Suppr超能文献

应对实验性疼痛的接受和分散策略比较。

Comparison of acceptance and distraction strategies in coping with experimentally induced pain.

机构信息

School of Psychology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.

Department of Psychology, National University of Ireland, Maynooth, Ireland.

出版信息

J Pain Res. 2015 Mar 17;8:139-51. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S58559. eCollection 2015.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study compared an acceptance-based strategy with a control-based strategy (distraction) in terms of the ability of participants to tolerate a painful stimulus, across two experiments. In addition, participants were either actively encouraged, or not, to link pain tolerance with pursuit of valued goals to examine the impact of pursuing a personally meaningful goal or value on the extent to which pain will be tolerated.

METHODS

Participants in experiment 1 (n=41) and experiment 2 (n=52) were equally assigned to acceptance or distraction protocols. Further, half the participants in each group generated examples from their own lives in which they had pursued a valued objective, while the other half did not. In experiment 2, the values focus was enhanced to examine the impact on pain tolerance.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences overall between the acceptance and distraction groups on pain tolerance in either experiment. However, in experiment 2, individuals classified as accepting in terms of general coping style and who were assigned to the acceptance strategy showed significantly better pain tolerance than accepting individuals who were in the distraction condition. Across both experiments, those with strong goal-driven values in both protocols were more tolerant of pain. Participants appeared to have more difficulty adhering to acceptance than to distraction as a strategy.

CONCLUSION

Acceptance may be associated with better tolerance of pain, but may also be more difficult to operationalize than distraction in experimental studies. Matching coping style and coping strategy may be most effective, and enhancement of goal-driven values may assist in pain coping.

摘要

背景

本研究在两项实验中比较了基于接纳的策略和基于控制的策略(分心)在参与者忍受疼痛刺激的能力方面的差异。此外,参与者被积极鼓励或不鼓励将疼痛耐受与追求有价值的目标联系起来,以检验追求个人有意义的目标或价值观对耐受疼痛程度的影响。

方法

实验 1(n=41)和实验 2(n=52)的参与者被平均分配到接纳或分心协议组。此外,每组有一半的参与者从自己的生活中生成了追求有价值目标的例子,而另一半则没有。在实验 2 中,价值观焦点得到了增强,以检验其对疼痛耐受的影响。

结果

在两项实验中,接纳组和分心组在疼痛耐受方面总体上没有显著差异。然而,在实验 2 中,一般应对方式被归类为接纳的个体,并且被分配到接纳策略的个体,与处于分心状态的接纳个体相比,具有更好的疼痛耐受能力。在两项实验中,在两个方案中都具有强烈目标驱动价值观的个体对疼痛的耐受性更强。与分心相比,参与者似乎更难以接受接纳作为一种策略。

结论

接纳可能与更好的疼痛耐受能力相关,但在实验研究中,可能比分心更难以实施。匹配应对方式和应对策略可能是最有效的,增强目标驱动的价值观可能有助于应对疼痛。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c74d/4370922/fa1cc055c93d/jpr-8-139Fig1.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparison of acceptance and distraction strategies in coping with experimentally induced pain.
J Pain Res. 2015 Mar 17;8:139-51. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S58559. eCollection 2015.
2
Coping when pain is a potential threat: the efficacy of acceptance versus cognitive distraction.
Eur J Pain. 2012 Mar;16(3):390-400. doi: 10.1002/j.1532-2149.2011.00019.x. Epub 2011 Dec 19.
3
Acceptance, cognitive restructuring, and distraction as coping strategies for acute pain.
J Pain. 2013 Mar;14(3):305-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2012.12.005. Epub 2013 Jan 24.
4
Acceptance versus distraction as coping strategies for acute pain and pain-induced alcohol urge and approach inclinations.
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2025 Feb;33(1):16-26. doi: 10.1037/pha0000739. Epub 2024 Aug 15.
6
Attention, distraction, and cold-pressor pain.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1982 Jul;43(1):154-62. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.43.1.154.
7
Effects of preparatory information and distraction on children's cold-pressor pain outcomes: a randomized controlled trial.
Behav Res Ther. 2007 Nov;45(11):2789-99. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2007.07.005. Epub 2007 Jul 24.
9
Effects of attentional direction, age, and coping style on cold-pressor pain in children.
Behav Res Ther. 2006 Jun;44(6):835-48. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2005.03.013. Epub 2005 Aug 15.

引用本文的文献

2
Acceptance-Based Emotion Regulation Reduces Subjective and Physiological Pain Responses.
Front Psychol. 2020 Jun 30;11:1514. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01514. eCollection 2020.
3
Pain acceptance in cancer patients with chronic pain in Hunan, China: A qualitative study.
Int J Nurs Sci. 2019 Sep 23;6(4):385-391. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnss.2019.09.011. eCollection 2019 Oct 10.
4
Building a Biopsychosocial Conceptual Framework to Explore Pressure Ulcer Pain for Hospitalized Patients.
Healthcare (Basel). 2016 Jan 8;4(1):7. doi: 10.3390/healthcare4010007.
5
Differences in Pain Coping Between Black and White Americans: A Meta-Analysis.
J Pain. 2016 Jun;17(6):642-53. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2015.12.017. Epub 2016 Jan 12.

本文引用的文献

2
Attentional bias towards pain-related information in chronic pain; a meta-analysis of visual-probe investigations.
Clin Psychol Rev. 2012 Feb;32(1):13-25. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2011.09.004. Epub 2011 Sep 17.
3
Acceptance-based interventions for the treatment of chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Pain. 2011 Mar;152(3):533-542. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.11.002. Epub 2011 Jan 19.
4
The effect of pain on cognitive function: a review of clinical and preclinical research.
Prog Neurobiol. 2011 Mar;93(3):385-404. doi: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2011.01.002. Epub 2011 Jan 7.
6
Keeping pain in mind: a motivational account of attention to pain.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2010 Feb;34(2):204-13. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.01.005. Epub 2009 Jan 28.
7
Psychological therapies for the management of chronic pain (excluding headache) in adults.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Apr 15(2):CD007407. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007407.pub2.
9
The influence of preferred coping style and cognitive strategy on laboratory-induced pain.
Health Psychol. 2007 Jan;26(1):22-9. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.26.1.22.
10
Acceptance and commitment therapy: model, processes and outcomes.
Behav Res Ther. 2006 Jan;44(1):1-25. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2005.06.006.

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