Within-person relationships between catastrophizing and pain intensity during a mind-body intervention to prevent persistent pain and disability after acute traumatic orthopedic injury

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2024-11-17 DOI:10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104737
Madelyn R. Frumkin , Julie R. Brewer , Julia E. Hooker , Kate N. Jochimsen , Ana-Maria Vranceanu
{"title":"Within-person relationships between catastrophizing and pain intensity during a mind-body intervention to prevent persistent pain and disability after acute traumatic orthopedic injury","authors":"Madelyn R. Frumkin ,&nbsp;Julie R. Brewer ,&nbsp;Julia E. Hooker ,&nbsp;Kate N. Jochimsen ,&nbsp;Ana-Maria Vranceanu","doi":"10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104737","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Interventions aimed at preventing chronic pain after acute traumatic injury have significant potential to reduce healthcare expenditures and improve quality of life for millions of individuals. Given recent development of such interventions, limited research has examined mechanisms of change using repeated measures (e.g., session-by-session assessments). This study examines <em>within-person</em> relationships between pain catastrophizing and intensity during and after a four-session mind-body intervention for individuals with acute traumatic orthopedic injury (<em>N</em> = 76, <em>T</em> = 445). Random intercept cross-lagged panel models were used to examine within-person autoregressive, contemporaneous, and cross-lagged effects between pain catastrophizing and pain intensity, after accounting for stable between-person differences. Our primary hypothesis that improvements in catastrophizing would be associated with subsequent reductions in pain intensity was partially supported by a significant within-person cross-lagged effect between catastrophizing at post-test and pain with activity reported at three-month follow-up (β = 0.421, SE = 0.099, p &lt; .001). Improvement in catastrophizing was also associated with same-session improvement in pain intensity midway through the intervention. Importantly, bidirectional within-person analyses allowed us to rule out the possibility that improvements in pain were responsible for subsequent improvements in catastrophizing, but not vice versa. Together, these findings suggest improvements in catastrophizing during psychosocial intervention may prevent transition from acute to chronic pain after injury. Future research with larger between-person sample sizes, more frequent within-person assessment, and comparable control group data is necessary to facilitate greater understanding of psychosocial mechanisms for preventing chronic pain after injury.</div></div><div><h3>Perspective</h3><div>This study examines within-person relationships between pain catastrophizing and intensity during and after a four-session mind-body intervention to prevent persistent pain after acute traumatic orthopedic injury. Improved catastrophizing at post-test was associated with reduced pain with activity at three-month follow-up. Within-person analyses enhance understanding of psychosocial mechanisms for preventing chronic pain after injury.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51095,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 104737"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1526590024007156","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Interventions aimed at preventing chronic pain after acute traumatic injury have significant potential to reduce healthcare expenditures and improve quality of life for millions of individuals. Given recent development of such interventions, limited research has examined mechanisms of change using repeated measures (e.g., session-by-session assessments). This study examines within-person relationships between pain catastrophizing and intensity during and after a four-session mind-body intervention for individuals with acute traumatic orthopedic injury (N = 76, T = 445). Random intercept cross-lagged panel models were used to examine within-person autoregressive, contemporaneous, and cross-lagged effects between pain catastrophizing and pain intensity, after accounting for stable between-person differences. Our primary hypothesis that improvements in catastrophizing would be associated with subsequent reductions in pain intensity was partially supported by a significant within-person cross-lagged effect between catastrophizing at post-test and pain with activity reported at three-month follow-up (β = 0.421, SE = 0.099, p < .001). Improvement in catastrophizing was also associated with same-session improvement in pain intensity midway through the intervention. Importantly, bidirectional within-person analyses allowed us to rule out the possibility that improvements in pain were responsible for subsequent improvements in catastrophizing, but not vice versa. Together, these findings suggest improvements in catastrophizing during psychosocial intervention may prevent transition from acute to chronic pain after injury. Future research with larger between-person sample sizes, more frequent within-person assessment, and comparable control group data is necessary to facilitate greater understanding of psychosocial mechanisms for preventing chronic pain after injury.

Perspective

This study examines within-person relationships between pain catastrophizing and intensity during and after a four-session mind-body intervention to prevent persistent pain after acute traumatic orthopedic injury. Improved catastrophizing at post-test was associated with reduced pain with activity at three-month follow-up. Within-person analyses enhance understanding of psychosocial mechanisms for preventing chronic pain after injury.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在预防急性创伤性骨科损伤后持续疼痛和残疾的身心干预过程中,灾难化和疼痛强度之间的人际关系。
旨在预防急性创伤后慢性疼痛的干预措施在减少医疗支出和提高数百万人的生活质量方面具有巨大潜力。鉴于此类干预措施的最新发展,使用重复测量(如逐个疗程评估)来研究变化机制的研究十分有限。本研究针对急性创伤性骨科损伤患者(N = 76,T = 445)进行了为期四次的身心干预,在此期间和之后,研究了疼痛灾难化与疼痛强度之间的人际关系。在考虑了稳定的人际差异后,我们使用随机截距交叉滞后面板模型来检验疼痛灾难化和疼痛强度之间的人内自回归、同期和交叉滞后效应。我们的主要假设是,灾难化的改善将与随后疼痛强度的降低相关联,这一假设得到了测试后灾难化与三个月随访时报告的活动性疼痛之间显著的人内交叉滞后效应的部分支持(β = 0.421, SE = 0.099, p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pain
Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
7.50%
发文量
441
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pain publishes original articles related to all aspects of pain, including clinical and basic research, patient care, education, and health policy. Articles selected for publication in the Journal are most commonly reports of original clinical research or reports of original basic research. In addition, invited critical reviews, including meta analyses of drugs for pain management, invited commentaries on reviews, and exceptional case studies are published in the Journal. The mission of the Journal is to improve the care of patients in pain by providing a forum for clinical researchers, basic scientists, clinicians, and other health professionals to publish original research.
期刊最新文献
Contemporary media campaigns for musculoskeletal pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis with social marketing benchmarking. Chronic pain-induced functional and structural alterations in the brain: a multi-modal meta-analysis. Language Errors in Pain Medicine: An Umbrella Review. Within-person relationships between catastrophizing and pain intensity during a mind-body intervention to prevent persistent pain and disability after acute traumatic orthopedic injury Enhancing the trustworthiness of pain research: A call to action.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1