Unique Contributions of Acceptance and Catastrophizing on Chronic Pain Adaptation
- 460 Downloads
Pain catastrophizing and acceptance represent distinct but interrelated constructs that influence adaptation to chronic pain. Clinical and laboratory research suggest that higher levels of catastrophizing and lower levels of acceptance predict worse functioning; however, findings have been mixed regarding which specific outcomes are associated with each construct. The current study evaluates these constructs in relation to pain, affect, and functioning in a treatment-seeking clinical sample.
Participants included 249 adult patients who were admitted to an interdisciplinary chronic pain rehabilitation program and completed measures of pain and related psychological and physical functioning.
Hierarchical multiple regression analyses indicated that pain catastrophizing and acceptance both significantly, but differentially, predicted depressive symptoms and pain-related negative affect. Only pain catastrophizing was a unique predictor of perceived pain severity, whereas acceptance uniquely predicted pain interference and performance in everyday living activities. There were no significant interactions between acceptance and catastrophizing, suggesting no moderation effects.
Findings from the current study indicate a pattern of results similar to prior studies in which greater levels of catastrophic thinking is associated with higher perceived pain intensity whereas greater levels of acceptance relate to better functioning in activities despite chronic pain. However, in the current study, both acceptance and catastrophizing were associated with negative affect. These relationships were significant beyond the effects of clinical and demographic variables. These results support the role of pain acceptance as an important contribution to chronic pain-related outcomes alongside the well-established role of pain catastrophizing. Results are limited by reliance on self-report data, cross-sectional design, and low racial/ethnic diversity.
KeywordsCatastrophization Chronic pain/psychology Psychological adaptation
Compliance with Ethical Standards
No funding was received for this study.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
All procedures performed involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
No financial disclosures.
- 23.Crombez G, Eccleston C, Van den Broeck A, Van Houdenhove B, Boubert L. The effects of catastrophic thinking about pain on attentional interference by pain: no mediation of negative affectivity in healthy volunteers and in patients with low back pain. Pain Res Manag. 2002;7(1):31–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 28.Osman A, Barrios FX, Kopper BA, et al. Factor structure, reliability, and validity of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale. J BehavMed. 1997;20:589–605.Google Scholar
- 36.McCormick ZL, Gagnon CM, Caldwell M, Patel J, Kornfeld S, Atchison J, et al. Short-term functional, emotional, and pain outcomes of patients with complex regional pain syndrome treated in a comprehensive interdisciplinary pain management program. Pain Med. 2015;16:2357–67.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 37.Townsend CO, Kerkvliet JL, Bruce BK, Rome JD, Hooten WM, Luedtke CA, Hodgson JE. A longitudinal study of the efficacy of a comprehensive pain rehabilitation program with opioid withdrawal: comparison of treatment outcomes based on opioid use status at admission. Pain. 2008;140:177–89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar