Pain Catastrophizing Scale

Last updated
Pain Catastrophizing Scale
PurposeAssess individual differences in responses to pain.

Catastrophic thinking has widely been recognized in the development and maintenance of hypochondriasis and anxiety disorders. This broadly accepted understanding has classified catastrophizing as a tendency to misinterpret and exaggerate situations that may be threatening. [1] Pain is an undesirable sensory and emotional experience in response to potential or actual tissue damage. [2] A general consensus of pain catastrophizing involves an exaggerated negative perception to painful stimuli. The components of catastrophizing that are considered primary were long under debate until the development of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) by Michael J. L. Sullivan and Scott R. Bishop of Dalhousie University in 1995. The PCS is a 13 item scale, with each item rated on a 5-point scale: 0 (Not at all) to 4 (all the time). The PCS is broken into three subscales being magnification, rumination, and helplessness. The scale was developed as a self-report measurement tool that provided a valid index of catastrophizing in clinical and non-clinical populations. [3] The results of the initial development and validation studies indicated that the PCS is a reliable and valid measurement tool for catastrophizing. The high test-retest relationships concluded that individuals may possess enduring beliefs with regards to the threat value of painful stimuli. It was also found that from a clinical perspective, the PCS may be useful in identifying individuals that may be more susceptible to high distress responses from aversive medical procedures such as chemotherapy or surgery. [3]

Contents


Further psychometric evaluation

A secondary study was conducted by Augustine Osman of the University of Northern Iowa to replicate the findings found in the development and validation studies of Sullivan and Bishop. At the time of the study there was a great deal of interest in understanding the cognitive factors involving pain and an individual's response to persistent pain experiences. Before the development of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) there had been no other self-report measurement tool that focused primarily on catastrophizing. Other self-report measurement tools such as: the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ), the Pain-Related Self-Statements Scale (PRSS) and the Cognitive Coping Strategy Inventory (CCS) had subscales for assessing catastrophizing but failed to explore specific dimensions of catastrophizing. Osman conducted a series of experiments to replicate the findings of Sullivan and Bishop, as well as evaluated the validity of the PCS's ability to effectively differentiate between adult outpatient and nonclinical community samples using adult subjects. [4] The study that Osman conducted effectively replicated the findings of Sullivan and Bishop. The Study confirmed the ability of the PCS to isolate general catastrophizing characterized by the three primary related factors (rumination, magnification, and helplessness). The PCS was found to effectively differentiate between clinical and nonclinical samples, through verifying a clear distinction between overall and subscale scores of the PCS of the tested subjects. The findings of the study provided empirical support for the PCS in future studies. [4]

As the Pain Catastrophizing Scale has been developed, the goal of studies has shifted to its usability as a universal scale. Through various studies the PCS was shown to be invariant (with most accuracy in the three oblique factor structure) across genders and both clinical and non-clinical groups. [1] The gender focused study expressed that female subjects report more frequent experiences of pain, varied intensity with increased persistence, and lower pain tolerances and thresholds. [5] With minimal modification (to address the subject of the catastrophizing) the PCS can also be applied to pain catastrophizing in a social context. The social aspects studied were parents of disabled children and spouses of individuals with chronic pain. Specifically it has been shown to determine illness related stress and depression issues that arise from parent's catastrophizing about their child's pain in regards to a disability or illness. Similarly with respect to pain catastrophizing between romantic partners, spouse catastrophizing about a partner's chronic pain was related to depressive and pain severity levels in both spouses. [6]

Applications

Research of pain catastrophizing has found that catastrophic thinking can result in a more intense experience of pain. By this association, catastrophizing has led to over predictions of pain, increased use of health care and longer hospital stays. [1] The use of the PCS in clinical and nonclinical settings can provide a more specific tool for healthcare professionals to better care for their patients. A greater understanding of a person's experience of pain can allow for a better care regimen to be implemented helping reduce problems that have previously come from catastrophizing.

Related Research Articles

Validity is the main extent to which a concept, conclusion or measurement is well-founded and likely corresponds accurately to the real world. The word "valid" is derived from the Latin validus, meaning strong. The validity of a measurement tool is the degree to which the tool measures what it claims to measure. Validity is based on the strength of a collection of different types of evidence described in greater detail below.

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is a standardized psychometric test of adult personality and psychopathology. Psychologists and other mental health professionals use various versions of the MMPI to help develop treatment plans, assist with differential diagnosis, help answer legal questions, screen job candidates during the personnel selection process, or as part of a therapeutic assessment procedure.

A pain scale measures a patient's pain intensity or other features. Pain scales are a common communication tool in medical contexts, and are used in a variety of medical settings. Pain scales are a necessity to assist with better assessment of pain and patient screening. Pain measurements help determine the severity, type, and duration of the pain, and are used to make an accurate diagnosis, determine a treatment plan, and evaluate the effectiveness of treatment. Accurately measuring pain is a necessity in medical settings, especially if the pain measurement is going to be used as a screening tool, either for potential diseases or medical problems, or as a type of triage to determine urgency of one patient over another. Pain scales are based on trust, cartoons (behavioral), or imaginary data, and are available for neonates, infants, children, adolescents, adults, seniors, and persons whose communication is impaired. Pain assessments are often regarded as "the 5th Vital Sign".

A patient-reported outcome (PRO) is a health outcome directly reported by the patient who experienced it. It stands in contrast to an outcome reported by someone else, such as a physician-reported outcome, a nurse-reported outcome, and so on. PRO methods, such as questionnaires, are used in clinical trials or other clinical settings, to help better understand a treatment's efficacy or effectiveness. The use of digitized PROs, or electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs), is on the rise in today's health research setting.

The Yale–Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) is a test to rate the severity of obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) symptoms.

Self-compassion is extending compassion to one's self in instances of perceived inadequacy, failure, or general suffering. Kristin Neff has defined self-compassion as being composed of three main elements – self-kindness, common humanity, and mindfulness.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Beck Anxiety Inventory</span>

The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), created by Aaron T. Beck and other colleagues, is a 21-question multiple-choice self-report inventory that is used for measuring the severity of anxiety in adolescents and adults ages 17 and older. The questions used in this measure ask about common symptoms of anxiety that the subject has had during the past week. It is designed for individuals who are of 17 years of age or older and takes 5 to 10 minutes to complete. Several studies have found the Beck Anxiety Inventory to be an accurate measure of anxiety symptoms in children and adults.

The Rivermead Post-Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire, abbreviated RPQ, is a questionnaire that can be administered to someone who sustains a concussion or other form of traumatic brain injury to measure the severity of symptoms. The RPQ is used to determine the presence and severity of post-concussion syndrome (PCS), a set of somatic, cognitive, and emotional symptoms following traumatic brain injury that may persist anywhere from a week, to months, or even more than six months.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rumination (psychology)</span> Focused attention

Rumination is the focused attention on the symptoms of one's distress, and on its possible causes and consequences, as opposed to its solutions, according to the Response Styles Theory proposed by Nolen-Hoeksema (1998).

Sexuality can be inscribed in a multidimensional model comprising different aspects of human life: biology, reproduction, culture, entertainment, relationships and love.

Affect measures are used in the study of human affect, and refer to measures obtained from self-report studies asking participants to quantify their current feelings or average feelings over a longer period of time. Even though some affect measures contain variations that allow assessment of basic predispositions to experience a certain emotion, tests for such stable traits are usually considered to be personality tests.

<i>Multidimensional Measurement of Religiousness/Spirituality for Use in Health Research</i>

Multidimensional Measurement of Religiousness/Spirituality for Use in Health Research is a report, originally published in 1999, by a Fetzer Institute / National Institute on Aging working group on the measurement of religion and spirituality. A revised version with a new preface was published in 2003. The book presents a series of 12 self-report questionnaire measures, each focused on a particular aspect of religiousness or spirituality, along with reviews of underlying theory and supporting research. The book's purpose is to provide validated measures of spiritual and religious factors in health research. The book includes the Brief Multidimensional Measure of Religiousness/Spirituality (BMMRS), a practical measure with selected items from the 12 previous chapters.

The Health Dynamics Inventory (HDI) is a 50 item self-report questionnaire developed to evaluate mental health functioning and change over time and treatment. The HDI was written to evaluate the three aspects of mental disorders as described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM): "clinically significant behavioral or psychological syndrome or pattern...associated with present distress...or disability". This also corresponds to the phase model described by Howard and colleagues Accordingly, the HDI assesses (1) the experience of emotional or behavioral symptoms that define mental illness, such as dysphoria, worry, angry outbursts, low self-esteem, or excessive drinking, (2) the level of emotional distress related to these symptoms, and (3) the impairment or problems fulfilling the major roles of one's life.

Pain catastrophizing is the tendency to describe a pain experience in more exaggerated terms than the average person, to ruminate on it more, and/or to feel more helpless about the experience. People who report a large number of such thoughts during a pain experience are more likely to rate the pain as more intense than those who report fewer such thoughts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Suicide Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised</span> Tool to measure suicide risk in teens

The Suicide Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised (SBQ-R) is a psychological self-report questionnaire designed to identify risk factors for suicide in children and adolescents between ages 13 and 18. The four-question test is filled out by the child and takes approximately five minutes to complete. The questionnaire has been found to be reliable and valid in recent studies. One study demonstrated that the SBQ-R had high internal consistency with a sample of university students. However, another body of research, which evaluated some of the most commonly used tools for assessing suicidal thoughts and behaviors in college-aged students, found that the SBQ-R and suicide assessment tools in general have very little overlap between them. One of the greatest strengths of the SBQ-R is that, unlike some other tools commonly used for suicidality assessment, it asks about future anticipation of suicidal thoughts or behaviors as well as past and present ones and includes a question about lifetime suicidal ideation, plans to commit suicide, and actual attempts.

The Dimensional Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (DOCS) is a 20-item self-report instrument that assesses the severity of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) symptoms along four empirically supported theme-based dimensions: (a) contamination, (b) responsibility for harm and mistakes, (c) incompleteness/symmetry, and (d) unacceptable (taboo) thoughts. The scale was developed in 2010 by a team of experts on OCD led by Jonathan Abramowitz, PhD to improve upon existing OCD measures and advance the assessment and understanding of OCD. The DOCS contains four subscales that have been shown to have good reliability, validity, diagnostic sensitivity, and sensitivity to treatment effects in a variety of settings cross-culturally and in different languages. As such, the DOCS meets the needs of clinicians and researchers who wish to measure current OCD symptoms or assess changes in symptoms over time.

Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) is a patient-reported outcome measure used to assess health-related quality of life in patients undergoing cancer therapy. The FACT-G is the original questionnaire that led to the development of the larger Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) collection of quality of life instruments. The survey assesses the impacts of cancer therapy in four domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional. The FACT-G is also offered with additional questions measuring cancer-specific factors that may affect quality of life, leading to the creation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Head and Neck (FACT-H&N), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Lung (FACT-L), and 18 others.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Positive and Negative Affect Schedule</span>

The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) is a self-report questionnaire that consists of two 10-item scales to measure both positive and negative affect. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). The measure has been used mainly as a research tool in group studies, but can be utilized within clinical and non-clinical populations as well. Shortened, elongated, and children's versions of the PANAS have been developed, taking approximately 5–10 minutes to complete. Clinical and non-clinical studies have found the PANAS to be a reliable and valid instrument in the assessment of positive and negative affect.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Attribution questionnaire</span> Psychological measurement

The Attribution Questionnaire (AQ) is a 27-item self-report assessment tool designed to measure public stigma towards people with mental illnesses. It assesses emotional reaction and discriminatory responses based on answers to a hypothetical vignette about a man with schizophrenia named Harry. There are several different versions of the vignette that test multiple forms of attribution. Responses assessing stigma towards Harry are in the form of 27 items rated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 to 9. There are 9 subscales within the AQ that breakdown the responses one could have towards a person with mental illness into different categories. The AQ was created in 2003 by Dr. Patrick Corrigan and colleagues and has since been revised into smaller tests because of the complexity and hypothetical that did not capture children and adolescent's stigmas well. The later scales are the Attribution Questionnaire-9 (AQ-9), the revised Attribution Questionnaire (r-AQ), and the children's Attribution Questionnaire (AQ-8-C).

The Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD) is a brief 12-question personality inventory test to assesses the possible presence of three co-morbid socially maladaptive, dark triad traits: Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy. The DTDD was developed to identify the dark triad traits among subclinical adult populations. It is a screening test. High scores on the DTDD do not necessary correlate with clinical diagnoses.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Damme S. V.; Crombez G.; Bijttebier P.; Goubert L.; Houdenhove B. V. (2001). "A confirmatory factor analysis of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale: invariant factor structure across clinical and non-clinical populations". International Association for the Study of Pain. 96 (3): 319–324. doi:10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00463-8. PMID   11973004. S2CID   19059827.
  2. ↑ Goldstein, E. B. (2013). Sensation and Perception (With Psychology Coursemate With Ebook Printed Access Card) (Ninth Edition ed.). Belmont CA: Wadsworth Pub Co.
  3. 1 2 Sullivan M. J.; Bishop S. R.; Pivik J. (1995). "The Pain Catastrophizing Scale: Development And Validation". Psychological Assessment. 7 (4): 524–532. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.323.7545 . doi:10.1037/1040-3590.7.4.524.
  4. 1 2 Osman A.; Barrios F. X.; Gutierrez P. M.; Kopper B. A.; Merrifield T.; Grittmann L. (2000). "The Pain Catastrophizing Scale: Further Psychometric Evaluation with Adult Samples". Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 23 (4): 351–64. doi:10.1023/A:1005548801037. PMID   10984864. S2CID   24276902.
  5. ↑ D'Eon J. L.; Harris C. A.; Ellis J. A. (2004). "Testing Factorial Validity And Gender Invariance Of The Pain Catastrophizing Scale". Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 27 (4): 361–372. doi:10.1023/b:jobm.0000042410.34535.64. PMID   15559733. S2CID   22212393.
  6. ↑ Cano A.; Leonard M. T.; Franz A. (2005). "The significant other version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS-S): Preliminary validation". International Association for the Study of Pain. 119 (1–3): 26–37. doi:10.1016/j.pain.2005.09.009. PMC   2679670 . PMID   16298062.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.