Cognitive Functional Therapy: what happens in this treatment – Knowledge

1. Why this article?

Cognitive Functional Therapy is a treatment approach for people whose back pain has persisted for months and restricts everyday life. The name is often shortened to the three letters CFT. Our practice offers this approach; you will find it under Back pain.

Anyone hearing the name for the first time will find it hard to work out what actually happens in the treatment. The word “cognitive” leads many people to expect a talking therapy. The word “functional” sounds like exercises. Both capture part of it, and this article explains both parts in detail.

The article answers seven questions:

• What do the three words in the name mean, each on its own?
• Which observations led to the development of this approach?
• Which people is it intended for?
• What happens in the first session, and what in the following ones?
• What do the studies show – and how certain are those results?
• What does the treatment ask of the clinician, and what of you?
• Where are the limits of the approach?

The text addresses people affected and their relatives. Technical terms appear because you will meet them in reports and conversations. Each one is written out and explained at first use. The numbers in square brackets refer to the reference list at the end.

On back pain in general – course, imaging, warning signs, medication – there is a separate detailed article under Understanding back pain. The present text assumes part of that and goes deeper into the treatment instead.

One note in advance: this article does not replace an examination. Which path suits your situation follows from an assessment by a doctor or a physiotherapist, and what is agreed there takes precedence over this text.

2. The name, word by word

The approach was developed in Australia. Its three words describe three things that come together in the treatment.

2.1 “Cognitive” – what you know about your own back

The word “cognitive” comes from the Latin “cognoscere”, meaning “to recognise”, and refers to everything a person thinks, knows, assumes and expects. In the treatment this means your personal picture of your back: what do you consider the cause of your complaints? Which movements do you consider dangerous? What do you expect over the coming months? Which explanations have you heard so far, and which of them make sense to you?

These questions have a practical reason. What a person believes about their back shapes how they move, how much they trust themselves and how much they still undertake in daily life. A woman convinced that her disc could slip out when she bends will lift differently. A man who knows that his back can take load and that the pain will ease moves more freely.

2.2 “Functional” – how you actually move

The word “functional” means “related to function” and here refers to the movements and activities of your everyday life. The treatment looks at how you bend, how you stand up, how you sit, how you lift something, how you turn over in bed. The attention goes to fine details: whether you hold your breath, whether you tighten your abdominal muscles, whether your back stays stiff when you bend, whether you carry out the movement very slowly and carefully.

The approach works on exactly these everyday movements. The exercises therefore differ from person to person, because the activities that are difficult differ from person to person.

2.3 “Therapy” – a treatment with a course

This is a treatment over several sessions with a clear structure: a detailed assessment at the start, then a series of steps that build on each other, and goals that you set yourself. The professional description of the approach comes from a group around Peter O'Sullivan in Perth and was published in 2018 in the journal Physical Therapy [1].

2.4 Putting the name into plain words

A plain description of the name runs like this: a treatment that works at the same time on the understanding of pain and on movement behaviour in everyday life. This description is longer than the name itself, and it states precisely what happens.

3. Where the approach comes from

The development goes back to observations from practice and from research that accumulated over some twenty years.

Back pain is the most common cause of restriction in everyday life worldwide. A review series in the journal The Lancet noted in 2018 that the number of people affected has risen over decades, while at the same time more imaging, more injections and more surgery were being carried out [16]. The review recommended putting the emphasis on explanation, movement and the return to everyday life.

Three observations shaped the approach [1][15]:

• Findings on images and complaints diverge widely. Changes in discs and spinal joints are found in a great many people without any complaints. A single finding therefore rarely explains persistent back pain in full.
• Some people with persistent back pain move measurably differently. This group tenses more muscles, moves more slowly and holds the back stiffer than people without complaints. There is no movement pattern that holds for everyone.
• What someone thinks about their own back predicts the further course better than the finding on the image. Confidence, expectation, fear of movement and worry about the future are clearly associated with what happens next.

From these three points came the idea of building a treatment that addresses all three at once. The first study was carried out in Norway, in collaboration between the University of Bergen and Curtin University in Perth [4]. In our practice the approach was learnt in 2012 from Peter O'Sullivan and in 2017 from Kjartan Vibe Fersum, the two people who led that first study.

4. Who the approach is intended for

Cognitive Functional Therapy was developed for a particular group and tested in that group: adults with back pain that has lasted longer than three months and clearly restricts everyday life [1][2].

“Clearly restricts” means, in the studies: the pain keeps you from activities that matter to you. You work less, you have given up sport or hobbies, you need help with things you used to manage alone, or you plan your day around the pain.

The approach fits particularly well when several of the following apply to you:

• The complaints have lasted for months or years.
• You have already tried various treatments, and each time the benefit was short-lived.
• You avoid certain movements because you fear damage.
• You have heard contradictory explanations for your pain and do not know which to believe.
• You tense up when you move, and you notice it yourself.
• The pain affects your sleep, your mood or your work.

For a fresh, first episode of back pain the usual path is a different one: simple explanation, staying in movement, waiting, and a pain reliever for a limited time if needed. Medication comes with a qualification: paracetamol on its own does little for back pain, and opioids are as a rule avoided. Which medicine is an option for you therefore belongs in the conversation with your doctor; it is covered in detail in the article Understanding back pain. Most of these episodes improve markedly within a few weeks. The more elaborate path through Cognitive Functional Therapy pays off where that simple path has not reached the goal over months.

In some situations other steps come first. Which ones is set out in section 15.

5. What keeps persistent back pain going

To understand where the treatment applies, it helps to look at what keeps back pain running over months. The following description is the reasoning behind the approach [1].

5.1 How a nervous system becomes more sensitive

Pain arises through an interplay: nerve endings in the tissue send signals, the spinal cord passes them on and amplifies or dampens them along the way, and the brain weighs them together with everything else it knows about the situation. At the end of this process stands the sensation you feel.

This system has a property that serves us well in daily life: it adjusts its own sensitivity. After an injury it switches to “look more closely”. The threshold at which a signal arrives as pain drops. This adjustment protects the tissue during the healing phase, because it leads to caution.

In some people this raised sensitivity remains in place beyond the healing time. The technical term for it is sensitisation, from the Latin “sensus” for “sensation”. In practice this means: movements that were unremarkable before now produce pain. The body's feedback grows louder, although no new or progressing tissue damage need be present.

The qualifier “in some people” matters. Demonstrable sensitisation is not found in everyone with persistent back pain, and in the individual case there is no way with today's means to measure how pronounced it is.

Several circumstances are associated with this sensitivity: sustained muscle tension, poor sleep, ongoing worry, high strain at work and low physical activity [15]. Whether these circumstances produce the sensitivity or are in part a consequence of the pain cannot be told apart in the individual person. They influence one another, and that is exactly what makes them sensible points to work on: you can change something about several of them, regardless of which end of the chain they sit at.

5.2 Protective behaviour – what the body does when it guards something

When a body part hurts, a person protects it. This protective behaviour runs largely without a conscious decision and shows itself in the back on several levels. A study that followed twelve people before and after a twelve-week course of Cognitive Functional Therapy, measuring their movements and interviewing them at length, describes these levels one by one [10]. The list below describes common patterns; none of them is found in everyone affected, and some people show conspicuously low muscle activity or a movement strategy entirely their own:

• Muscle tension. In some people the muscles around the trunk stay tense throughout, including in sitting and lying. Those affected often notice this only when someone points it out.
• Stiff movement. The back barely joins in when bending. The movement is taken from the hip and knee instead, and the spine stays like a block.
• Slowness and caution. Every movement is carried out in a controlled way, with high attention and in slow motion.
• Held breath. Before a movement that is expected to hurt, some people briefly hold their breath.
• Avoidance. Certain activities are no longer carried out at all, others only with help or with an aid.
• Constant monitoring. Attention turns to the back again and again, with the question of whether it is getting worse right now.

Over days and weeks, protective behaviour serves its purpose. Over months it has costs. Permanently tensed muscles tire and become painful themselves. A permanently stiff movement pattern is effortful, it reduces the variety of movements available to you, and it reinforces the feeling that the back has to be protected at all times. Avoided activities lead to strength and endurance declining, so that the same activity is even harder the next time. And the constant monitoring of one's own back keeps attention where the pain sits.

5.3 How the circle closes

The individual parts reinforce one another. One possible sequence – which does not run the same way in everyone, and does not appear in full in everyone – looks like this:

1. Back pain begins, often after an overload, sometimes without any recognisable trigger.
2. The pain leads to protective behaviour: tensing, moving stiffly, being careful.
3. An explanation is added that points to damage – a word from a report, a remark, a search on the internet.
4. This explanation strengthens the protective behaviour, because caution now appears sensible.
5. Activities fall away. Strength, endurance and confidence decline.
6. Sleep suffers, mood sinks, worry grows. The nervous system stays sensitive.
7. At the next attempt the same activity hurts more. This appears to confirm the explanation from step 3.

The circle keeps turning, and with every round it tightens. Cognitive Functional Therapy applies at several points of this circle at once: at the explanation, at the protective behaviour and at the activities that have fallen away.

6. The three building blocks

The treatment consists of three parts that interlock [1][2].

6.1 Making sense of your own pain

The technical term is “making sense of pain”. What is meant is an explanation that fits your own history and that convinces you.

This part begins with listening. You describe when the complaints began, what has happened since, what you have tried, what someone has told you, what you fear and what you miss most. From this account and from the physical examination an explanation is then built that is tailored to you.

Such an explanation typically contains several components:

• Which circumstances have come together in your case – physical load, sleep, tension, movement that has fallen away, worry about the future.
• How these circumstances interact and reinforce each other.
• What the findings from images mean in your case and what they leave open.
• Why pain during a movement – provided that examination and course do not point to a new injury or illness – does not by itself indicate new damage.
• At which points of this interplay you can change something.

The explanation is worked out together. Two things help particularly. First, the comparison with your own experience: there are almost always days when the same activity hurts less, and that observation leads somewhere. Second, the test in the treatment room, where you feel directly how a small change to your movement changes the pain. More on that in section 7.3.

6.2 Moving with control

The technical term is “exposure with control”. The first part, exposure, means that you carry out the avoided movement again. The second part, with control, means that you change something about how you do it, so that the movement becomes easier.

Which change helps depends on your own movement behaviour. This point is central and easily skimmed over. The approach knows no movement that would be right for everyone. It looks for the direction that runs counter to the particular protective or avoidance pattern, and for two people with the same diagnosis that direction is often the opposite one.

With one common pattern – the held, stiffly bent back – the changes go in this direction:

• Lowering muscle tension. The abdomen stays soft, the shoulders drop, the jaw relaxes.
• Keeping the breath going. Breathing continues calmly throughout the whole movement.
• Letting the back join in. The spine takes part in the movement again instead of being held as a block.
• Becoming brisker and more casual. The movement runs at normal speed, without special attention.

With other patterns the direction lies elsewhere. Someone who drops into a bend very fast without any tension practises the opposite: more guidance, more involvement of the legs, a calmer pace. Someone who holds one position for hours practises changing it. Someone who avoids a direction of movement altogether approaches that very direction step by step. At no point is this approach a general training of spinal flexion; the four points above are a common example, not a rule.

After that comes progression. It goes in small, manageable steps and follows your goals: first the empty laundry basket, then the half-full one, then the full one; first ten minutes of gardening, then twenty, then half an hour. Every step is tried out before it becomes the rule.

The movements come from your daily life. This is what distinguishes the approach from a fixed exercise sheet that looks the same for everyone. Someone who lifts heavy loads at work practises lifting. Someone who sits for hours works on sitting positions and on breaks. Someone who is afraid of putting on their shoes practises exactly that.

6.3 Everyday habits

The third part concerns the circumstances that keep the sensitivity of the nervous system high [1]:

• Sleep. Too little sleep measurably lowers the pain threshold. Bedtimes, lying positions and dealing with waking at night are discussed.
• Physical activity. Regular movement spread across the day acts on several of the circumstances involved at once. The amount is matched to what is currently possible and then increased.
• Tension and worry. Someone who is tense all day is tense in the back as well. What feeds this tension in your life, and what lowers it, is discussed.
• Work. The return to work or the adjustment of tasks is planned, in steps and with a timeframe.
• Pain medication. Current use is reviewed and adjusted over the course together with the doctor.

This third building block gets less space in the description of the approach than the other two, and in practice it is often the one that tips the balance. Someone who has slept badly for a year makes slower progress with the exercises as long as this point remains unaddressed.

7. How a course of treatment runs

7.1 The first conversation

The first session lasts longer than an ordinary physiotherapy session, often about an hour, and consists largely of questions and listening. The questions cover:

• the course: when it began, how it has developed since, what has got better and what worse;
• the pattern: at which times of day and with which activities the complaints rise and fall;
• your explanations: what you yourself consider the cause, and where that idea comes from;
• findings: which investigations were done, what you were told, which words stayed in your memory;
• your worries: what you fear, which movement you consider dangerous;
• everyday life: work, sleep, movement, demands outside the back;
• your goals: what you would like to do again, named as a concrete activity.

The question about goals matters more than it sounds. A goal such as “less pain” is hard to break into steps. A goal such as “work an hour in the garden without having to lie down for the rest of the day” gives a yardstick against which progress can be read.

Many people describe this first conversation as unusually thorough. The reason is that the explanation which comes out of it can only be as precise as the account it rests on.

7.2 The physical examination

The examination has two tasks. The first is to recognise the rare cases in which a medical assessment takes precedence. These include loss of strength, altered sensation, disturbances of bladder and bowel, fever, unintended weight loss and complaints after a fall. These signs are listed in section 15.

The second task is to look at your movements: how you bend, straighten up, turn, sit down, stand up, lift. The attention goes less to whether a movement looks “correct” and more to which signs of protective behaviour appear – tension, held breath, a back held stiff, a very slow pace.

Some clinicians film individual movements with a phone and then show them to you. This picture surprises many people, because tension feels different from the inside than it looks from the outside.

7.3 The test that shows the difference

The most important part of the first session is a test in the room. It runs in four steps:

1. You carry out a movement that is difficult for you – for example bending forward and touching the floor. You rate the pain on a scale from 0 to 10.
2. You change one single thing about how you do it. Which one follows from what was visible in step 1. With a held back it is often: let the abdominal muscles go, breathe out and let the back round as you bend. With a different pattern it is a different, sometimes the opposite, change.
3. You carry out the same movement again and rate the pain once more.
4. You discuss what you observed.

For many people the second rating comes out lower than the first. This observation is valuable for two reasons. First, you experience directly in your own body that the way a movement is carried out influences the pain. Second, it yields a first step that you can apply in daily life from that moment on.

A study from 2025 measured this connection across a whole course of treatment. In people who bent forward more freely and more quickly during the treatment, threatening appraisals of the pain receded at the same time and confidence in their own way of coping with pain increased [11]. Movement and thinking change together.

7.4 The plan

At the end of the first or second session there is a plan with four components:

• Your explanation – what interacts in your case, in words you would use yourself.
• Two to four movements from your daily life to be worked on first.
• One or two points from everyday habits, usually sleep or daily movement.
• Your goals with a rough timeframe.

The plan is written down so that you can read it again at home.

7.5 The further sessions

In the studies the session numbers ranged from five to eight across eight to twelve weeks, often with a booster session after some months. In the large Australian trial up to seven sessions over twelve weeks were planned plus one session after about half a year [2]. In the Norwegian trial the average was 7.7 sessions over twelve weeks [4].

A typical follow-up session contains:

• a review: what has gone well since last time, what was difficult, was there a setback;
• a check of the movements being worked on;
• the next progression;
• an addition to the explanation from what you have observed yourself in the meantime;
• the next steps until the next appointment.

The larger part of the work lies between the sessions. Practice consists mainly of building the changed way of moving into the activities of the day – tying shoelaces, loading the dishwasher, getting out of the car.

8. What changes in everyday movement

The following examples show what the changes look like in practice. Which of them suit you follows from your examination.

• Picking something up from the floor. Many people bend with a straight back from the hip and hold the abdomen firm. The opposite of this tension is practised: breathe out, let the abdomen soften and let the back round as you bend. For light objects this is an ordinary way of bending that the back tolerates well.
• Getting up from a chair. Often people rise with momentum and held breath, with both hands on the armrests. A calm sequence is practised: breathe out, bring the upper body forward, push with the legs, without stiffening the back.
• Sitting. Many people were taught one particular sitting posture as correct, which they then hold with muscle effort. Changing position is practised instead: a comfortable starting position, then a different one every twenty to thirty minutes, with a brief stand-up in between.
• Turning over in bed. The trunk is often turned as a block, with tensing beforehand. A relaxed roll with continued breathing is practised.
• Carrying something heavy. A build-up in stages is practised: first a light weight over a short distance, then more weight, then a longer distance.
• Walking. With persistent pain, walking often becomes shorter, slower and stiffer. Lengthening it in small steps is practised, with loose arms and calm breathing.

In the study that interviewed people before and after treatment and measured their movements, participants described this change as a shift from guarded to ordinary movement [10]. Several reported that at some point they stopped thinking about their movements, and that they noticed this point only in hindsight.

9. Dealing with setbacks

During such a course of treatment, phases with stronger pain occur. The technical term for them is flare-ups. They belong to the usual course and are discussed in advance, so that they are not read as proof that something has broken.

An agreed way of dealing with them usually contains these points:

• Lower the amount, keep the activity. Instead of stopping an activity altogether, it is carried out for a shorter time, more lightly or more slowly.
• Keep the relaxed way of moving. Precisely during a flare-up the old tension returns easily. Continued breathing and letting go are then particularly effective.
• Expect a timeframe. In practical experience most flare-ups subside within a few days to two weeks. There is no sound figure from research for this, so discuss the timeframe against your own course so far.
• Look back at what came before. Often there is a week with little sleep, an unaccustomed load, a demanding period at work or a combination of these.

What counts as progress in this treatment is therefore not the absence of flare-ups. Progress means that the flare-ups become shorter, that you can do more in between and that a flare-up no longer throws you off course.

10. What the studies show

Several controlled trials of this approach now exist. In a controlled trial, participants are allocated at random to two or more treatments so that the groups are comparable. The results differ, and the reason lies mainly in what the comparison was.

10.1 The first trial from Norway

121 people with back pain lasting longer than three months were randomly allocated to two groups [4]. One group received Cognitive Functional Therapy, the other manual therapy with exercises. Both groups received roughly the same number of sessions, on average 7.7 versus 8.0 over twelve weeks.

Restriction in everyday life was measured with a questionnaire called the Oswestry Index, which runs from 0 to 100; a higher value means greater restriction. After twelve months the group with Cognitive Functional Therapy was 8.2 points better off (95 per cent confidence interval 3.8 to 12.6). For pain on a scale from 0 to 10 the difference was 1.3 points (0.5 to 2.1) in favour of the same group.

The addition “95 per cent confidence interval” states the range within which the true value very probably lies. A narrow range stands for a precise result, a wide range for uncertainty.

The same participants were asked again after three years [5]. The difference remained: 63 out of 100 people in the Cognitive Functional Therapy group had improved to a meaningful degree, compared with 36 out of 100 in the comparison group.

10.2 The large Australian trial

The largest and most elaborate trial so far carries the name RESTORE and was published in 2023 in the journal The Lancet [2]. 492 adults took part, all with back pain lasting longer than three months and clearly restricting everyday life. The treatment took place in 20 ordinary physiotherapy practices in Australia, which speaks for its transferability to everyday practice.

Participants were allocated to three groups:

• usual care, that is, what they would have received anyway (165 people);
• Cognitive Functional Therapy (164 people);
• Cognitive Functional Therapy together with a movement sensor worn on the back, which reports through an application on the phone how much the back is currently moving (163 people).

Up to seven sessions over twelve weeks were planned, plus a booster session after about half a year.

Restriction in everyday life was measured after thirteen weeks with the Roland-Morris questionnaire, which runs from 0 to 24 points; a higher value means greater restriction. The result: the group with Cognitive Functional Therapy was 4.6 points better off than usual care (95 per cent confidence interval 3.4 to 5.9). After twelve months the difference was of similar size.

To put this number in context: 4.6 points lies above several commonly used thresholds for a clinically meaningful difference between groups, and it is among the largest differences reported in this field of research. There is, however, no generally valid threshold: the proposed values depend on the baseline score and on the context. A mean difference between groups also describes something other than the change an individual person notices in themselves.

Further results from the same trial: 82 out of 100 people in the Cognitive Functional Therapy groups were satisfied with their treatment, compared with 19 out of 100 in usual care. The calculation over one year also showed a saving of more than 5000 Australian dollars per person for society, mainly because participants worked more. The additional movement sensor brought no recognisable advantage over the treatment without a sensor.

10.3 Three years later

The same participants were asked again after three years; that analysis appeared in 2025 [3]. The difference persisted, to a somewhat smaller extent: 3.5 points for the group with Cognitive Functional Therapy alone (95 per cent confidence interval 2.0 to 4.9) and 4.1 points for the group with the additional movement sensor (2.6 to 5.6).

The proportions make this more vivid: a clear improvement of at least 5 points was reached after three years by around 62 out of 100 people in the group with Cognitive Functional Therapy alone and around 74 out of 100 in the group with the sensor, compared with around 33 out of 100 in usual care.

The higher proportion in the sensor group deserves a caveat. The trial was designed to test both forms against usual care. The difference between the two Cognitive Functional Therapy groups was small and not clear-cut, and no added benefit of the sensor can be derived from these proportions. What is established is the statement against usual care, and it holds for both forms.

A difference persisting over three years is unusual in back pain research. With most treatments, the differences between groups disappear within the first year.

10.4 The trial against a sham treatment

With a treatment made of conversation and movement, one objection suggests itself: perhaps what works is less the approach itself than the attention, the time and the expectation that come with six hours of personal care. A Brazilian trial tested exactly this objection [17].

152 people with persistent back pain in a public primary care service were randomly allocated to two groups. One received six one-hour sessions of Cognitive Functional Therapy. The other received six equally long individual sessions of a sham treatment: 30 minutes at a laser device that was deliberately switched off and emitted nothing, together with conversation on topics unrelated to back pain or its treatment. Both groups were given the same information booklet.

The design is what makes this trial special. Because the sham treatment looked the same and lasted just as long, neither the participants nor the person doing the assessment knew who had received which treatment. Attention, time and interest were equal in both groups.

After six weeks the group with Cognitive Functional Therapy was 1.8 points better off for pain on the scale from 0 to 10 (95 per cent confidence interval 1.1 to 2.5) and 9.9 points better off for restriction in everyday life on the Oswestry Index from 0 to 100 (6.5 to 13.2). The difference was still present at three and at six months.

The differences therefore cannot be explained by treatment time, attention and general treatment expectations alone. Expectation can never be held perfectly equal, however. What this comparison leaves open: a sham treatment is not a good active treatment. How much the approach adds against an effective alternative is answered by the next section.

10.5 The comparison with other active physiotherapy

This section is decisive for placing the figures above. The comparison group in the Australian trial received “usual care” in Australia. That contained a great deal of passive treatment, medication and imaging and little structured active treatment. A difference against this comparison therefore cannot simply be carried over to the comparison with good active physiotherapy.

A single Brazilian trial studied that comparison [6]. 148 people with persistent back pain received either Cognitive Functional Therapy or a programme of trunk strengthening exercises and manual therapy, in each case five one-hour sessions within eight weeks. After eight weeks the group with Cognitive Functional Therapy was 4.75 points better off for restriction in everyday life on the scale from 0 to 100 (95 per cent confidence interval 1.11 to 8.38). For pain there was no difference. The authors described the difference found for restriction as too small to be noticeable for the individual person.

A single trial with five sessions does not carry that judgement on its own. The 2024 meta-analysis therefore analysed the available trials separately by comparison group [8]. Against other active treatments – exercise programmes, manual therapy, education – the following differences emerged for restriction in everyday life, each on a scale from 0 to 100:

• short term 9.5 points (95 per cent confidence interval 5.0 to 14.0), moderate certainty;
• medium term 9.1 points (5.4 to 12.8), moderate certainty;
• long term 5.3 points (1.3 to 9.2), moderate certainty.

For pain the picture was less consistent: 14.7 points short term and 13.4 points medium term, both with low certainty, and 4.7 points long term with a confidence interval that includes zero – so no established difference there.

This gives a more precise picture than a single trial allows. Against other active treatments the additional benefit is smaller and less consistent than against usual care. It shows most steadily for everyday function, where it is present across all three time frames and decreases over time. For pain it shows in the medium term and fades in the long term. Whether a difference of this size becomes noticeable for you personally stays open.

For the decision in an individual case this means: a substantial part of the benefit is likely to be connected with the move to an active treatment that builds on your own confidence. That connection was not tested directly in the trials named here – it follows from comparing their results. Cognitive Functional Therapy is a particularly well-studied, individually tailored form of such an approach, and against other active routes it has a certain edge for everyday function.

10.6 How the overall picture has changed

A summary of all studies on one question is called a systematic review; when the numbers are combined statistically, it is called a meta-analysis. Two such papers on this approach appeared shortly after one another and reach different conclusions. The reason is instructive.

The first appeared in May 2023 and reached a cautious conclusion: the available trials were small and methodologically open to criticism, and the effectiveness would remain very uncertain until better trials were available [7]. That paper was completed before the results of the large Australian trial were published.

The second appeared in 2024 and included that trial [8]. It combined seven trials with a total of 1011 participants. Calculated across all comparison groups together, over the medium term of some months there was a difference in pain of 13.7 points on a scale from 0 to 100 (95 per cent confidence interval 9.3 to 18.2) and in restriction in everyday life a difference of 10.6 points (6.6 to 14.6), each with moderate certainty. Over the longer term a difference of 8.8 points in restriction remained (1.8 to 15.9), here with low certainty. These overall figures mix usual care and active treatments; split by comparison group they are in section 10.5.

One other value came out as the most stable: confidence in one's own way of coping with pain, in technical language pain self-efficacy. Here the difference was 12.3 points over the medium and 12.5 points over the long term, and this result was rated by the paper as of high certainty.

The certainty rating comes from an established appraisal procedure and states how stable a result is likely to be against new studies. “High” means that a further trial will hardly shift the picture. “Low” means that the picture may still change.

10.7 What the difference hangs on

An analysis of the Australian trial pursued the question of how the effect might come about [9]. It examined which changes come before the improvement in time, and how much of the total difference can be accounted for through them statistically. This kind of analysis is called a mediation analysis.

Four quantities proved to carry the effect:

• confidence in one's own way of coping with pain;
• fear of movement and loading;
• threatening appraisals of the pain, in technical language catastrophising – meaning the expectation of the worst possible outcome;
• pain intensity itself.

Changes in these four quantities preceded the improvement in restriction and statistically accounted for up to 61 per cent of the total difference. For pain, confidence, fear and catastrophising came to up to 62 per cent.

How far does this finding carry? A mediation analysis shows that a large part of the effect can be mapped onto these quantities and that their change came first in time. It does not prove that they cause the effect – even the temporal order does not rule out a further, unmeasured quantity moving both. The finding supports these four as plausible routes of action and fits the way the approach is built, which is aimed at exactly them. Part of the difference also remains unaccounted for, which is a usual finding in such analyses.

10.8 Beyond the back

The approach was developed for back pain, and that is where most of the evidence lies. Early trials are testing it for other complaints.

A trial from Brazil studied 80 people with persistent back pain after spinal surgery [12]. The comparison was again with trunk strengthening exercises and manual therapy, with 4 to 12 sessions over a maximum of twelve weeks. After the treatment the group with Cognitive Functional Therapy was 2.42 points better off for pain on the scale from 0 to 10 (95 per cent confidence interval 1.69 to 3.14), and for everyday function there was a difference with a large effect size. After 22 weeks the difference was still present, to a somewhat smaller extent.

For complaints at the shoulder, neck or knee, trials are under way. As long as their results are missing, use in those areas rests on the similarity of the complaint patterns rather than on evidence of its own.

11. What the treatment asks of the clinician

This point belongs in an article for people affected, because it shapes what you may expect and where you will find the approach.

The physiotherapists in the Australian trial were experienced professionals with at least two years of experience in treating back pain. Even so, they went through around 80 hours of training over half a year, with courses, with supervised treatments of real patients and with feedback on their own sessions. At the end came an assessment of competence, and not all participants reached that threshold within the six months [13].

Interviews with the clinicians involved describe the change as demanding [14]. The shift concerns listening, the conduct of the conversation and letting go of the familiar role in which the clinician does something to the patient.

Two practical conclusions follow for you. First, the number of clinicians with this training is limited. Second, the name alone says nothing about the depth of training; asking about courses and years is a factual and ordinary question.

12. What the treatment asks of you

The approach requires active participation, and this participation looks different from a treatment in which you lie on a couch.

• Time for the conversation. The first session is long, and part of it consists of personal questions about sleep, work and demands.
• Willingness to observe yourself. Between the sessions you pay attention to when you tense up, when you hold your breath and what preceded a worse day.
• Practice in everyday life. The work takes place mostly at home, spread across many small opportunities during the day.
• Persistence over weeks. First changes often show in the first sessions; a sound judgement becomes possible after eight to twelve weeks.
• Willingness to examine an existing explanation. If you have heard for years that your disc is the cause, it takes time to test that idea against your own observations.

The last point deserves a clarification. Your existing explanation is not treated as a mistake. It is usually the summary of what professionals have told you, and until now it has been the best explanation available. The treatment places a more detailed explanation alongside it and tests both against what you observe in your own daily life.

13. Limits and open questions

A complete picture belongs to an honest account. Five points limit what the evidence so far can say.

• Participants and clinicians usually cannot be blinded. In a trial such as the Australian one, both know which treatment is running. Expectations and non-specific treatment effects can therefore influence the self-reported results; how large that share is cannot be determined from such trials. The Brazilian sham-controlled trial [17] does show, however, that blinding participants is feasible with this approach and that a difference remains even then.
• A large share of the trials comes from the research groups that developed the approach. Independent work by other groups now exists – the Brazilian trials [6][12][17] are among them – but their number is still small.
• The comparison determines the result. Against care with little active treatment the difference is large; against other active treatments it is smaller and less consistent, and steadiest for everyday function [2][8].
• Not everyone improves. In the Australian trial around a third of those treated had not reached a clear improvement after three years [3]. Who will benefit cannot yet be predicted in advance.
• Transfer into routine care is open. The training is demanding, the number of trainers is limited, and the session lengths in the trials exceed what many funding systems provide for [13].

These points argue against expecting a procedure with a certain outcome. They argue for placing the approach as a well-tested option, followed up over three years, whose effect in the individual case stays open until it has been tried.

14. Four questions of placement

14.1 “Does this mean my pain comes from my head?”

Many people ask this, and it deserves a full answer.

All pain arises through the work of the nervous system. A cut in the finger hurts because nerve endings in the skin send signals, the spinal cord passes them on and the brain weighs them. This pathway is the same for every pain, whether it lasts two minutes or two years. What you feel arises at the end of this pathway and has a place in the body where you perceive it.

With persistent pain, something about this pathway changes. The amplification in the spinal cord increases, the threshold drops, and more signals arrive as pain. This change is physical, it is measurable, and it happens without any doing on your part.

Cognitive Functional Therapy addresses the circumstances that keep this amplification high: sustained muscle tension, sleep, activity, attention and worry. Each of these circumstances acts on the sensitivity of the system through demonstrable physical routes. The approach thus treats a physical process through levers you can reach.

The question of whether someone is imagining their pain does not arise at any point within this framework.

14.2 “Is this psychotherapy?”

The approach is delivered by physiotherapists and works on movements, activities and the understanding of musculoskeletal complaints. The conversations revolve around your back, your daily life and your movements.

For the treatment of depression, an anxiety disorder or the consequences of a distressing experience, psychotherapists are the right professionals. If it becomes clear during the course that such treatment is indicated, pointing this out is part of the physiotherapist's task. The two treatments then run alongside each other.

14.3 “Do I get exercises?”

Yes, and they look different from a sheet with five strengthening exercises. The emphasis lies on everyday movements carried out in a changed way, spread across many short opportunities during the day.

Strength and endurance training are often added once the most painful movements are manageable again. Both are well established for persistent back pain and described in detail in our article on strength training.

14.4 “Do I still get manual therapy or massage?”

Hands-on techniques at the spine and massage have a short-lived benefit for pain. Within this approach they are used sparingly, mostly to make a movement possible that is then practised shortly afterwards.

The reason for this restraint lies in the aim of the treatment: at the end you should have means at your disposal that you can apply yourself. Regular treatment that someone carries out on you works against that aim. On the effects of massage there is a separate article under Massage.

15. When other steps come first

With the following signs, a medical assessment comes before any treatment decision. They are rare, and they change the approach completely [15].

Seek medical assessment immediately:

• Numbness in the area between the legs, in the sitting area or on the inner thighs.
• New difficulty passing urine, or trouble holding urine or stool.
• Increasing weakness in one leg or both legs.
• Severe back pain after a fall or accident.
• Fever together with back pain.

Arrange an appointment within the next few days:

• Unintended weight loss, or a history of cancer, together with new back pain.
• Back pain that is severe at night and does not ease when lying down.
• Morning stiffness lasting over an hour, particularly with onset before the age of 45.
• Treatment with corticosteroids over a longer period, or known osteoporosis, together with new pain.

These signs do not argue against the approach. They show that what is going on has to be clarified first.

16. How to prepare for the first conversation

You can give the first session a good start with little effort.

• Note down three activities you would like to do again, as precisely as possible. “Sit on the floor with the grandchildren and get up again” leads further than “become more mobile”.
• Record for a week when the complaints rise and when they fall, together with the sleep of the night in question.
• Bring any reports you have, and write down the sentences from them that stayed in your memory.
• Write down your fears. Which movement do you avoid, and what do you expect if you do it anyway?
• List what you have tried, with the result in each case and how long it lasted.
• Note your medication, including over-the-counter products and how often you take them.

This information shortens the assessment and makes the resulting explanation more precise.

17. Ten misunderstandings

• “This is talking therapy for back pain.” The conversation takes up much room in the first session. A substantial part of the treatment consists of movement, of everyday activities and of stepwise progression [1].
• “So my pain is imaginary.” The approach works on physical processes: muscle tension, the sensitivity of the nervous system, sleep and capacity. Imagination is assumed at no point [1].
• “There is one correct lifting technique I have to learn.” A single technique correct for everyone could not be established in research. A broader range of options is practised, so that you have several ways available [15].
• “If it hurts while I practise, I am damaging something.” Temporary pain belongs to the course of this approach. The rule of thumb for progression is that complaints return to their starting level within a day. This rule has proved useful in practice; it is not a scientifically validated threshold.
• “Success means the pain is gone.” What the trials measure first is what you can do again in daily life. Pain intensity often improves as well, to a smaller extent [2][8].
• “It works for everyone.” In the three-year analysis around a third of those treated had not reached a clear improvement [3].
• “The movement sensor is the decisive part.” The additional sensor brought no recognisable advantage over the treatment without a sensor [2].
• “This replaces strength training.” Strength and endurance training are added over the course, once the most painful movements are manageable again.
• “Any physiotherapist can offer this if they know the name.” The clinicians in the large trial went through around 80 hours of training over half a year with an assessment at the end [13].
• “A flare-up means the treatment has failed.” Flare-ups occur during the course. Progress means that they become shorter and that you can do more between them [10].

18. When to get in touch

During an ongoing course of treatment, the following observations belong in the conversation:

• One of the signs from section 15 appears anew. In that case contact a doctor immediately.
• A flare-up lasts longer than two to three weeks.
• After eight to twelve weeks of careful application, nothing has changed in what you can do in daily life.
• The agreed steps cannot be put into practice, for whatever reason. A plan that does not fit your daily life gets changed.
• The explanation you were given does not convince you. An explanation you do not share will not change your behaviour, and this point belongs out in the open.
• Mood, sleep or drive deteriorate markedly.

19. In summary

Cognitive Functional Therapy is a treatment for adults whose back pain has persisted for months and restricts everyday life. It combines three parts: an explanation of one's own pain that fits one's own history; the stepwise return to avoided movements carried out in a relaxed way; and work on sleep, activity, tension and the work situation.

The course begins with a detailed conversation and an examination in which your movements are observed. A test in the treatment room shows you directly how a small change in the way you move changes the pain. Which change that is follows from your own movement behaviour and often runs in opposite directions for two people. From this comes a plan with your own goals. Five to eight sessions over eight to twelve weeks are usual, and the larger part of the work takes place between the sessions.

For a physiotherapy approach, the evidence is extensive. The largest trial with 492 participants found a difference of 4.6 points against usual care on a questionnaire running from 0 to 24 points, and this difference was still present after three years. A Brazilian sham-controlled trial, in which neither participants nor assessors knew who received what, also found a difference – so attention and expectation alone do not explain the effect.

Against other active treatments the additional benefit is smaller and less consistent than against usual care. It shows most steadily for everyday function, where it persists across short, medium and long time frames while decreasing; for pain it fades in the long term. A substantial part of the benefit is therefore likely to be connected with the move to an active treatment that builds on your own confidence; that was not tested directly. Cognitive Functional Therapy is a particularly well-studied, individually tailored form of such an approach.

The plausible routes of action were confidence in one's own way of coping with pain, the decrease in fear of movement and the decline of threatening appraisals of the pain. A large part of the measured difference could be mapped onto these three quantities statistically; that is not proof that they cause it.

The limits are named: participants and clinicians cannot be blinded in most of these trials, a large share of the trials comes from the developing groups, around a third of those treated did not reach a clear improvement, and the training of clinicians is demanding.

What you can influence most is the regularity with which you build the changed way of moving into your day, the patience over eight to twelve weeks and the willingness to take your own observations seriously. Those observations are exactly the material from which progress in this treatment is made.

References

All Digital Object Identifiers (DOI) were individually checked against the Crossref register in August 2026. The links in the reference list lead through the DOI service to the publishers' pages. Some of these are located outside Switzerland and the EU. When you click, your IP address is transmitted to the respective provider – on our own site this does not happen.

[1] O'Sullivan PB, Caneiro JP, O'Keeffe M, Smith A, Dankaerts W, Fersum K, O'Sullivan K. Cognitive Functional Therapy: An Integrated Behavioral Approach for the Targeted Management of Disabling Low Back Pain. Physical Therapy. 2018;98(5):408–423. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzy022

[2] Kent P, Haines T, O'Sullivan P, et al. Cognitive functional therapy with or without movement sensor biofeedback versus usual care for chronic, disabling low back pain (RESTORE): a randomised, controlled, three-arm, parallel group, phase 3, clinical trial. The Lancet. 2023;401(10391):1866–1877. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(23)00441-5

[3] Hancock M, Smith A, O'Sullivan P, et al. Cognitive functional therapy with or without movement sensor biofeedback versus usual care for chronic, disabling low back pain (RESTORE): 3-year follow-up of a randomised, controlled trial. The Lancet Rheumatology. 2025;7(11):e789–e798. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2665-9913(25)00135-3

[4] Vibe Fersum K, O'Sullivan P, Skouen JS, Smith A, Kvåle A. Efficacy of classification-based cognitive functional therapy in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial. European Journal of Pain. 2013;17(6):916–928. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1532-2149.2012.00252.x

[5] Vibe Fersum K, Smith A, Kvåle A, Skouen JS, O'Sullivan P. Cognitive functional therapy in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain—a randomized controlled trial 3-year follow-up. European Journal of Pain. 2019;23(8):1416–1424. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejp.1399

[6] Castro J, Correia L, Donato BS, et al. Cognitive functional therapy compared with core exercise and manual therapy in patients with chronic low back pain: randomised controlled trial. Pain. 2022;163(12):2430–2437. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002644

[7] Devonshire JJ, Wewege MA, Hansford HJ, Odemis HA, Wand BM, Jones MD, McAuley JH. Effectiveness of Cognitive Functional Therapy for Reducing Pain and Disability in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. 2023;53(5):244–285. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2023.11447

[8] Thiveos L, Kent P, Pocovi NC, O'Sullivan P, Hancock MJ. Cognitive Functional Therapy for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Physical Therapy. 2024;104(12):pzae128. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzae128

[9] Schütze R, Liew B, Caneiro JP, et al. Mechanisms of change in cognitive functional therapy: A longitudinal mediation analysis of the RESTORE clinical trial for disabling chronic low back pain. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 2025;193:104853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2025.104853

[10] Wernli K, Smith A, Coll F, Campbell A, Kent P, O'Sullivan P. From protection to non-protection: A mixed methods study investigating movement, posture and recovery from disabling low back pain. European Journal of Pain. 2022;26(10):2097–2119. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejp.2022

[11] Chang R, Campbell A, Kent P, O'Sullivan P, Hancock M, Hoffman L, Smith A. Relationships Between Changes in Forward Bending, Pain Catastrophizing, and Pain Self-Efficacy During Cognitive Functional Therapy for People With Chronic Low Back Pain. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. 2025;55(4):284–294. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2025.13114

[12] Avila L, da Silva MD, Neves ML, et al. Effectiveness of Cognitive Functional Therapy Versus Core Exercises and Manual Therapy in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain After Spinal Surgery: Randomized Controlled Trial. Physical Therapy. 2024;104(1):pzad105. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzad105

[13] Simpson P, Holopainen R, Schütze R, O'Sullivan P, Smith A, Kent P. Becoming confidently competent: a qualitative investigation of training in cognitive functional therapy for persistent low back pain. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice. 2024;40(4):804–816. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2022.2151333

[14] Simpson P, Holopainen R, Schütze R, O'Sullivan P, Kent P, Smith A. “Every patient teaches you something new”: experiences of physiotherapists delivering cognitive functional therapy for chronic, disabling low back pain in a randomised controlled trial. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2025;47(13):3375–3383. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2024.2420836

[15] O'Sullivan PB, Caneiro J, O'Sullivan K, Lin I, Bunzli S, Wernli K, O'Keeffe M. Back to basics: 10 facts every person should know about back pain. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2020;54(12):698–699. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2019-101611

[16] Foster NE, Anema JR, Cherkin D, et al. Prevention and treatment of low back pain: evidence, challenges, and promising directions. The Lancet. 2018;391(10137):2368–2383. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30489-6

[17] de Lira MR, Meziat-Filho N, Zuelli Martins Silva G, Castro J, Fernandez J, Guirro RRJ, Berg R, Chaves TC. Efficacy of cognitive functional therapy for pain intensity and disability in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain: a randomised sham-controlled trial. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2025;59(13):912–920. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2024-109012