Piloting of Augmented Reality-Based Psychoeducation with Mindfulness Intervention for Chronic Low Back Pain
Robin Conen, Nikolai Hepke, Jörg Lohscheller, Steffen Mueller, Ana N. Tibubos
Cognitive Therapy and Research May 28, 2026 DOI: 10.1007/s10608-026-10752-z (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Pilot study, randomized controlled trial Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 44 |
| Population | Adults with mild chronic low back pain (pain intensity < 4 on a 1-10 scale) |
| Topics | Meditation |
| Key findings | Both the AR and conventional interventions significantly reduced pain intensity, pain catastrophizing, and stress, with no significant between-group differences. Self-efficacy and depression symptoms did not change. The AR intervention was deemed feasible and acceptable, but efficacy remains inconclusive. |
Abstract
Abstract Background Chronic low back pain (CLBP) affects many globally. This study explored potential effects of an augmented reality (AR) intervention combining psychoeducation and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR)-body scan. The pilot study investigated pain intensity and pain-related outcomes, focusing on AR intervention versus conventional methods, aiming to establish a foundation for future confirmatory trials.
Methods: In a pilot study, an AR intervention was compared to a conventional intervention of equivalent duration and content. A two-way mixed-design ANOVA (time: pre vs. post) with one between-subjects factor (group: IG vs. CG) was performed. The AR intervention group (IG) used Microsoft HoloLens 2 for psychoeducation and an MBSR-body scan in a simulated forest; the control group (CG) read a corresponding psychoeducational text and listened to MBSR audio. The primary outcome was pain intensity; secondary outcomes were catastrophizing, self-efficacy, stress, and depression symptoms. Forty-four participants with mild CLBP (< ;4; scale 1–10) were in IG (n 1 = 22, men = 9, women = 13; M age = 39.63, range = 20–67) and CG (n 2 = 22, men = 6, women = 16; M age = 41.81, range = 21–70).
Results: Pain intensity (F(1,42) = 29.783, p = 0.001, n 2 p = 0.415), pain catastrophizing (F(1,42) = 27.954, p < 0.001, n 2 p = 0.400), and stress (F(1,42) = 20.656, p < 0.001, n 2 p = 0.335) decreased in both groups. Self-efficacy (F(1,42) = 0.293, p = 0.591, n 2 p = 0.07) and depression (F(1,42) = 0.796, p = 0.377, n 2 p = 0.019) remained unchanged. No significant time × group interaction effects were observed.
Discussion: In this exploratory pilot study, results show reduced pain intensity and pain-related outcomes in both groups, with no differences between them. Conclusions about the AR intervention’s efficacy cannot be drawn, but findings indicate responsiveness in both interventions. The AR intervention appears feasible and acceptable, encouraging further investigations.
Trial Registration: Open Science Framework: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/XVJBZ