Solomon P, Tunks E
Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy, Mohawk College, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Clin J Pain. 1991 Dec;7(4):300-4. doi: 10.1097/00002508-199112000-00008.
This study examined the extent to which being involved in civil and industrial litigation predicted outcome in an population of chronic pain patients. Data were collected in a structured telephone interview for a litigant group of 80 patients and a nonlitigant group of 47 patients. There were no significant differences in the amount of medication used, the number of hours spent resting per day, or the number of individuals who were able to return to work. Litigants showed significantly higher levels of depression. Multiple regression analyses indicated that litigation was not the primary predictor of downtime or medication use. Litigation was found to be the primary predictor of Zung depression scores. Discriminant function analyses indicated that litigation was not the most important variable in distinguishing between those working and not working. Results lend support to previous studies that suggest that the suspicion and disbelief with which litigating patients are often treated is unfounded.
本研究调查了参与民事和工业诉讼在多大程度上能够预测慢性疼痛患者群体的治疗结果。通过结构化电话访谈收集了数据,涉及80名诉讼患者组和47名非诉讼患者组。在用药量、每天休息时间或能够重返工作岗位的人数方面,两组没有显著差异。诉讼患者的抑郁水平显著更高。多元回归分析表明,诉讼不是停工时间或药物使用的主要预测因素。研究发现,诉讼是zung抑郁评分的主要预测因素。判别函数分析表明,诉讼并非区分在职和非在职人员的最重要变量。研究结果支持了先前的研究,这些研究表明,对待诉讼患者时常常存在的怀疑和不信任是没有根据的。