Advertisement

Psychological Injury and Law

, Volume 3, Issue 3, pp 212–219 | Cite as

The Three Major Components of Behavior Used for Assessing Pain: Problems Faced When There Is Discordance Among the Three

  • Robert J. Gatchel
  • Nancy D. Kishino
  • Dennis E. Minotti
Article

Abstract

The present article discusses the three major components of behavior that are used for assessing pain—self-report, overt behavior/function, and physical indices. Issues concerning the reliable operational definitions of these three behavioral referents of pain are reviewed, as well as the fact that a high degree of concordance or precise overlap among the three cannot be automatically assumed. The best biopsychosocial assessment approved to be used when discordance occurs—a stepwise approach to assessment—is then presented. Finally, in addition to the often complex interactions among the three behavioral referents of pain, what makes this assessment area even more complicated is that there may also be complex interactions among the construct of pain and the two related constructs of impairment and disability. These potential complexities are also discussed.

Keywords

Components of behavior Pain Disability Impairment Biopsychosocial assessment 

References

  1. Anderson, T., Cole, T., Gullickson, G., Hudgens, A., & Roberts, A. (1977). Behavioral modification of chronic pain: A treatment program by a multidisciplinary team. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 129, 96–100.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Beck depression inventory manual (2nd ed.). San Antonio: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  3. Charlton, J. E., Gourlay, G., & Butler, S. H. (Eds.). (2005). Core curriculum for professional education in pain. Seattle: International Association for the Study of Pain Press.Google Scholar
  4. Dembe, A. E. (2000). Pain, function, impairment and disability: Implications for workers' compensation and other disability insurance systems. In T. G. Mayer, R. J. Gatchel, & P. B. Polatin (Eds.), Occupational musculoskeletal disorders: function, outcomes and evidence. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
  5. Dersh, J., Polatin, P. B., Leeman, G., & Gatchel, R. J. (2004). The management of secondary gain and loss in medicolegal settings: Strengths and weaknesses. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 14(4), 267–279.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Flores, L., Gatchel, R. J., & Polatin, P. B. (1997). Objectification of functional improvement after nonoperative care. Spine, 22(14), 1622–1633.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Gatchel, R. J. (1996). Psychological disorders and chronic pain: Cause and effect relationships. In R. J. Gatchel & D. C. Turk (Eds.), Psychological approaches to pain management: A practitioner's handbook (pp. 33–52). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  8. Gatchel, R. J. (2001). A compendium of outcome instruments for assessment and research of spinal disorders. LaGrange: North American Spine Society.Google Scholar
  9. Gatchel, R. J. (2004a). Comorbidity of chronic mental and physical health disorders: The biopsychosocial perspective. The American Psychologist, 59, 792–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gatchel, R. J. (2004b). Psychosocial factors that can influence the self-assessment of function. Journal of Occupation Rehabilitation, 14(3), 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gatchel, R. J. (2005). Clinical essentials of pain management. Washington: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gatchel, R. J. (Ed.). (2006). Compendium of outcome instruments (2nd ed.). LeGrange: North American Spine Society.Google Scholar
  13. Gatchel, R. J., & Kishino, N. D. (2010). Chronic Pain, Impairment and Disability. In A. Rice, R. Howard, D. Justins, C. Miaskowski, & T. Newton-John (Eds.), Textbook of Clinical Pain Management, 2nd edn (in press). London: Hodder Arnold Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Gatchel, R. J., Kishino, N. D., & Strezak, A. (2006). The importance of outcome assessment in orthopaedics: An overview. In J. M. Spivak & P. J. Connolly (Eds.), Orthopaedic knowledge update: spine. Chicago: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.Google Scholar
  15. Gatchel, R. J., Mayer, T. G., Dersh, J., Robinson, R., & Polatin, P. B. (1999). The association of the SF-36 health status survey with one-year socioeconomic outcomes in a chronically disabled spinal disorder population. Spine, 24, 2162–2170.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gatchel, R. J., Robinson, R. C., Pulliam, C., & Maddrey, A. M. (2003). Biofeedback with pain patients: Evidence for its effectiveness. Seminars in Pain Management, 1, 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lang, P. J. (1978). Autonomic control or learning to play in internal organs. Psychology Today, 4, 37–41.Google Scholar
  18. Leeman, G., Polatin, P., Gatchel, R., & Kishino, N. (2000). Managing secondary gain in patients with pain-associated disability: A clinical perspective. Journal of Workers Compensation, 9, 25–44.Google Scholar
  19. Merskey, H., & Bogduk, N. (Eds.). (1994). Classification of chronic pain: Descriptions of chronic pain syndromes and definitions of pain terms [Report of the Task Force on Taxonomy of the International Association for the Study of Pain] (2nd ed.). Seattle: IASP Press.Google Scholar
  20. Rondinelli, R., Genovese, E., Katz, R., Mayer, T., Mueller, K., Ranavaya, M., et al. (2008). Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment (6th ed.). Chicago: American Medical Association.Google Scholar
  21. Schofferman, J., & Wasserman, S. (1994). Successful treatment of low back pain and neck pain after a motor vehicle accident despite litigation. Spine, 19(9), 1007–1010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Texas Department of Insurance, Division of Worker's Compensation. Quick Reference Guide for Designated Doctors. C508-002A (5-08).Google Scholar
  23. Tukey, J. W. (1979). Methodology and the statistician's responsibility for both accuracy and relevance. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 786–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Turk, D. C., & Kerns, R. D. (1983). Conceptual issues in the assessment of clinical pain. International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine, 13(1), 57–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Turk, D. C., & Melzack, R. (2001). Handbook of pain assessment (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  26. Turk, D. C., & Monarch, E. S. (2002). Biopsychosocial perspective on chronic pain. In D. C. Turk & R. J. Gatchel (Eds.), Psychological approaches to pain management: A practitioner's handbook (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  27. Turner, J. A., Ersek, M., Herron, L., Haselkorn, J., Kent, D., & Ciol, M. A. (1992). Patient outcomes after lumbar spinal fusions. Journal of the American Medical Association, 268(7), 907–911.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Waddell, G. (1987). Clinical assessment of lumbar impairment. Clinical Orthopaedic Related Research, 221, 110–120.Google Scholar
  29. Ware, J. E., Snow, K. K., Kosinski, M., & Gandek, B. (1993). SF-36 health survey: Manual and interpretation guide. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert J. Gatchel
    • 1
  • Nancy D. Kishino
    • 2
  • Dennis E. Minotti
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Psychology, College of ScienceThe University of Texas at ArlingtonArlingtonUSA
  2. 2.West Coast Spine Restoration CenterRiversideUSA
  3. 3.The Osteopathic Research CenterThe University of North Texas Health Science CenterFort WorthUSA

Personalised recommendations