Background and aims: Studies on real-world outcomes in a general chronic pain population are rare. We aimed to assess whether the addition of invasive treatment modalities on selected chronic pain patients had a beneficial impact on the patients' self-reported global impression of a clinically relevant change. 
Methods: The Oslo University Hospital Pain Registry (OPR) is the local registry of the largest university and interdisciplinary outpatient pain clinic in Norway. We analyzed data regarding treatments and 12 month follow-up on 476 patients with complete records. Primary outcome was the Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC).For clinical purpose we converted the original PGIC 7 point Likert scale to a binary outcome: success (clinically significant improvement) and failure (ranging from clinically insignificant improvement to clinically significant deterioration). We included the following independent variables in a logistic regression analysis: work status, pain duration, pain catastrophizing (all three previously shown to impact 12 month follow-up outcomes); ICD-11 diagnosis (primary, secondary, or other pain), invasive treatment modality, interdisciplinary treatment, and treatment frequency. 
Results: Work status, pain duration, pain catastrophizing, and receiving an invasive treatment modality predicted clinical management success. Receiving an invasive treatment modality increased the odds for success with 2.8.
Conclusions: In this study, patients receiving an invasive treatment modality had a substantially increased odd for success. These data are preliminary, and only highly selected patients received this type of treatment. Several of these patients also received interdisciplinary pain treatment. We cannot conclude that invasive treatment is the treatment of choice for most patients.

INVASIVE TREATMENT MODALITIES' IMPACT ON CLINICALLY RELEVANT OUTCOMES AT 12 MONTHS FOLLOW-UP IN A CHRONIC PAIN POPULATION - AN OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL PAIN REGISTRY STUDY