School of Psychology.
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine.
Rehabil Psychol. 2021 Feb;66(1):39-49. doi: 10.1037/rep0000318. Epub 2020 Mar 26.
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the type and recency of the pain experience recalled (i.e., pain referent) by a healthy group and a chronic/recurrent pain group when they responded to the trait version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). We also aimed to disentangle the influence of trait personality factors and state oriented pain-related cognitive processes on PCS scores. Research Method/Design: A cross-sectional online survey was administered. Participants who reported chronic/recurrent pain comprised the pain group ( = 153) and those not reporting a pain condition comprised the healthy group ( = 120).
A sensory pain referent, as opposed to an emotional pain referent, was reported by 92% of the healthy group and 95% of the pain group; however, the PCS pain referent in the pain group was different from their self-reported type of chronic/recurrent pain in 55% of cases. In the healthy group, 86% of participants reported PCS pain referents that occurred > 24 hr ago; 51% of participants in the pain group reported using pain referents occurring < 24 hr ago. Neuroticism and conscientiousness significantly predicted PCS scores in the healthy group. Within the pain group, both neuroticism and the state-oriented measure of rumination/absorption significantly predicted PCS scores, with rumination/absorption evidencing the largest effect size.
CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: These findings suggest individuals with and without chronic/recurrent pain focus on a sensory pain referent when answering the PCS. The results have implications for refining the PCS instructions and for improving the sensitivity of this measure in capturing variance in pain-related outcomes, particularly when administered in homogenous pain type (e.g., migraine) populations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
本研究调查了健康组和慢性/复发性疼痛组在回答特质版疼痛灾难化量表（PCS）时回忆起的疼痛类型和近期疼痛经历（即疼痛参照）。我们还旨在厘清特质人格因素和状态导向的与疼痛相关认知过程对 PCS 评分的影响。
研究方法/设计：进行了横断面在线调查。报告慢性/复发性疼痛的参与者组成疼痛组（n=153），未报告疼痛状况的参与者组成健康组（n=120）。
健康组 92%和疼痛组 95%报告了感觉性疼痛参照，而非情绪性疼痛参照；然而，疼痛组的 PCS 疼痛参照与他们自我报告的慢性/复发性疼痛类型在 55%的情况下不同。在健康组中，86%的参与者报告 PCS 疼痛参照发生在>24 小时前；51%的疼痛组参与者报告使用发生在<24 小时前的疼痛参照。神经质和尽责性显著预测健康组的 PCS 评分。在疼痛组中，神经质和状态导向的沉思/吸收测量均显著预测 PCS 评分，其中沉思/吸收的效应量最大。
结论/意义：这些发现表明，有和没有慢性/复发性疼痛的个体在回答 PCS 时都关注感觉性疼痛参照。这些结果对细化 PCS 说明以及提高该测量方法在捕捉与疼痛相关结果的变异性方面的敏感性具有意义，特别是在同质疼痛类型（例如偏头痛）人群中进行测量时。（PsycInfo 数据库记录（c）2021 APA，保留所有权利）。
