The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 107–117 | Cite as

Measuring Pain Catastrophizing and Pain-Related Self-Efficacy: Expert Panels, Focus Groups, and Cognitive Interviews

  • Dagmar Amtmann
  • Kendra Liljenquist
  • Alyssa Bamer
  • Fraser Bocell
  • Mark Jensen
  • Rosanne Wilson
  • Dennis Turk
Original Research Article

Abstract

Purpose

Pain-related self-efficacy and pain catastrophizing are important psychosocial determinants of pain and can be therapeutic targets for chronic pain management. Advances in psychometric science have made shorter or dynamically administered instruments possible. The aim of this study was to generate and test candidate items for two new patient-reported outcome measures of pain-related self-efficacy and pain catastrophizing.

Methods

An expert panel of pain clinicians and researchers was convened to establish construct definitions of pain-related self-efficacy and pain catastrophizing and guide item development. Two patient advisors provided guidance throughout the project. Nineteen people with chronic pain participated in focus groups about their perspectives and experiences related to pain-related self-efficacy and pain catastrophizing. Twenty-two people with chronic pain participated in cognitive interviews to test proposed candidate items.

Results

Saturation was reached after three focus groups with no new subdomains identified by participants in the third focus group. Following cognitive interviews, five of the 48 initial pain-related self-efficacy candidate items were dropped and seven required substantial revision resulting in 43 pain-related self-efficacy candidate items. After two rounds of cognitive interviews, ten items were eliminated and ten substantially revised, resulting in a set of 30 from the initial 43 pain catastrophizing candidate items.

Conclusion

This article summarizes results of the qualitative phase of the development of new measures of pain-related self-efficacy and pain catastrophizing. Candidate items will be field tested with a large sample of people with chronic pain and the data will be used to calibrate items to an item response theory model. Resulting item banks and short forms will be made publicly available to researchers and clinicians.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank our two patient advisors who provided exceptional insight concerning the patient perspective on chronic pain. Mary R. Scott, who has since passed away and was a member of the UW Patient Voices Network that includes patients interested in research, and Penney Cowan, who is a founder of the American Chronic Pain Association. We also thank the members of the expert panel for providing valuable contribution to the new instruments. These included Frank Keefe, PhD, Michael Nicholas, PhD, Beverly Thorn, PhD, Judith Turner, PhD, and Michael Sullivan, PhD.

Author Contributions

Dagmar Amtmann, Kendra Liljenquist, Alyssa Bamer, Fraser Bocell, Mark Jensen, Rozanne Wilson, and Dennis Turk contributed to all aspects of the article including conception and design, acquisition of data, and analysis and interpretation of data.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

This study was funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (ME-1403-12550) and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living and Rehabilitation Research (H133P120002).

Conflict of interest

Dagmar Amtmann, Kendra Liljenquist, Alyssa Bamer, Fraser Bocell, Mark Jensen, Rozanne Wilson, and Dennis Turk have no conflicts of interest directly relevant to the content of this article.

Ethics approval

All procedures performed in studies 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.

References

  1. 1.
    Johannes CB, Le TK, Zhou X, Johnston JA, Dworkin RH. The prevalence of chronic pain in United States adults: results of an Internet-based survey. J Pain. 2010;11(11):1230–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Institute of Medicine CoAPRC, Education. Relieving pain in America a blueprint for transforming prevention, care, education, and research. 2011. http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2011/Relieving-Pain-in-America-A-Blueprint-for-Transforming-Prevention-Care-Education-Research/Pain%20Research%202011%20Report%20Brief.pdf. Accessed 20 Jul 2017.
  3. 3.
    Fine PG. Long-term consequences of chronic pain: mounting evidence for pain as a neurological disease and parallels with other chronic disease states. Pain Med. 2011;12(7):996–1004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gerrits MMJG, Vogelzangs N, van Oppen P, van Marwijk HWJ, van der Horst H, Penninx BWJH. Impact of pain on the course of depressive and anxiety disorders. Pain. 2012;153(2):429–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Farrar JT, et al. Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain. 2005;113(1–2):9–19.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burns JW, Glenn B, Bruehl S, Harden RN, Lofland K. Cognitive factors influence outcome following multidisciplinary chronic pain treatment: a replication and extension of a cross-lagged panel analysis. Behav Res Ther. 2003;41(10):1163–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Burns JW, Glenn B, Lofland K, Bruehl S, Harden RN. Stages of change in readiness to adopt a self-management approach to chronic pain: the moderating role of early-treatment stage progression in predicting outcome. Pain. 2005;115(3):322–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Burns JW, Kubilus A, Bruehl S, Harden RN, Lofland K. Do changes in cognitive factors influence outcome following multidisciplinary treatment for chronic pain? A cross-lagged panel analysis. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2003;71(1):81–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Domenech J, Sanchis-Alfonso V, Espejo B. Changes in catastrophizing and kinesiophobia are predictive of changes in disability and pain after treatment in patients with anterior knee pain. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(10):2295–300.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jensen MP, Turner JA, Romano JM. Changes in beliefs, catastrophizing, and coping are associated with improvement in multidisciplinary pain treatment. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2001;69(4):655–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jensen MP, Turner JA, Romano JM. Changes after multidisciplinary pain treatment in patient pain beliefs and coping are associated with concurrent changes in patient functioning. Pain. 2007;131(1–2):38–47.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jensen MP, Turner JA, Romano JM, Karoly P. Coping with chronic pain: a critical review of the literature. Pain. 1991;47(3):249–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Turner JA, Jensen MP, Romano JM. Do beliefs, coping, and catastrophizing independently predict functioning in patients with chronic pain? Pain. 2000;85(1–2):115–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Abramson LY, Alloy LB, Metalsky GI. Hopelessness depression—a theory-based subtype of depression. Psychol Rev. 1989;96(2):358–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Keefe FJ, Rumble ME, Scipio CD, Giordano LA, Perri LM. Psychological aspects of persistent pain: current state of the science. J Pain. 2004;5(4):195–211.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Angst F, Gantenbein AR, Lehmann S, et al. Multidimensional associative factors for improvement in pain, function, and working capacity after rehabilitation of whiplash associated disorder: a prognostic, prospective outcome study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014;15(1):130.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wong WS, Lam HM, Chow YF, et al. The effects of anxiety sensitivity, pain hypervigilance, and pain catastrophizing on quality of life outcomes of patients with chronic pain: a preliminary, cross-sectional analysis. Qual Life Res. 2014;23(8):2333–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wertli MM, Eugster R, Held U, Steurer J, Kofmehl R, Weiser S. Catastrophizing—a prognostic factor for outcome in patients with low back pain—a systematic review. Spine J. 2014;14(11):2639–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schiphorst Preuper HR, Geertzen JH, van Wijhe M, et al. Do analgesics improve functioning in patients with chronic low back pain? An explorative triple-blinded RCT. Eur Spine J. 2014;23(4):800–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim HJ, Kim SC, Kang KT, Chang BS, Lee CK, Yeom JS. Influence of educational attainment on pain intensity and disability in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: mediation effect of pain catastrophizing. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39(10):E637–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    George SZ, Parr JJ, Wallace MR, et al. Biopsychosocial influence on exercise-induced injury: genetic and psychological combinations are predictive of shoulder pain phenotypes. J Pain. 2014;15(1):68–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Arnow BA, Blasey CM, Constantino MJ, et al. Catastrophizing, depression and pain-related disability. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2011;33(2):150–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Keefe FJ, Lefebvre JC, Maixner W, Salley AN Jr, Caldwell DS. Self-efficacy for arthritis pain: relationship to perception of thermal laboratory pain stimuli. Arthritis Care Res. 1997;10(3):177–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jarvik JG, Hollingworth W, Heagerty PJ, Haynor DR, Boyko EJ, Deyo RA. Three-year incidence of low back pain in an initially asymptomatic cohort: clinical and imaging risk factors. Spine. 2005;30(13):1541–8 (discussion 1549).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Carragee EJ, Alamin TF, Miller JL, Carragee JM. Discographic, MRI and psychosocial determinants of low back pain disability and remission: a prospective study in subjects with benign persistent back pain. Spine J. 2005;5(1):24–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bandura A, O’Leary A, Taylor CB, Gauthier J, Gossard D. Perceived self-efficacy and pain control: opioid and nonopioid mechanisms. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1987;53(3):563–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Keefe FJ, Brown GK, Wallston KA, Caldwell DS. Coping with rheumatoid arthritis pain: catastrophizing as a maladaptive strategy. Pain. 1989;37(1):51–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Osman A, Barrios FX, Kopper BA, Hauptmann W, Jones J, O’Neill E. Factor structure, reliability, and validity of the pain catastrophizing scale. J Behav Med. 1997;20(6):589–605.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nicholas MK. The pain self-efficacy questionnaire: taking pain into account. Eur J Pain. 2007;11(2):153–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Anderson KO, Dowds BN, Pelletz RE, Edwards WT, Peeters-Asdourian C. Development and initial validation of a scale to measure self-efficacy beliefs in patients with chronic pain. Pain. 1995;63(1):77–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lorig K, Chastain RL, Ung E, Shoor S, Holman HR. Development and evaluation of a scale to measure perceived self-efficacy in people with arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1989;32(1):37–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cella D, Gershon R, Lai JS, Choi S. The future of outcomes measurement: item banking, tailored short-forms, and computerized adaptive assessment. Qual Life Res. 2007;16(Suppl 1):133–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hays RD, Morales LS, Reise SP. Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century. Med Care. 2000;38(9 Suppl):II28–42.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cook KF, Choi SW, Crane PK, Deyo RA, Johnson KL, Amtmann D. Letting the CAT out of the bag: comparing computer adaptive tests and an 11-item short form of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33(12):1378–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    PROMIS. Instruments available for use in assessment center. 2016. http://www.assessmentcenter.net/documents/InstrumentLibrary.pdf. Accessed 20 Jul 2017.
  36. 36.
    DeWalt DA, Rothrock N, Yount S, Stone AA. Evaluation of item candidates: the PROMIS qualitative item review. Med Care. 2007;45(5 Suppl 1):S12–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Reeve BB, Hays RD, Bjorner JB, et al. Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: plans for the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Med Care. 2007;45(5 Suppl 1):S22–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hays RD, Bjorner JB, Revicki DA, Spritzer KL, Cella D. Development of physical and mental health summary scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items. Qual Life Res. 2009;18(7):873–80.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    PROMIS. PROMIS adult profile instruments: a brief guide to the PROMIS profile instruments for adult respondents. 2015. https://www.assessmentcenter.net/documents/PROMIS%20Profile%20Scoring%20Manual.pdf. Accessed 16 Aug 2017.
  40. 40.
    Bennett MI, Smith BH, Torrance N, Potter J. The S-LANSS score for identifying pain of predominantly neuropathic origin: validation for use in clinical and postal research. J Pain. 2005;6(3):149–58.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Freynhagen R, Baron R, Gockel U, Tolle TR. painDETECT: a new screening questionnaire to identify neuropathic components in patients with back pain. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22(10):1911–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Askew RL, Cook KF, Keefe FJ, et al. A PROMIS measure of neuropathic pain quality. Value Health. 2016;19(5):623–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Beatty PC, Willis GB. Research synthesis: the practice of cognitive interviewing. Public Opin Q. 2007;71(2):287–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Gershon R, Lai J, Bode R, et al. Neuro-QOL: quality of life item banks for adults with neurological disorders: item development and calibrations based upon clinical and general population testing. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(3):475–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gershon RC, Wagster MV, Hendrie HC, Fox NA, Cook KF, Nowinski CJ. NIH toolbox for assessment of neurological and behavioral function. Neurology. 2013;80(11 Suppl 3):S2–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage; 1990.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lamers F, Hoogendoorn AW, Smit JH, et al. Sociodemographic and psychiatric determinants of attrition in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA). Compr Psychiatry. 2012;53(1):63–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sullivan MJ, D’Eon JL. Relation between catastrophizing and depression in chronic pain patients. J Abnorm Psychol. 1990;99(3):260–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dagmar Amtmann
    • 1
  • Kendra Liljenquist
    • 1
  • Alyssa Bamer
    • 1
  • Fraser Bocell
    • 1
  • Mark Jensen
    • 1
  • Rosanne Wilson
    • 1
  • Dennis Turk
    • 1
  1. 1.Rehabilitation MedicineUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations