The purpose of this study is to examine the feasibility, acceptability, preliminary effects, and candidate gut-brain mechanisms of an optimized positive psychology (PP) intervention for patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), entitled "WISH," compared to an educational control intervention.
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), a disorder of gut-brain interaction (DGBI; also known as functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorder) is characterized by abdominal pain and altered bowel habits, and conceptualized as resulting from complex interactions between biological, psychological, and social factors. Compared to healthy populations, individuals with IBS have reduced positive psychological well-being, which in turn has been associated with impaired physical health, greater depression and anxiety, and worse health-related quality of life. A growing body of evidence supports the use of behavioral health interventions, referred to as brain-gut behavior therapies (BGBTs), as part of a comprehensive treatment approach for IBS. There is a critical need for new BGBTs for IBS that are scalable, acceptable, and mechanistically targeted. Positive psychology (PP) interventions have successfully been implemented in a variety of other chronic medical conditions to improve well-being, health-related quality of life, health behavior engagement, and health outcomes. PP interventions are typically highly acceptable and easily delivered remotely without extensive specialized training, which increases their scalability and reach. Aside from the investigator's preliminary proof-of-concept work, however, PP interventions have not been evaluated in IBS. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to examine the feasibility, acceptability, preliminary efficacy, and candidate gut-brain mechanisms of an optimized, 9-week, phone-delivered, PP intervention for patients with IBS, entitled "Well-being in IBS: Strengths and Happiness (WISH)," compared to a time-and attention-matched educational control intervention. The primary aims of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) are to determine feasibility (at least 50% of participants completing at least 6/9 PP sessions) and acceptability (mean ease and utility ratings for each session of at least 7/10). The exploratory aims of this RCT are to examine: (1) preliminary effects of the PP intervention in improving health-related (IBS symptom severity, health-related quality of life, and IBS diagnostic criteria), psychological (positive affect, optimism, resilience, self-efficacy, depression, anxiety, GI symptom-specific anxiety, response to pain, and perceived stress), and health behavior (physical activity, avoidant/restrictive eating) outcomes; and (2) candidate gut-brain mechanisms of the PP intervention including changes in autonomic function (as measured by heart-rate variability), interoception, stress-mediated gene expression, and immune system activity.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
50
This is an adapted, optimized, phone-based, 9-week positive psychology (PP) intervention. Participants will complete 9 weekly phone sessions (30 minutes each) with a study interventionist in which they will review PP exercises that they have independently completed in between phone sessions. The PP exercises will be completed in a treatment manual that describes the PP exercise and provides space to write about the exercise and its effects, and to answer associated questions. A total of 9 sessions will be completed over the course of the program.
This is an educational intervention that will match the PP intervention in terms of both time and attention. Participants will complete 9 weekly phone sessions (30 minutes each) with a study interventionist in which they will review educational exercises that they have independently completed in between phone sessions. The exercises will be completed in a treatment manual that describes the exercise and provides space to write about the exercise and its effects, and to answer associated questions. A total of 9 sessions will be completed over the course of the program.
Massachusetts General Hospital
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
RECRUITINGProportion of Intervention Sessions Completed by Participants
Feasibility will be measured by the proportion of intervention sessions completed by participants. The intervention will be considered feasible if at least 50% of participants complete at least 6/9 sessions.
Time frame: Post-intervention at 9 weeks
Ease of Weekly Exercises
Participants will provide ratings of ease after each weekly exercise, measured on a 10-point Likert scale (0=very difficult, 10=very easy).
Time frame: Weekly during intervention (weeks 1-8) and post-intervention (week 9)
Utility of Weekly Exercises
Participants will provide ratings of utility after each weekly exercise, measured on a 10-point Likert scale (0=not at all helpful; 10=very helpful).
Time frame: Weekly during intervention (weeks 1-8) and post-intervention (week 9)
Immediate Impact of the Exercises: Change in Optimism Ratings
Participants will provide ratings of optimism before and after each positive psychology exercise, measured on a 10-point Likert scale (0-10). Higher scores indicate higher levels of optimism.
Time frame: Weeks 1-9
Immediate Impact of the Exercises: Change in Happiness Ratings
Participants will provide ratings of happiness before and after each positive psychology exercise, measured on a 10-point Likert scale (0-10). Higher scores indicate higher levels of happiness.
Time frame: Weeks 1-9
Immediate Impact of the Exercises: Change in IBS Knowledge Ratings
Participants will provide ratings of knowledge about IBS before and after each educational exercise, measured on a 10-point Likert scale (0-10). Higher scores indicate higher levels of knowledge.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Time frame: Weeks 1-9
Change in IBS Symptom Severity
Measured by the IBS symptom severity score (IBS-SSS) (Range 0-500). This is a validated disease-specific instrument that measures IBS symptom severity. Higher scores indicate more severe symptoms.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in IBS Health-Related Quality of Life
Measured by the IBS Quality of Life (IBS-QOL) score (Range: 0-100), a validated disease-specific instrument measuring quality of life. Higher scores indicate better IBS-specific quality of life.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Rome IV Diagnostic Criteria for IBS
Measured by the The Rome-IV Diagnostic Questionnaire - IBS Module, which is a validated disease-specific instrument used to screen for IBS diagnostic criteria and to provide a provisional (yes/no) diagnosis of IBS. To meet criteria for IBS, the following are required for the past 3 months: (1) recurrent abdominal pain at least weekly; (2) pain associated with 2 or more of the following criteria: a) related to defecation at least 30% of occasions; b) associated with change in stool frequency at least 30% of occasions; c) associated with change in stool form at least 30% of occasions; and (3) symptom onset at least 6 months prior to diagnosis.
Time frame: At prescreening (prior to baseline), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Positive Affect
Measured with the positive affect items on the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), a well-validated scale used in other intervention trials and in patients with medical illnesses (Range: 10-50). Higher scores indicate higher levels of positive affect.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Dispositional Optimism
Measured with the Life Orientation Test-Revised (LOT-R), a well-validated 6-item instrument used to measure dispositional optimism (Range: 0-24). Higher scores indicate higher levels of optimism.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in State Optimism
Measured with the Brief State Optimism Measure (B-SOM), a validated 2-item instrument used to measure state optimism (Range: 0-100 for each item). Higher scores indicate greater state optimism.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Resilience
Measured by the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) (Range: 6-30), a reliable 6-item measure of the ability to "bounce back" or recover from stress. Higher scores reflect greater bounce back resilience.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Self-Efficacy
Measured by the General Self-Efficacy (GSE) Scale (Range: 10-40), a 10-item validated measure of self-efficacy, defined as an individual's perception of their ability to succeed at a task or achieve a goal. Higher scores indicate greater self-efficacy.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Depression
Measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)-depression subscale. This is a well-validated scale with few somatic symptom items that can confound mood/anxiety assessment in medically-ill patients (Range: 0-21). Higher scores indicate higher levels of depression.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Anxiety
Measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)-anxiety subscale. This is a well-validated scale with few somatic symptom items that can confound mood/anxiety assessment in medically-ill patients (Range: 0-21). Higher scores indicate higher levels of anxiety.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Gastrointestinal (GI) Symptom-Specific Anxiety
Measured by the Visceral Sensitivity Index (VSI) score, a validated self-report measure of anxiety specific to visceral sensations (Range: 0-75). Higher scores indicate higher levels of GI-specific anxiety.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Response to Pain
Measured by the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), a widely used tool to assess cognitive and affective responses to pain (Range: 0-52). Higher scores indicate higher levels of pain-related anxiety.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Perceived Stress
Measured by the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) (Range: 0-40), a validated measure to assess perceived levels of stress. Higher scores indicate higher perceived stress.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Self-Reported Physical Activity
Measured by the self-report International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) Short Form. This 7-item measure assesses self-reported physical activity from the preceding 7 days. All activities are converted to multiples of resting energy expenditure (MET) minutes per week. Higher scores reflect higher levels of physical activity.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Avoidant and Restrictive Eating
Measured by the Nine Item Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder screen (NIAS) (Range: 0-45), a validated tool to assess avoidant/restrictive eating patterns. Higher scores indicate higher levels of avoidant/restrictive eating patterns.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Interoception
The Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness-Version 2 (MAIA-2) is a validated measure of interoception, defined as an awareness of internal bodily sensations (Range: 0-185). Higher scores indicate a higher level of interoceptive bodily awareness.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1), at the mid-point of the intervention (week 5), post-intervention (week 9), and 3-months post-intervention (week 21)
Change in Autonomic Function
Heart-rate variability measurements will be collected to explore changes in autonomic function related to the intervention.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1) and post-intervention (week 9)
Change in Stress-Mediated Gene Expression
Whole transcriptome analysis of blood samples by RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) will be completed to explore gene expression changes related to the intervention.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1) and post-intervention (week 9)
Change in Serum Cytokine Levels
Serum cytokine levels will be assessed to explore changes in immune system activity related to the intervention.
Time frame: At baseline (week 1) and post-intervention (week 9)
Treatment Credibility
The Credibility sub-scale (Range: 3-27) of the Credibility/Expectancy Questionnaire (CEQ) will be used to compare treatment credibility between conditions. Higher scores indicate higher treatment credibility.
Time frame: Week 1 (after first phone session)
Treatment Expectancy
The Expectancy sub-scale (Range: 3-27) of the Credibility/Expectancy Questionnaire (CEQ) will be used to compare treatment expectancy between conditions. Higher scores indicate higher treatment expectancy.
Time frame: Week 1 (after first phone session)