College of Health Professions, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.
College of Health Professions, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; Center of Excellence for Stress and Mental Health, VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, CA; Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2022 Apr;103(4):747-754. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2021.04.011. Epub 2021 May 17.
To evaluate whether pain interference mediates the relationship between pain intensity and probable major depression (PMD) among persons with spinal cord injury (SCI), accounting for differences in the frequency of prescription medication use and resilience.
Cross-sectional analysis using self-report assessment.
Medical university in the Southeastern United States.
There were a total of 4670 participants (N=4670), all of whom had traumatic SCI of at least 1-year duration, identified from the Southeastern Regional SCI Model System and 2 state-based surveillance systems.
Not applicable.
The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 was used to define PMD. Covariates included demographic and injury characteristics, pain severity, pain interference, and resilience. Separate sets of multistage logistic regression analyses were conducted for 3 levels of prescription pain medication use (daily, occasional/weekly, none).
Pain intensity was related to a greater risk of PMD (odds ratio [OR], 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-1.35; OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.16-1.36; OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.33-1.56), but this relationship disappeared after consideration of pain interference (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.04; OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.84-1.05; OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.95-1.20), which indicates pain interference was a mediator between pain intensity and PMD and there was no direct relationship between pain intensity and PMD. Resilience was protective of PMD in each model but was not a mediator.
Although pain intensity was associated with PMD, the relationship was mediated by pain interference. Resilience was an important protective factor. Therefore, clinicians should assess pain interference when screening for PMD and direct treatment at reducing pain interference. Building resilience may further reduce the risk of PMD.
评估疼痛干扰是否在脊髓损伤(SCI)患者的疼痛强度与可能的重度抑郁症(PMD)之间起中介作用,同时考虑处方药物使用频率和适应力的差异。
使用自我报告评估进行的横断面分析。
美国东南部的一所医科大学。
共有 4670 名参与者(N=4670),均来自东南地区脊髓损伤模型系统和 2 个州级监测系统,他们患有至少 1 年的外伤性 SCI。
不适用。
使用患者健康问卷-9 来定义 PMD。协变量包括人口统计学和损伤特征、疼痛严重程度、疼痛干扰和适应力。针对处方止痛药使用的 3 个水平(每日、偶尔/每周、无)分别进行了多阶段逻辑回归分析。
疼痛强度与 PMD 的风险增加相关(优势比[OR],1.28;95%置信区间[CI],1.21-1.35;OR,1.26;95% CI,1.16-1.36;OR,1.44;95% CI,1.33-1.56),但考虑到疼痛干扰后,这种关系消失了(OR,0.97;95% CI,0.90-1.04;OR,0.94;95% CI,0.84-1.05;OR,1.07;95% CI,0.95-1.20),这表明疼痛干扰是疼痛强度和 PMD 之间的中介,疼痛强度与 PMD 之间没有直接关系。适应力在每个模型中都是 PMD 的保护因素,但不是中介因素。
尽管疼痛强度与 PMD 相关,但这种关系是由疼痛干扰介导的。适应力是一个重要的保护因素。因此,临床医生在筛查 PMD 时应评估疼痛干扰,并直接进行治疗以减轻疼痛干扰。增强适应力可能会进一步降低 PMD 的风险。