cohen d=0.237; 95% CI 0.10-0.37) from baseline to follow-up assessment. However, no differential effects were observed over time between the 3 conditions on measures of engagement, pain intensity, pain interference, attentional bias, anxiety, depression, interpretation bias, or perceived improvement (all P values>.05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that gamification, in this context, was not effective at enhancing engagement, and they do not support the widespread clinical use of web-delivered ABMT in treating individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain. The implications of these findings are discussed, and future directions for research are suggested. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12620000803998; https://anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12620000803998.aspx. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/32359.