性别和情景疼痛灾难化对疼痛敏感性影响的混合方法研究。

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY Pain Medicine Pub Date : 2024-08-09 DOI:10.1093/pm/pnae072
Yun-Yun K Chen, Jenna M Wilson, K Mikayla Flowers, Carin A Colebaugh, Angelina R Franqueiro, Philipp Lirk, Kamen Vlassakov, Kristin L Schreiber
{"title":"性别和情景疼痛灾难化对疼痛敏感性影响的混合方法研究。","authors":"Yun-Yun K Chen, Jenna M Wilson, K Mikayla Flowers, Carin A Colebaugh, Angelina R Franqueiro, Philipp Lirk, Kamen Vlassakov, Kristin L Schreiber","doi":"10.1093/pm/pnae072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It is well established that catastrophic thinking about pain modulates clinical pain severity, but it may also relate to interindividual differences in the pain experience during procedures. This mixed-methods study investigated the relationship between ratings of situational pain catastrophizing and reported pain sensitivity in the context of receiving a nerve block without sedation, and explored participants' experiences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Healthy volunteers (n = 42) completed baseline psychosocial questionnaires, underwent quantitative sensory testing, and received a lower extremity nerve block, followed by further psychosocial assessment and interviews. Associations of catastrophizing scores with pain sensitivity and procedural site pain were assessed using Spearman's correlations. Interviews were reviewed using an immersion/crystallization approach to identify emergent themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Greater situational catastrophizing scores were associated with higher pain sensitivity, measured as lower pain threshold and tolerance. Although females exhibited greater pain sensitivity generally, moderation analysis revealed a significant association between situational catastrophizing scores and pain sensitivity only among male participants. Qualitative interviews revealed the importance of participants' emotional responses to pain, and a mismatch of expectation and experience with procedural pain. Males also reported more negative comments about procedural pain.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Examination of the variable subjective experience while receiving a nerve block in this experimental lab-based study revealed an important relationship between situational pain catastrophizing scores and pain sensitivity, which was more prominent among male participants. These findings reinforce how insight into individual expectations, emotions, and thought processes may impact pain sensitivity during procedures, and may inform strategies to personalize care, improving patient satisfaction and procedural acceptance.</p>","PeriodicalId":19744,"journal":{"name":"Pain Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Mixed-Methods study of the impact of sex and situational pain catastrophizing on pain sensitivity.\",\"authors\":\"Yun-Yun K Chen, Jenna M Wilson, K Mikayla Flowers, Carin A Colebaugh, Angelina R Franqueiro, Philipp Lirk, Kamen Vlassakov, Kristin L Schreiber\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/pm/pnae072\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It is well established that catastrophic thinking about pain modulates clinical pain severity, but it may also relate to interindividual differences in the pain experience during procedures. This mixed-methods study investigated the relationship between ratings of situational pain catastrophizing and reported pain sensitivity in the context of receiving a nerve block without sedation, and explored participants' experiences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Healthy volunteers (n = 42) completed baseline psychosocial questionnaires, underwent quantitative sensory testing, and received a lower extremity nerve block, followed by further psychosocial assessment and interviews. Associations of catastrophizing scores with pain sensitivity and procedural site pain were assessed using Spearman's correlations. Interviews were reviewed using an immersion/crystallization approach to identify emergent themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Greater situational catastrophizing scores were associated with higher pain sensitivity, measured as lower pain threshold and tolerance. Although females exhibited greater pain sensitivity generally, moderation analysis revealed a significant association between situational catastrophizing scores and pain sensitivity only among male participants. Qualitative interviews revealed the importance of participants' emotional responses to pain, and a mismatch of expectation and experience with procedural pain. Males also reported more negative comments about procedural pain.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Examination of the variable subjective experience while receiving a nerve block in this experimental lab-based study revealed an important relationship between situational pain catastrophizing scores and pain sensitivity, which was more prominent among male participants. These findings reinforce how insight into individual expectations, emotions, and thought processes may impact pain sensitivity during procedures, and may inform strategies to personalize care, improving patient satisfaction and procedural acceptance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pain Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pain Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnae072\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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":"Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnae072","RegionNum":3,"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:对疼痛的灾难性思考会调节临床疼痛的严重程度,这一点已得到公认,但它也可能与手术过程中疼痛体验的个体差异有关。这项混合方法研究调查了在无镇静的情况下接受神经阻滞时,情景疼痛灾难化评分与所报告的疼痛敏感度之间的关系,并探讨了参与者的体验。方法:健康志愿者(n = 42)填写基线社会心理问卷,接受定量感觉测试,并接受下肢神经阻滞,然后接受进一步的社会心理评估和访谈。灾难化评分与疼痛敏感性和手术部位疼痛的相关性采用斯皮尔曼相关性进行评估。采用沉浸/结晶方法对访谈进行审查,以确定新出现的主题:结果:情景灾难化得分越高,疼痛敏感度越高,疼痛阈值和耐受性越低。虽然女性普遍表现出更高的疼痛敏感性,但调节分析显示,只有男性参与者的情境灾难化得分与疼痛敏感性之间存在显著关联。定性访谈显示了参与者对疼痛的情绪反应的重要性,以及对程序性疼痛的期望和体验的不匹配。男性对手术疼痛的负面评价也更多:讨论:在这项以实验室为基础的实验研究中,对接受神经阻滞时的主观体验变量的研究表明,情景疼痛灾难化评分与疼痛敏感性之间存在重要关系,而男性参与者的这种关系更为突出。这些发现加强了对个人期望、情绪和思维过程的洞察力,这可能会影响手术过程中的疼痛敏感性,并为个性化护理策略提供信息,从而提高患者满意度和手术接受度。
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
A Mixed-Methods study of the impact of sex and situational pain catastrophizing on pain sensitivity.

Background: It is well established that catastrophic thinking about pain modulates clinical pain severity, but it may also relate to interindividual differences in the pain experience during procedures. This mixed-methods study investigated the relationship between ratings of situational pain catastrophizing and reported pain sensitivity in the context of receiving a nerve block without sedation, and explored participants' experiences.

Methods: Healthy volunteers (n = 42) completed baseline psychosocial questionnaires, underwent quantitative sensory testing, and received a lower extremity nerve block, followed by further psychosocial assessment and interviews. Associations of catastrophizing scores with pain sensitivity and procedural site pain were assessed using Spearman's correlations. Interviews were reviewed using an immersion/crystallization approach to identify emergent themes.

Results: Greater situational catastrophizing scores were associated with higher pain sensitivity, measured as lower pain threshold and tolerance. Although females exhibited greater pain sensitivity generally, moderation analysis revealed a significant association between situational catastrophizing scores and pain sensitivity only among male participants. Qualitative interviews revealed the importance of participants' emotional responses to pain, and a mismatch of expectation and experience with procedural pain. Males also reported more negative comments about procedural pain.

Discussion: Examination of the variable subjective experience while receiving a nerve block in this experimental lab-based study revealed an important relationship between situational pain catastrophizing scores and pain sensitivity, which was more prominent among male participants. These findings reinforce how insight into individual expectations, emotions, and thought processes may impact pain sensitivity during procedures, and may inform strategies to personalize care, improving patient satisfaction and procedural acceptance.

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
Pain Medicine
Pain Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
3.20%
发文量
187
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Pain Medicine is a multi-disciplinary journal dedicated to pain clinicians, educators and researchers with an interest in pain from various medical specialties such as pain medicine, anaesthesiology, family practice, internal medicine, neurology, neurological surgery, orthopaedic spine surgery, psychiatry, and rehabilitation medicine as well as related health disciplines such as psychology, neuroscience, nursing, nurse practitioner, physical therapy, and integrative health.
期刊最新文献
Case-Based Peer Teaching for Pain Medicine Fellows: A Curriculum for Diverse Residency Backgrounds Exploring new educational approaches in neuropathic pain: Assessing accuracy and consistency of AI responses from GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. Pudendal nerve entrapment syndrome: Clinical features, diagnosis, and management. Assessment of chronic pain and its association with functional capacity in patients with HTLV-1. Examination of a repaired medial meniscus: ultrasound's forte.
×
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