对慢性疼痛患者的多维心理灵活性简表(MPFI-24)和 Psy-Flex 西班牙语版进行心理测试。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY European Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2024-07-19 DOI:10.1002/ejp.4704
Jaime Navarrete, Carla Rodríguez-Freire, Juan P Sanabria-Mazo, David Martínez-Rubio, Lance M McCracken, Ana Gallego, Felicia T A Sundstrom, Mayte Serrat, Jordi Alonso, Albert Feliu-Soler, Rubén Nieto, Juan V Luciano
{"title":"对慢性疼痛患者的多维心理灵活性简表(MPFI-24)和 Psy-Flex 西班牙语版进行心理测试。","authors":"Jaime Navarrete, Carla Rodríguez-Freire, Juan P Sanabria-Mazo, David Martínez-Rubio, Lance M McCracken, Ana Gallego, Felicia T A Sundstrom, Mayte Serrat, Jordi Alonso, Albert Feliu-Soler, Rubén Nieto, Juan V Luciano","doi":"10.1002/ejp.4704","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) has been found to be beneficial for individuals dealing with chronic pain. The theoretical mechanisms of change proposed by ACT are based on the Hexaflex model. To comprehensively reflect this model, the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory (MPFI) and Psy-Flex have been developed. The study aimed to adapt the MPFI-24 and the Psy-Flex for Spanish-speaking populations with chronic pain and to examine their dimensionality, internal consistency, convergent validity and incremental validity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study involved 309 Spanish-speaking adults with chronic pain who completed an online survey. The majority of the participants were women (88.3%). The ages ranged from 18 to 79 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Factor analysis showed that the Spanish version of the MPFI-24 has 12 factors, consisting of six flexibility and six inflexibility factors, similar to the original version, but lacking second-order general factors. The Psy-Flex demonstrated a single-factor structure, maintaining the general factor of psychological flexibility seen in the original version. The MPFI-24 showed good internal consistency and adequate convergent validity, with the exception of the Acceptance and Experiential Avoidance subscales. The Psy-Flex showed good internal consistency and convergent validity. Notably, both the MPFI-24 and Psy-Flex scores significantly explained additional variance in psychological distress beyond other ACT-related measures of Hexaflex processes; however, only the Psy-Flex explained pain interference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Spanish adaptations of the MPFI-24 and Psy-Flex are valid and reliable instruments for assessing the Hexaflex model processes in Spanish-speaking adults with chronic pain.</p><p><strong>Significance statement: </strong>Practitioners and researchers in chronic pain will find the Spanish versions of the MPFI-24 and the Psy-Flex here, along with recommendations for their use and scoring based on a robust psychometric rationale. It should be noted that these measures surpass the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ) and the Psychological Inflexibility in Pain Scale (PIPS), which are considered gold standards in chronic pain assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":12021,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Pain","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychometric examination of the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory Short Form (MPFI-24) and the Psy-Flex Spanish versions in individuals with chronic pain.\",\"authors\":\"Jaime Navarrete, Carla Rodríguez-Freire, Juan P Sanabria-Mazo, David Martínez-Rubio, Lance M McCracken, Ana Gallego, Felicia T A Sundstrom, Mayte Serrat, Jordi Alonso, Albert Feliu-Soler, Rubén Nieto, Juan V Luciano\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ejp.4704\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) has been found to be beneficial for individuals dealing with chronic pain. The theoretical mechanisms of change proposed by ACT are based on the Hexaflex model. To comprehensively reflect this model, the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory (MPFI) and Psy-Flex have been developed. The study aimed to adapt the MPFI-24 and the Psy-Flex for Spanish-speaking populations with chronic pain and to examine their dimensionality, internal consistency, convergent validity and incremental validity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study involved 309 Spanish-speaking adults with chronic pain who completed an online survey. The majority of the participants were women (88.3%). The ages ranged from 18 to 79 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Factor analysis showed that the Spanish version of the MPFI-24 has 12 factors, consisting of six flexibility and six inflexibility factors, similar to the original version, but lacking second-order general factors. The Psy-Flex demonstrated a single-factor structure, maintaining the general factor of psychological flexibility seen in the original version. The MPFI-24 showed good internal consistency and adequate convergent validity, with the exception of the Acceptance and Experiential Avoidance subscales. The Psy-Flex showed good internal consistency and convergent validity. Notably, both the MPFI-24 and Psy-Flex scores significantly explained additional variance in psychological distress beyond other ACT-related measures of Hexaflex processes; however, only the Psy-Flex explained pain interference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Spanish adaptations of the MPFI-24 and Psy-Flex are valid and reliable instruments for assessing the Hexaflex model processes in Spanish-speaking adults with chronic pain.</p><p><strong>Significance statement: </strong>Practitioners and researchers in chronic pain will find the Spanish versions of the MPFI-24 and the Psy-Flex here, along with recommendations for their use and scoring based on a robust psychometric rationale. It should be noted that these measures surpass the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ) and the Psychological Inflexibility in Pain Scale (PIPS), which are considered gold standards in chronic pain assessment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12021,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Pain\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Pain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejp.4704\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejp.4704","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:接受与承诺疗法(ACT接受与承诺疗法(ACT)被认为对慢性疼痛患者有益。接受与承诺疗法所提出的理论改变机制是以 Hexaflex 模型为基础的。为了全面反映这一模型,开发了多维心理弹性量表(MPFI)和心理弹性量表(Psy-Flex)。本研究旨在对 MPFI-24 和 Psy-Flex 进行调整,使其适用于讲西班牙语的慢性疼痛患者,并对其维度、内部一致性、收敛效度和增量效度进行研究:这项横断面研究涉及 309 位讲西班牙语的成年慢性疼痛患者,他们完成了一项在线调查。大部分参与者为女性(88.3%)。结果:因素分析表明,西班牙文版本的慢性疼痛调查问卷具有较高的有效性:因子分析显示,西班牙语版 MPFI-24 有 12 个因子,包括 6 个灵活性因子和 6 个非灵活性因子,与原始版本相似,但缺乏二阶一般因子。Psy-Flex 显示了单因素结构,保留了原始版本中心理灵活性的一般因素。MPFI-24 显示出良好的内部一致性和足够的收敛效度,但接受和体验回避子量表除外。Psy-Flex 具有良好的内部一致性和收敛效度。值得注意的是,MPFI-24和Psy-Flex得分都能显著解释心理困扰的额外变异,超过了其他与ACT相关的六合彩资料大全过程测量;但是,只有Psy-Flex能解释疼痛干扰:结论:西班牙语改编的 MPFI-24 和 Psy-Flex 是评估西班牙语成人慢性疼痛患者 Hexaflex 模型过程的有效而可靠的工具:慢性疼痛领域的从业人员和研究人员可以在此找到西班牙语版的 MPFI-24 和 Psy-Flex,以及基于可靠的心理测量原理提出的使用和评分建议。值得注意的是,这些测量方法超过了慢性疼痛接受度问卷(CPAQ)和疼痛心理不灵活量表(PIPS),而后者被认为是慢性疼痛评估的黄金标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Psychometric examination of the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory Short Form (MPFI-24) and the Psy-Flex Spanish versions in individuals with chronic pain.

Background: Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) has been found to be beneficial for individuals dealing with chronic pain. The theoretical mechanisms of change proposed by ACT are based on the Hexaflex model. To comprehensively reflect this model, the Multidimensional Psychological Flexibility Inventory (MPFI) and Psy-Flex have been developed. The study aimed to adapt the MPFI-24 and the Psy-Flex for Spanish-speaking populations with chronic pain and to examine their dimensionality, internal consistency, convergent validity and incremental validity.

Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 309 Spanish-speaking adults with chronic pain who completed an online survey. The majority of the participants were women (88.3%). The ages ranged from 18 to 79 years.

Results: Factor analysis showed that the Spanish version of the MPFI-24 has 12 factors, consisting of six flexibility and six inflexibility factors, similar to the original version, but lacking second-order general factors. The Psy-Flex demonstrated a single-factor structure, maintaining the general factor of psychological flexibility seen in the original version. The MPFI-24 showed good internal consistency and adequate convergent validity, with the exception of the Acceptance and Experiential Avoidance subscales. The Psy-Flex showed good internal consistency and convergent validity. Notably, both the MPFI-24 and Psy-Flex scores significantly explained additional variance in psychological distress beyond other ACT-related measures of Hexaflex processes; however, only the Psy-Flex explained pain interference.

Conclusions: The Spanish adaptations of the MPFI-24 and Psy-Flex are valid and reliable instruments for assessing the Hexaflex model processes in Spanish-speaking adults with chronic pain.

Significance statement: Practitioners and researchers in chronic pain will find the Spanish versions of the MPFI-24 and the Psy-Flex here, along with recommendations for their use and scoring based on a robust psychometric rationale. It should be noted that these measures surpass the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ) and the Psychological Inflexibility in Pain Scale (PIPS), which are considered gold standards in chronic pain assessment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Pain
European Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
163
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: European Journal of Pain (EJP) publishes clinical and basic science research papers relevant to all aspects of pain and its management, including specialties such as anaesthesia, dentistry, neurology and neurosurgery, orthopaedics, palliative care, pharmacology, physiology, psychiatry, psychology and rehabilitation; socio-economic aspects of pain are also covered. Regular sections in the journal are as follows: • Editorials and Commentaries • Position Papers and Guidelines • Reviews • Original Articles • Letters • Bookshelf The journal particularly welcomes clinical trials, which are published on an occasional basis. Research articles are published under the following subject headings: • Neurobiology • Neurology • Experimental Pharmacology • Clinical Pharmacology • Psychology • Behavioural Therapy • Epidemiology • Cancer Pain • Acute Pain • Clinical Trials.
期刊最新文献
A discrete choice experiment: Understanding patient preferences for managing chronic non-cancer pain. Beyond intensity: A commentary on stretch-induced hypoalgesia. Evaluating multiplicity reporting in analgesic clinical trials: An analytical review. Cycling sensitivity across migraine phases: A longitudinal case-control study. Preoperative resting-state electrophysiological signals predict acute but not chronic postoperative pain.
×
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