Prospective Comparison of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and MMPI-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) in Predicting Treatment Outcomes Among Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain

  • Anthony M. Tarescavage
  • Judith Scheman
  • Yossef S. Ben-Porath
Article

Abstract

The purpose of the current study was to examine the relative utility of the most updated MMPI adult instrument, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF), which was designed to address psychometric limitations of the MMPI-2. To this end, we compared mean scores and correlates of emotional distress treatment outcomes using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in a sample of 230 patients (73 males, 157 females) who had completed an interdisciplinary chronic pain rehabilitation program. Structural equation modeling analyses indicated that higher scale scores from all the MMPI-2-RF substantive domains were meaningfully associated with worse emotional distress outcomes, whereas the MMPI-2 Clinical Scales generally did not have any meaningful associations. Similar results were found in additional analyses using a clinically significant change framework with more direct clinical implications. The results of this study provide preliminary support for the use of the MMPI-2-RF among patients with chronic low back pain.

Keywords

MMPI-2-RF Chronic pain Back pain Treatment outcome Applied assessment 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Yossef Ben-Porath is a paid consultant to the MMPI-2-RF publisher, the University of Minnesota Press, and a distributor for Pearson Assessments. He receives royalties on sales of MMPI-2-RF materials and research Grants from the MMPI-2-RF publisher. Anthony Tarescavage also receives research funding from the MMPI-2-RF publisher. The authors thank Dr. Kelly Huffman for her help with institutional review board processing and approval. Judith Scheman declares that she does not have any conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights

All procedures were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committees and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV-TR. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publisher.Google Scholar
  2. Anestis, J. C., Finn, J. A., Gottfried, E., Arbisi, P. A., & Joiner, T. E. (2014). Reading the road signs the utility of the MMPI-2 Restructured Form validity scales in prediction of premature termination. Assessment, 22, 279–288.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Arbisi, P. A., Polusny, M. A., Erbes, C. R., Thuras, P., & Reddy, M. K. (2011). The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form in National Guard soldiers screening positive for posttraumatic stress disorder and mild traumatic brain injury. Psychological Assessment, 23(1), 203.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021339.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Tellegen, A. (2008/2011). MMPI-2-RF: Manual for administration, scoring and interpretation. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradley, L. A. (1995). Biopsychosocial model and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: Even psychologists make cognitive errors. Pain Forum, 4(2), 97–100.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1082-3174(11)80006-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Browne, M. W., Cudeck, R., Bollen, K. A., & Long, J. S. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sage Focus Editions, 154, 136–136.Google Scholar
  9. Butcher, J., Graham, J. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Tellegen, A., Dahlstrom, G. W., & Kaemmer, B. (2001). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2: Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  10. Chou, R., Qaseem, A., Snow, V., Casey, D., Cross, J. T. Jr., Shekelle, P., & Owens, D. K. (2007). Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain: A joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society. Annals of Internal Medicine, 147(7), 478–491.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Crawford, J. R., & Henry, J. D. (2003). The Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS): Normative data and latent structure in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42(2), 111–131.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Forbey, J. D., Lee, T. T., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Arbisi, P. A., & Gartland, D. (2013). Associations between MMPI-2-RF validity scale scores and extra-test measures of personality and psychopathology. Assessment, 20, 448.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Freburger, J. K., Holmes, G. M., Agans, R. P., Jackman, A. M., Darter, J. D., Wallace, A. S., … Carey, T. S. (2009). The rising prevalence of chronic low back pain. Archives of Internal Medicine, 169(3), 251–258.  https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2008.543.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Gatchel, R. J., McGeary, D. D., McGeary, C. A., & Lippe, B. (2014). Interdisciplinary chronic pain management: Past, present, and future. American Psychologist, 69(2), 119.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gatchel, R. J., Peng, Y. B., Peters, M. L., Fuchs, P. N., & Turk, D. C. (2007). The biopsychosocial approach to chronic pain: Scientific advances and future directions. Psychological Bulletin, 133(4), 581–624.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.581.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Graham, J. R. (2012). The MMPI-2: Assessing personality and psychopathology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Graham, J. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & McNulty, J. L. (1999). MMPI-2 correlates for outpatient community mental health settings. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  19. Guo, H., Tanaka, S., Halperin, W. E., & Cameron, L. L. (1999). Back pain prevalence in US industry and estimates of lost workdays. American Journal of Public Health, 89(7), 1029–1035.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Hathaway, S. R., & McKinley, J. C. (1943). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  21. Jacobson, N. S., & Truax, P. (1991). Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59(1), 12–19.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Katz, J. N. (2006). Lumbar disc disorders and low-back pain: Socioeconomic factors and consequences. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, 88(suppl_2), 21–24.  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.E.01273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keefe, F. J., Lefebvre, J. C., & Beaupre, P. M. (1995). The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory in chronic pain: Security blanket or sound investment? Pain Forum, 4(2), 101–103.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1082-3174(11)80007-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kessler, R. C., Berglund, P., Chiu, W. T., Demler, O., Heeringa, S., Hiripi, E., … Zheng, H. (2004). The US National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R): Design and field procedures. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 13(2), 69–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. LaBar, G. (1992). A battle plan for back injury prevention. Occupational Hazards, 11, 29–33.Google Scholar
  26. Little, T. D. (2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the beck depression and anxiety inventories. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33(3), 335–343.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Lovibond, S. H., & Lovibond, P. F. (1996). Manual for the depression anxiety stress scales. Sydney: Psychology Foundation of Australia.Google Scholar
  29. Main, C. J., & Spanswick, C. C. (1995). Personality assessment and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: 50 years on: Do we still need our security blanket? Pain Forum, 4(2), 90–96.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1082-3174(11)80005-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Manchikanti, L., Cash, K. A., Damron, K. S., Manchukonda, R., Pampati, V., & McManus, C. D. (2006). Controlled substance abuse and illicit drug use in chronic pain patients: An evaluation of multiple variables. Pain Physician, 9(3), 215–225.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Marek, R. J., Block, A. R., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2014). The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form: (MMPI-2-RF): Incremental validity in predicting early postoperative outcomes in spine surgery candidate. Psychological Assessment, 27(1), 114–124.  https://doi.org/10.1037/PAS0000035.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. McCord, D. M., & Drerup, L. C. (2011). Relative practical utility of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Clinical Scales versus the Clinical Scales in a chronic pain patient sample. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 33(1), 140–146.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2010.495056.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. McGill, J. C., Lawlis, G. F., Selby, D., Mooney, V., & McCoy, C. E. (1983). The relationship of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) profile clusters to pain behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 6(1), 77–92.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00845278.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. McNeil, J. M., & Binette, J. (2001). Prevalence of disabilities and associated health conditions among adults-United States, 1999. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285(12), 1571–1572.Google Scholar
  35. Moore, J. E., Armentrout, D. P., Parker, J. C., & Kivlahan, D. R. (1986). Empirically derived pain-patient MMPI subgroups: Prediction of treatment outcome. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 9(1), 51–63.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00844644.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2010). Mplus user’s guide, v 6.1. Los Angeles: Muthen and Muthen, UCLA.Google Scholar
  37. Page, A. C., Hooke, G. R., & Morrison, D. L. (2007). Psychometric properties of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) in depressed clinical samples. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 46(3), 283–297.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Piotrowski, C. (1998). Assessment of pain: A survey of practicing clinicians. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86(1), 181–182.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Piotrowski, C., & Lubin, B. (1990). Assessment practices of health psychologists: Survey of APA division 38 clinicians. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 21(2), 99–106.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0735-7028.21.2.99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Reichenbach, H. (1938). Experience and prediction: An analysis of the foundations and the structure of knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  41. Rubin, D. I. (2007). Epidemiology and risk factors for spine pain. Neurologic Clinics, 25(2), 353–371.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ncl.2007.01.004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Sellbom, M., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Bagby, R. M. (2008). On the hierarchical structure of mood and anxiety disorders: Confirmatory evidence and elaboration of a model of temperament markers. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117(3), 576–590.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012536.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Steiger, J. H. (1998). A note on multiple sample extensions of the RMSEA fit index. Structural Equation Modeling-a Multidisciplinary Journal, 5(4), 411–419.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519809540115. doi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tarescavage, A. M. (2015). Predicting treatment outcomes among low back pain patients using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form. (Dissertation, Ph. D.), Kent State University, Kent, OH. Retrieved from http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1447070671.
  45. Tellegen, A., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2008/2011). Minnesota mutliphasic personality inventory-2-Restructured Form: Technical manual. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  46. Turk, D. C., & Fernandez, E. (1995). Personality assessment and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory in chronic pain: Underdeveloped and overexposed. Pain Forum, 4(2), 104–107.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1082-3174(11)80008-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Van der Heijden, P. T., Egger, J. I., & Derksen, J. J. (2010). Comparability of scores on the MMPI-2-RF scales generated with the MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-RF booklets. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(3), 254–259.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891003670208.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Von Korff, M., Crane, P., Lane, M., Miglioretti, D. L., Simon, G., Saunders, K., … Kessler, R. (2005). Chronic spinal pain and physical-mental comorbidity in the United States: Results from the national comorbidity survey replication. PAIN, 113(3), 331–339.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2004.11.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yu, C. (2002). Evaluating cutoff criteria of model fit indices for latent variable models with binary and continuous outcomes. Los Angeles: University of California Los Angeles.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anthony M. Tarescavage
    • 1
  • Judith Scheman
    • 2
  • Yossef S. Ben-Porath
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Psychological SciencesJohn Carroll UniversityUniversity HeightsUSA
  2. 2.Digestive Disease and Surgical InstituteCleveland Clinic FoundationClevelandUSA
  3. 3.Department of Psychological SciencesKent State UniversityKentUSA

Personalised recommendations