Suppr超能文献

慢性腰痛患者多维疼痛量表亚组的疼痛、功能和应对方式的差异:一项单组前后测研究。

Differences in pain, function and coping in Multidimensional Pain Inventory subgroups of chronic back pain: a one-group pretest-posttest study.

机构信息

Physiotherapy Institute, Bern University Hospital, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.

出版信息

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011 Jun 30;12:145. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-12-145.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patients with non-specific back pain are not a homogeneous group but heterogeneous with regard to their bio-psycho-social impairments. This study examined a sample of 173 highly disabled patients with chronic back pain to find out how the three subgroups based on the Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI) differed in their response to an inpatient pain management program.

METHODS

Subgroup classification was conducted by cluster analysis using MPI subscale scores at entry into the program. At program entry and at discharge after four weeks, participants completed the MPI, the MOS Short Form-36 (SF-36), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ). Pairwise analyses of the score changes of the mentioned outcomes of the three MPI subgroups were performed using the Mann-Whitney-U-test for significance.

RESULTS

Cluster analysis identified three MPI subgroups in this highly disabled sample: a dysfunctional, interpersonally distressed and an adaptive copers subgroup. The dysfunctional subgroup (29% of the sample) showed the highest level of depression in SF-36 mental health (33.4 ± 13.9), the interpersonally distressed subgroup (35% of the sample) a modest level of depression (46.8 ± 20.4), and the adaptive copers subgroup (32% of the sample) the lowest level of depression (57.8 ± 19.1). Significant differences in pain reduction and improvement of mental health and coping were observed across the three MPI subgroups, i.e. the effect sizes for MPI pain reduction were: 0.84 (0.44-1.24) for the dysfunctional subgroup, 1.22 (0.86-1.58) for the adaptive copers subgroup, and 0.53 (0.24-0.81) for the interpersonally distressed subgroup (p = 0.006 for pairwise comparison). Significant score changes between subgroups concerning activities and physical functioning could not be identified.

CONCLUSIONS

MPI subgroup classification showed significant differences in score changes for pain, mental health and coping. These findings underscore the importance of assessing individual differences to understand how patients adjust to chronic back pain.

摘要

背景

非特异性腰痛患者并非同质群体,而是在生物-心理-社会功能障碍方面存在异质性。本研究对 173 名患有慢性腰痛的高度残疾患者进行了样本分析,以了解基于多维疼痛量表(MPI)的三个亚组在对住院疼痛管理方案的反应方面有何不同。

方法

使用入院时 MPI 亚量表评分进行聚类分析对亚组进行分类。在方案开始时和四周后出院时,参与者完成了 MPI、MOS 简短形式 36 项健康调查(SF-36)、医院焦虑和抑郁量表(HADS)和应对策略问卷(CSQ)。使用 Mann-Whitney-U 检验对三个 MPI 亚组的上述结果的评分变化进行两两分析。

结果

聚类分析在该高度残疾样本中确定了三个 MPI 亚组:功能障碍、人际困扰和适应性应对者亚组。功能障碍亚组(样本的 29%)在 SF-36 心理健康方面表现出最高水平的抑郁(33.4±13.9),人际困扰亚组(样本的 35%)表现出适度水平的抑郁(46.8±20.4),适应性应对者亚组(样本的 32%)表现出最低水平的抑郁(57.8±19.1)。在三个 MPI 亚组之间观察到疼痛减轻和心理健康和应对能力改善方面的显著差异,即 MPI 疼痛减轻的效应量分别为:功能障碍亚组为 0.84(0.44-1.24)、适应性应对者亚组为 1.22(0.86-1.58),人际困扰亚组为 0.53(0.24-0.81)(p=0.006 用于两两比较)。在活动和身体功能方面,亚组间的显著评分变化无法确定。

结论

MPI 亚组分类显示疼痛、心理健康和应对方面的评分变化存在显著差异。这些发现强调了评估个体差异以了解患者如何适应慢性腰痛的重要性。

相似文献

5
Fear and avoidance in dysfunctional chronic back pain patients.
Pain. 1997 Feb;69(3):231-236. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(96)03288-5.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

7
Subclassification of low back pain: a cross-country comparison.下背痛的亚分类:一项跨国比较。
Eur Spine J. 2007 Jul;16(7):865-79. doi: 10.1007/s00586-007-0313-2. Epub 2007 Mar 17.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验