• Pain Pract · Jun 2021

    A cumulative impact of psychological and sensitization risk factors on pain-related outcomes.

    • Zakir Uddin, Arthur Woznowski-Vu, Daniel Flegg, Andrea Aternali, and Timothy H Wideman.
    • School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
    • Pain Pract. 2021 Jun 1; 21 (5): 523-535.

    ObjectiveRisk constructs based on psychological risk factors (eg, pain catastrophizing, PC) and sensitization risk factors (eg, pressure pain threshold, PPT) are important in research and clinical practice. Most research looks at individual constructs but does not consider how different constructs might interact within the same individual. An evaluation of the cumulative impact of psychological and sensitization risk factors on pain-related outcomes may help guide us in the risk assessment of patients with pain conditions. The aim of this study is to evaluate the cumulative impact of these psychological (PC) and sensitization (PPT) risk factors on pain-related outcomes (activity avoidance, pain severity, and disability) considering covariates.MethodsWe included 109 participants (70.60% women; mean ± SD age 53.6 ± 12.3 years) with chronic musculoskeletal pain for data analysis, who completed all measures of this study. Participants completed a single testing session that included measures of risk factors (PC and PPT) and pain-related outcomes (self-reported avoidance, functional avoidance, disability, and pain severity). Subgroups were constructed by dichotomizing of PC and PPT scores, resulting in four groups: (1) low catastrophizing and low sensitivity (N = 26), (2) high catastrophizing and low sensitivity (N = 27), (3) low catastrophizing and high sensitivity (N = 25), and (4) high catastrophizing and high sensitivity (N = 31).ResultsOne-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed significant group differences (P < 0.05, η2  = 0.08 to 0.14) in all outcomes of this study (except functional avoidance), and post hoc analysis indicated the significant differences are between group 1 and 4. A cumulative impact is reflected by large effect sizes between group 1 and 4 (d = 0.8 to 1). The group 2 and 3 (one risk dimension groups: either high-PC or high-PPT) represent 47% of the total participants.ConclusionsThe study suggests both higher level of PC and pressure sensitivity have a cumulative impact on risk screening for pain-related outcomes, considering gender in functional avoidance (task-related outcome). A clinical presentation with high-PC (one dimension of risk) is not associated with high-PPT (another dimension of risk). This finding has important clinical and theoretical implications.© 2020 World Institute of Pain.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…