The journal of pain : official journal of the American Pain Society
-
Successful adjustment to dynamic environments requires the simultaneous pursuit of multiple goals. However, the pursuit of multiple goals may bring about goal conflict. Despite evidence indicating that goal conflict can have a detrimental effect on subjective well-being, little is known about the effects of goal competition in the context of pain. This experiment investigated whether different types of goal competition increase pain-related fear and slow pain-related decision-making. Forty-six participants completed a cross-directional movement task in which they learned to associate movements in 1 direction (eg, left) with pain, and movements in the opposite direction (eg, right) with safety; and that movements in other directions (eg, up and down) were associated with reward and loss of reward, respectively. In the test phase, both phases were combined, creating different types of goal competition. The results showed that participants were most afraid of movements associated with 2 concurrent avoidance goals, and the least afraid of movements associated with approach-approach competition. Additionally, participants were slower in making a choice when presented with an avoidance-avoidance competition compared with approach-approach and avoidance-approach competition. These findings suggest that avoidance-avoidance competition increased fear and slowed decision-making compared with other types of competition. ⋯ This study provides experimental evidence for the differential effects of various goal conflicts on pain-related fear and decision-making. This knowledge may improve our understanding of patients' behavior when experiencing goal conflict and may contribute to improving treatments by addressing multiple goals patients are pursuing, and not just pain avoidance/reduction.
-
This study aims to determine risk factors of opioid overdose among the Colorado Medicaid population. A retrospective nested case-control study was undertaken. Medicaid beneficiaries who had ≥1 medical claim for an emergency department visit or a hospitalization associated with an opioid overdose from July 2009 to June 2014 were defined as cases. Controls were selected using a nearest neighbor matching without replacement. The matched controls were selected on the basis of age, sex, and opioid prescription. One case was matched with three controls. Multivariate conditional logistic regression was used to compare risk factors. A total of 816 cases with 2,448 controls were included. Six factors were associated with opioid overdose: mean morphine dose equivalent (>50 mg/d; odds ratio [OR] = 1.986 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.509-2.614]), methadone use (switching opioid to methadone vs. no methadone use; OR = 7.230 [95% CI, 2.346-22.286]), drug/alcohol abuse (OR = 3.104 [95% CI, 2.195-4.388]), other psychiatric illness (OR = 1.730 [95% CI, 1.307-2.291]), benzodiazepine use (OR = 2.005 [95% CI, 1.516-2.652]), and the number of pharmacies used by the beneficiary (≥4 pharmacies vs. 1 pharmacy; OR = 1.514 [95% CI, 1.003-2.286]). In conclusion, several factors are associated with opioid overdose. States and communities should ensure the availability of at-home intranasal naloxone for overdose rescue on the basis of the presence of risk factors. ⋯ This article presents the risk factors of opioid overdose among the Colorado Medicaid population. On the basis of study findings, Colorado Medicaid is currently working with physicians, hospitals, and other health system stakeholders to continue to develop policies to identify and assist this subset of our population. One such policy will be to provide at-home intranasal naloxone for overdose rescue.
-
The Publisher regrets that this abstract is an accidental duplication of abstract (436), also published in the 2016 American Pain Society Scientific Meeting abstracts supplement: J Pain 17:S83, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2016.01.413. The duplicate abstract (440) has therefore been withdrawn. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy.
-
Over the past decade, the role of positive psychology in pain experience has gained increasing attention. One such positive factor, identified as resilience, has been defined as the ability to maintain positive emotional and physical functioning despite physical or psychological adversity. Although cross-situational measures of resilience have been shown to be related to pain, it was hypothesized that a pain-specific resilience measure would serve as a stronger predictor of acute pain experience. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a series of studies to develop and validate the Pain Resilience Scale. Study 1 described exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses that support a scale with 2 distinct factors, Cognitive/Affective Positivity and Behavioral Perseverance. Study 2 showed test-retest reliability and construct validity of this new scale, including moderate positive relationships with measures of positive psychological functioning and small to moderate negative relationships with vulnerability measures such as pain catastrophizing. Finally, consistent with our initial hypothesis, study 3 showed that the Pain Resilience Scale is more strongly related to ischemic pain responses than existing measures of general resilience. Together, these studies support the predictive utility of this new pain-specific measure of resilience in the context of acute experimental pain. ⋯ The Pain Resilience Scale represents a novel measure of Cognitive/Affective Positivity and Behavioral Perseverance during exposure to noxious stimuli. Construct validity is supported by expected relationships with existing pain-coping measures, and predictive validity is shown by individual differences in response to acute experimental pain.