Measuring Pain Catastrophizing and Pain-Related Self-Efficacy: Expert Panels, Focus Groups, and Cognitive Interviews

Development and validation of the Chiropractic Professional Identity Embodiment Scale (CPIES)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Chiropractic professional identity (CPI) encompasses diverse values, beliefs, experiences, and philosophies about one's work, specific to the chiropractic profession. Yet currently, there is no instrument available to measure CPI. This study aimed to develop and validate the Chiropractic Professional Identity Embodiment Scale (CPIES).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A mixed-methods sequential exploratory design was employed where qualitative inquiry preceded quantitative analysis of survey items conducted in New Zealand in 2022. Expert key informants provided feedback on candidate items via one-to-one cognitive interviews. Candidate items were administered to Board-registered chiropractors or chiropractic students through an online survey. The suitability of candidate items was evaluated using a variety of psychometric analyses including conceptually guided exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and reliability testing.

RESULTS

Based on relevant professional identity literature and feedback from 15 expert key informants, a draft survey instrument with 92 candidate items (across six domains) was rated by 231 participants. Using EFA, the number of items was reduced to 15. The CPIES sum score exhibited significant correlations with individuals' philosophical self-categorisation and five of the six optional subscales.

CONCLUSION

The 15-item CPIES, either as a unidimensional score or with six separate subscale scores, has been demonstrated to provide valid and reliable measurement of CPI. Future research could utilise the CPIES to investigate how CPI influences clinical practice, patient outcomes, career satisfaction, and public perception of the chiropractic profession, further advancing professionalisation and recognition within healthcare.

Pain Catastrophizing: Controversies, Misconceptions and Future Directions

Recent reports have pointed to problems with the term "pain catastrophizing." Critiques of the term pain catastrophizing have come from several sources including individuals with chronic pain, advocates for individuals with chronic pain, and pain scholars. Reports indicate that the term has been used to dismiss the medical basis of pain complaints, to question the authenticity of pain complaints, and to blame individuals with pain for their pain condition. In this paper, we advance the position that the problems prompting calls to rename the construct of pain catastrophizing have little to do with the term, and as such, changing the term will do little to solve these problems. We argue that continued calls for changing or deleting the term pain catastrophizing will only divert attention away from some fundamental flaws in how individuals with pain conditions are assessed and treated. Some of these fundamental flaws have their roots in the inadequate training of health and allied health professionals in evidence-based models of pain, in the use of psychological assessment and intervention tools for the clinical management of pain, and in gender equity and antiracism. Critiques that pain scholars have leveled against the defining, operational, and conceptual bases of pain catastrophizing are also addressed. Arguments for reconceptualizing pain catastrophizing as a worry-related construct are discussed. Recommendations are made for remediation of the problems that have contributed to calls to rename the term pain catastrophizing. PERSPECTIVE: The issues prompting calls to rename the construct of pain catastrophizing have their roots in fundamental flaws in how individuals with pain are assessed and treated. Efforts to address these problems will require more than a simple change in terminology.

Preference for Hedonic Goals in Fibromyalgia; Is It Always an Avoidance Mechanism? Looking the Relationship with Pain Acceptance from a Positive Psychology Perspective

The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of openness to experience on pain acceptance through positive affect (PA) considering the moderating role of preference for mood management goals in women with fibromyalgia (FM). A cross-sectional study (n = 231) was carried out. A simple mediation model and a moderate mediation model were conducted by SPSS macro-PROCESS. Results showed that PA mediated positively the effect of openness to experience on acceptance (B = 0.46, SE = 0.80, t = 5,59; 95% CI = [0.3016, 0.6298], p < .001) and that the contribution of openness to experience to PA varied at different values of mood management goals (medium: - .04; ß = .40, p < .001; high: .95; ß = .61, p<.001). Findings may serve as a foundation for tailored interventions to promote activity through acceptance focusing on PA and mood management goals among women with medium to high level of hedonic goals.

Feasibility of Brief, Hypnotic Enhanced Cognitive Therapy for SCI-related Pain During Inpatient Rehabilitation

OBJECTIVES

(1) Adapt evidence-based hypnosis-enhanced cognitive therapy (HYP-CT) for inpatient rehabilitation setting; and (2) determine feasibility of a clinical trial evaluating the effectiveness of HYP-CT intervention for pain after spinal cord injury (SCI).

STUDY DESIGN

Pilot non-randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Inpatient rehabilitation unit.

PARTICIPANTS

English-speaking patients admitted to inpatient rehabilitation after SCI reporting current pain of at least 3 on a 0-10 scale. Persons with severe psychiatric illness, recent suicide attempt or elevated risk, or significant cognitive impairment were excluded. Consecutive sample of 53 patients with SCI-related pain enrolled, representing 82% of eligible patients.

INTERVENTION

Up to 4 sessions of HYP-CT Intervention, each 30-60 minutes long.

METHODS

Participants were assessed at baseline and given the choice to receive HYP-CT or Usual Care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Participant enrollment and participation and acceptability of intervention. Exploratory analyses examined the effect of intervention on pain and cognitive appraisals of pain.

RESULTS

In the HYP-CT group, 71% completed at least 3 treatment sessions and reported treatment benefit and satisfaction with the treatment; no adverse events were reported. Exploratory analyses of effectiveness found pre-post treatment pain reductions after HYP-CT with large effect (P<.001; β=-1.64). While the study was not powered to detect significant between-group differences at discharge, effect sizes revealed decreases in average pain (Cohen's d=-0.13), pain interference (d=-0.10), and pain catastrophizing (d=-0.20) in the HYP-CT group relative to control and increases in self-efficacy (d=0.27) and pain acceptance (d=0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to provide HYP-CT to inpatients with SCI, and HYP-CT results in substantial reductions in SCI pain. The study is the first to show a psychological-based nonpharmacologic intervention that may reduce SCI pain during inpatient rehabilitation. A definitive efficacy trial is warranted.

Who Benefits the Most From Different Psychological Chronic Pain Treatments? An Exploratory Analysis of Treatment Moderators

Different psychological chronic pain treatments benefit some individuals more than others. Understanding the factors that are associated with treatment response-especially when those factors differ between treatments-may inform more effective patient-treatment matching. This study aimed to identify variables that moderate treatment response to 4 psychological pain interventions in a sample of adults with low back pain or chronic pain associated with multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, acquired amputation, or muscular dystrophy (N = 173). The current study presents the results from secondary exploratory analyses using data from a randomized controlled clinical trial which compared the effects of 4 sessions of cognitive therapy (CT), hypnosis focused on pain reduction (HYP), hypnosis focused on changing pain-related cognitions and beliefs (HYP-CT), and a pain education control condition (ED). The analyses tested the effects of 7 potential treatment moderators. Measures of primary (pain intensity) and secondary (pain interference, depression severity) outcome domains were administered before and after the pain treatments, and potential moderators (catastrophizing, hypnotizability, and electroencephalogram (EEG)-assessed oscillation power across five bandwidths) were assessed at pre-treatment. Moderator effects were tested fitting regression analyses to pre- to post-treatment changes in the three outcome variables. The study findings, while preliminary, support the premise that pre-treatment measures of hypnotizability and EEG brain activity predict who is more (or less) likely to respond to different psychological pain treatments. If additional research replicates the findings, it may be possible to better match patients to their more individually suitable treatment, ultimately improving pain treatment outcomes. PERSPECTIVE: Pre-treatment measures of hypnotizability and EEG-assessed brain activity predicted who was more (or less) likely to respond to different psychological pain treatments. If these findings are replicated in future studies, they could inform the development of patient-treatment matching algorithms.

A Case Study of Hypnosis Enhanced Cognitive Therapy for Pain in a Ventilator Dependent Patient during Inpatient Rehabilitation for Spinal Cord Injury

Early, acute pain following spinal cord injury (SCI) is common, can negatively impact SCI rehabilitation, and is frequently not responsive to biomedical treatment. Nonpharmacological interventions show promise in reducing pain for individuals with SCI. However, most psychological interventions rely heavily on verbal interaction between the individual being treated and the clinician, making them inaccessible for individuals with impaired verbal output due to mechanical ventilation. This case study aims to describe the adaptation and implementation of hypnotic cognitive therapy (HYP-CT) intervention for early SCI pain in the context of mechanical ventilation dependence and weaning. The participant was a 54-year-old male with C2 AIS A SCI requiring mechanical ventilation. Four sessions of HYP-CT were provided during inpatient rehabilitation with assessment prior to intervention, after the intervention sessions, and prior to discharge. The participant reported immediate reductions in pain intensity following each intervention session. Overall, he reported increases in self-efficacy and pain acceptance. He did not report any negative treatment effects and thought the intervention provided support during mechanical ventilation weaning. During treatment, he discontinued opioid pain medications and reported actively using intervention strategies. Our results support the potential for early, hypnotic cognitive therapy for individuals with SCI experiencing pain or distress while dependent on mechanical ventilation.

Patient Responses to the Term Pain Catastrophizing: Thematic Analysis of Cross-sectional International Data

Pain catastrophizing is understood as a negative cognitive and emotional response to pain. Researchers, advocates and patients have reported stigmatizing effects of the term in clinical settings and the media. We conducted an international study to investigate patient perspectives on the term pain catastrophizing. Open-ended electronic patient and caregiver proxy surveys were promoted internationally by collaborator stakeholders and through social media. 3,521 surveys were received from 47 countries (77.3% from the U.S.). The sample was mainly female (82.1%), with a mean age of 41.62 (SD 12.03) years; 95% reported ongoing pain and pain duration > 10 years (68.4%). Forty-five percent (n = 1,295) had heard of the term pain catastrophizing; 12% (n = 349) reported being described as a 'pain catastrophizer' by a clinician with associated high levels of feeling blamed, judged, and dismissed. We present qualitative thematic data analytics for responses to open-ended questions, with 32% of responses highlighting the problematic nature of the term. We present the patients' perspective on the term pain catastrophizing, its material effect on clinical experiences, and associations with negative gender stereotypes. Use of patient-centered terminology may be important for favorably shaping the social context of patients' experience of pain and pain care. PERSPECTIVE: Our international patient survey found that 45% had heard of the term pain catastrophizing, about one-third spontaneously rated the term as problematic, and 12% reported the term was applied to them with most stating this was a negative experience. Clinician education on patient-centered terminology may improve care and reduce stigma.

Responsiveness of the UW Concerns About Pain Scale and UW Pain-Related Self-Efficacy Scale in Individuals With Chronic Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to examine the responsiveness, presence of floor or ceiling effects, and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for 2 new measures of pain-related catastrophizing and self-efficacy in individuals with chronic low back pain.

METHODS

A total of 183 individuals with chronic low back pain recruited from physical therapy clinics in Thailand completed the Thai versions of the 6-item University of Washington Concerns About Pain scale (T-UW-CAP6) and 6-item University of Washington Pain-Related Self-Efficacy scale (T-UW-PRSE6) at baseline and at 4 weeks follow-up. Perceived change in low back symptom was assessed at 4 weeks using a 7-point measure of Global Perceived Effect (GPE). Responsiveness of the T-UW-CAP6 and the T-UW-PRSE6 scale scores were evaluated by computing the effect sizes and standardized response means for change over time, and examining these as a function of the GPE ratings. Floor and ceiling effects were examined by evaluating the score distributions. Scale core MCIDs were estimated by computing a half a SD and SE of measurement statistics for each scale.

RESULTS

Responsiveness of the scales to pain treatment was supported by differences found in the mean change scores as a function of the treatment response categories. No significant floor or ceiling effects were found for either measure. Changes of 4.38 and 3.68 appeared to be the smallest change score perceived as clinical meaningful for the T-UW-CAP6 and T-UW-PRSE 6 scale scores, respectively.

DISCUSSION

The T-UW-CAP6 and T-UW-PRSE6 demonstrated good ability to detect perceived changes over time in patients with chronic low back pain. The MCIDs values provide a benchmark for assessing individual improvement in this clinical context.

Pain-Related Worrying and Goal Preferences Determine Walking Persistence in Women with Fibromyalgia

Physical activity and exercise are relevant behaviors for fibromyalgia health outcomes; however, patients have difficulties undertaking and maintaining an active lifestyle. With a cross-sectional design, this study explored the role of pain-related worrying and goal preferences in the walking persistence of women with fibromyalgia. The sample included 111 women who attended a tertiary health setting. We adapted the Six-Minute Walk Test where participants decided either to stop or continue walking in five voluntary 6 min bouts. Women who were categorized higher in pain-related worrying reported higher preference for pain avoidance goals (t = -2.44, p = 0.02) and performed worse in the walking task (LongRank = 4.21; p = 0.04). Pain avoidance goal preference increased the likelihood of stopping after the first (OR = 1.443), second (OR = 1.493), and third (OR = 1.540) 6 min walking bout, and the risk of ending the walking activity during the 30 min task (HR = 1.02, [1.0-1.03]). Influence of pain-related worrying on total walking distance was mediated by goal preferences (ab = -3.25). In interventions targeting adherence in physical activity and exercise, special attention is needed for women who are particularly worried about pain to help decrease their preference for short-term pain avoidance goals relative to long-term goals such as being active through walking.

The Measurement and Conceptualization of Coping Responses in Pediatric Chronic Pain Populations: A Scoping Review

Background: Pediatric chronic pain is a prevalent condition that requires significant coping to encourage optimal functioning; however, relevant research is vast, heterogeneous, and difficult to interpret. To date, no attempt has been made to map and summarize the measurement and conceptualization of coping responses in the context of pediatric chronic pain. Objectives: A scoping review was conducted to map and summarize the participant characteristics, methodologies, theoretical frameworks, and measures used to assess coping responses in youth with chronic pain. The extent to which authors used definitions and examples of coping responses (conceptual clarity) as well as consistently used measures (measurement consistency) and their corresponding conceptualizations (conceptual consistency) relative to how they were intended to be used were assessed. Methods: Searches were conducted through MEDLINE (PubMed) and PsycINFO. Following title/abstract screening, full-text extractions were performed on 125 English-language publications on coping in youth with chronic pain. Results: Of the 125 studies, only 12.8% used a theoretical framework to explain the coping responses assessed, and even fewer (7.2%) used theory to guide measure selection. Conceptual clarity was rated "low/very low" (i.e., no definitions and/or examples) for 47.2% of studies. The majority of studies were conducted in the United States (67%) and a preponderance of White and female participants was sampled. The research primarily used quantitative methods (85%) and cross-sectional designs (67%). Parent- or self-report questionnaires were the most common methods for assessing coping (86%). Of the 95 studies that utilized one of the 14 questionnaires with known psychometric properties, 33.7 and 55.8% had one or more discrepancies for conceptual and measurement consistency, respectively. Conclusions: This review highlights the lack of clear descriptions and theoretical frameworks of coping responses for pediatric chronic pain. Inconsistencies in the measurement and conceptualization of coping responses limit research and clinical advancements. As a field, we need to strive toward using well-developed theory to create fewer, more well-established standardized measures with clearly defined coping responses. Opportunities for qualitative and observational research in more diverse patient populations should be considered for theory construction and measure validation. Clinical Trial Registration: https://osf.io/xvn2a/?view_only=eff04e0c0b9649be89d403b10e9ff082.

Association Between Pain Catastrophizing and Pain and Cardiovascular Changes During a Cold-Pressor Test in Athletes

CONTEXT

Athletes are often exposed to pain due to injury and competition. Using preliminary evidence, researchers have shown that cardiovascular measures could be an objective measure of pain, but the cardiovascular response can be influenced by psychological factors, such as catastrophizing.

OBJECTIVE

To use a painful cold-pressor test (CPT) to measure the relationship among catastrophizing, pain, and cardiovascular variables in athletes.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING

Laboratory.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

A total of 36 male rugby athletes (age = 24.0 ± 4.6 years, height = 180.0 ± 6.1 cm, mass = 90.5 ± 13.8 kg).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

We measured catastrophizing using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale and pain using a numeric pain rating scale. Cardiovascular measures were heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate variability.

RESULTS

During the CPT, participants experienced increases in pain (from 0 to 4.1 ± 2.2), systolic blood pressure (from 126.7 ± 16.5 to 149.7 ± 23.4 mm Hg), diastolic blood pressure (from 76.9 ± 8.3 to 91.9 ± 11.5 mm Hg), and heart rate variability (from 0.0164 ± 0.0121 to 0.0400 ± 0.0323 milliseconds; all P values < .001). In addition, we observed a decrease in heart rate after the CPT (P = .04). We found a correlation between athletes' pain catastrophizing and both pain intensity and change in heart rate during the CPT (P = .02 and P = .003, respectively). Linear regression indicated that pain and catastrophizing explained 29% of the variance in the change in heart rate (P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

Athletes who had catastrophizing thoughts were more likely to experience higher levels of pain and a greater cardiovascular response during a painful stimulus. The change in cardiovascular variables may be a good objective measure of pain in athletes in the future.

Pain-related beliefs, cognitive processes, and electroencephalography band power as predictors and mediators of the effects of psychological chronic pain interventions

ABSTRACT

The current study used data from a clinical trial to identify variables that are associated with and/or mediate the beneficial effects of 4 psychological chronic pain treatments: one teaching patients self-hypnosis to reduce pain intensity (HYP), one teaching self-hypnosis to change thoughts about pain (hypnotic cognitive therapy [HYP-CT]), one teaching cognitive restructuring skills to change thoughts about pain (cognitive therapy [CT]), and one providing education about pain (ED; included as an active control condition). Of 17 possible mechanism variables examined, and with alpha not corrected for multiple comparisons, significant between-group differences were observed for 3. Two of these (changes in beliefs about control over pain and number of days of skill practice) were supported as mediators of the beneficial effects of HYP, CT, or HYP-CT, relative to ED. Six mechanism variables evidenced significant pretreatment to post-treatment changes in the sample as a whole, without showing significant between-group differences. Pretreatment to post-treatment changes in all 6 were associated with improvements in pain interference, pain intensity, or both. In addition, participant ratings of therapeutic alliance at post-treatment were associated significantly with improvements in both pain intensity and pain interference in the sample as a whole. Thus, of the 17 possible mediators examined, there were relatively few that served as mediators for the beneficial effects of specific treatments; a larger number of variables predicted treatment outcome overall. The extent to which these variables are treatment mediators (ie, are responsible for, rather than merely associated with, treatment-related improvements) will require further research.

Psychometric examination of short forms from the University of Washington pain-related self-efficacy and concerns about pain item banks in patients with low back pain

PURPOSE

This study examined the psychometric properties of custom short forms assessing pain-related self-efficacy and catastrophizing, which are important psychosocial constructs for individuals with pain conditions. Short forms were derived from the University of Washington concerns about pain (UWCAP) and pain-related self-efficacy (UWPRSE) item banks.

METHODS

Participants with low back pain (LBP) in a clinical trial (n = 241) examining nonpharmacologic treatments completed the 8-item UWCAP and 9-item UWPRSE and a numeric pain intensity rating, Oswestry Disability and Fear-Avoidance Beliefs questionnaires at baseline, 1-, 4- and 12-weeks after enrollment. Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients estimated internal consistency and test-retest reliability, respectively. Floor and ceiling effects for the UWCAP and UWPRSE were examined. Concurrent validity was evaluated with univariate correlation coefficients and predictive validity with multivariate regression models. Participants were divided into categories of treatment responsiveness based on a single-item global rating measure, and UWPRSE and UWCAP change scores and standardized effect sizes were calculated in each category.

RESULTS

Both short forms had good internal consistency (α = 0.89-0.90) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.77-0.85), without substantial floor or ceiling effects. As expected, the UWCAP was positively correlated, and UWPRSE negatively correlated, with concurrent measures of pain intensity, disability and fear-avoidance beliefs. The UWCAP added to the prediction model for 4-week disability outcomes (β = 0.25, p = 0.008). Responsiveness was supported by the mean change scores and effect sizes across treatment response categories.

CONCLUSION

The UWCAP and UWPRSE short forms demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties, supporting future research on the role of these constructs in the management of persons with LBP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT02860834. Registered on August 16, 2016.

Psychomotor Predictive Processing

Psychomotor experience can be based on what people predict they will experience, rather than on sensory inputs. It has been argued that disconnects between human experience and sensory inputs can be addressed better through further development of predictive processing theory. In this paper, the scope of predictive processing theory is extended through three developments. First, by going beyond previous studies that have encompassed embodied cognition but have not addressed some fundamental aspects of psychomotor functioning. Second, by proposing a scientific basis for explaining predictive processing that spans objective neuroscience and subjective experience. Third, by providing an explanation of predictive processing that can be incorporated into the planning and operation of systems involving robots and other new technologies. This is necessary because such systems are becoming increasingly common and move us farther away from the hunter-gatherer lifestyles within which our psychomotor functioning evolved. For example, beliefs that workplace robots are threatening can generate anxiety, while wearing hardware, such as augmented reality headsets and exoskeletons, can impede the natural functioning of psychomotor systems. The primary contribution of the paper is the introduction of a new formulation of hierarchical predictive processing that is focused on psychomotor functioning.

The factor structure and subscale properties of the pain catastrophizing scale: are there differences in the distinctions?

As presently constructed, the pain catastrophizing failed to discriminate effectively among levels of rumination, magnification, and helplessness in a sample of patients with chronic pain.

Increasingly, studies have documented the negative impact of pain catastrophizing on health outcomes. The Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) has been the measure of choice for many of these studies. The PCS provides 3 subscales for measuring pain catastrophizing: rumination, magnification, and helplessness. Factor analytic investigations of these factors have been limited by the sample size and relevance, and results have been inconsistent. No study has directly estimated the added value of subscale scoring of the PCS compared with scoring it as a single measure.

The Concerns About Pain (CAP) Scale: A Patient-Reported Outcome Measure of Pain Catastrophizing

Pain catastrophizing has been recognized as an important and consistent psychosocial predictor of nearly every key pain-related outcome. The purpose of this study was to develop a new measure of pain catastrophizing using modern psychometric methodology. People with chronic pain (N = 795) responded to thirty items. Data were analyzed using item response theory, including assessment of differential item functioning and reliability. Sensitivity to change and validity were examined using data collected from patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery (n = 184) and participating in an ongoing longitudinal aging with a disability survey study (n = 1,388). The final 24-item bank had no items with significant local dependence, misfit, or differential item functioning. Results provided strong evidence of reliability and validity. Six- and 2-item short forms were developed for use when computer adaptive testing is not feasible or desirable. The item bank was named the University of Washington Concerns About Pain scale because the term "catastrophizing" was considered stigmatizing by people with chronic pain. Guidance for score interpretation was developed with extensive feedback from individuals with chronic pain. The Concerns About Pain item bank, short forms, and user manuals are free and publicly available to all users and can be accessed online at https://uwcorr.washington.edu/measures/. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the development of the University of Washington Concerns About Pain scale, the first item response theory-based item bank of pain catastrophizing. The measure is intended for clinicians interested in improving outcomes of patients with chronic pain and for researchers who study impact of and treatment interventions aimed at reducing pain catastrophizing.

Let's talk about pain catastrophizing measures: an item content analysis

BACKGROUND

Concerns have been raised about whether self-report measures of pain catastrophizing reflect the construct as defined in the cognitive-behavioral literature. We investigated the content of these self-report measures; that is, whether items assess the construct 'pain catastrophizing' and not other theoretical constructs (i.e., related constructs or pain outcomes) using the discriminant content validity method.

METHOD

Items (n = 58) of six pain catastrophizing measures were complemented with items (n = 34) from questionnaires measuring pain-related worrying, vigilance, pain severity, distress, and disability. Via an online survey, 94 participants rated to what extent each item was relevant for assessing pain catastrophizing, defined as "to view or present pain or pain-related problems as considerably worse than they actually are" and other relevant constructs (pain-related worrying, vigilance, pain severity, distress, and disability).

RESULTS

Data were analyzed using Bayesian hierarchical models. The results revealed that the items from pain-related worrying, vigilance, pain severity, distress, and disability questionnaires were distinctively related to their respective constructs. This was not observed for the items from the pain catastrophizing questionnaires. The content of the pain catastrophizing measures was equally well, or even better, captured by pain-related worrying or pain-related distress.

CONCLUSION

Based upon current findings, a recommendation may be to develop a novel pain catastrophizing questionnaire. However, we argue that pain catastrophizing cannot be assessed by self-report questionnaires. Pain catastrophizing requires contextual information, and expert judgment, which cannot be provided by self-report questionnaires. We argue for a person-centered approach, and propose to rename 'pain catastrophizing' measures in line with what is better measured: 'pain-related worrying'.

Cross-cultural adaptation, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of the Thai version of the University of Washington Pain-Related Self-Efficacy Scale

INTRODUCTION

One psychosocial factor in the biopsychosocial model is pain-related self-efficacy, which has been shown to be a strong predictor of response to pain treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To cross-culturally adapt the University of Washington Pain-Related Self-Efficacy Scale (UW-PRSE6) into Thai and evaluate its psychometric properties.

METHODS

The study was approved by the Chulalongkorn University Human Ethics Committee (COA No. 156/2018). The original UW-PRSE6 was cross-culturally adapted using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy translation methodology. Two hundred forty-one individuals with chronic low back pain completed the Thai version of UW-PRSE6 (T-UW-PRSE6), Thai Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (T-FABQ), and Thai Medical Outcome Study Short-Form 36 (T-SF-36). A subset of 152 participants completed the T-UW-PRSE6 again after a 7-day interval. Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to estimate internal consistency and test-retest reliability, respectively. The construct validity of the T-UW-PRSE6 was evaluated by computing Spearman correlation coefficients between the T-UW-PRSE6 score and the measures of the validity criterion variables.

RESULTS

The T-UW-PRSE6 had good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.85) and moderate test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [2,1] = 0.72). The T-UW-PRSE6 was negatively correlated with the T-FABQ Work and Physical Activity subscales (rs = -0.34 and -0.34, respectively) and positively correlated with the General Health, Physical Functioning, Role Physical, Role Emotional, Social Functioning, Bodily Pain, Vitality, and Mental Health scales of the T-SF-36 (rs = 0.38, 0.42, 0.54, 0.51, 0.47, 0.54, 0.41, and 0.40, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The T-UW-PRSE6 demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties for assessing pain-related self-efficacy in individuals with chronic low back pain, making available a measure for facilitating future cross-cultural research on pain self-efficacy.

Preferred self-administered questionnaires to assess fear of movement, coping, self-efficacy, and catastrophizing in patients with musculoskeletal pain-A modified Delphi study

The way people with musculoskeletal disorders deal with pain influences their prognosis. Psychosocial factors that influence outcomes include fear of movement, coping, self-efficacy, and catastrophizing. A 3-round modified Delphi study was conducted with the aim to reach consensus on the most appropriate questionnaires to assess these 4 psychosocial factors in patients at risk of developing persistent musculoskeletal pain. The panel consisted of 36 experts, with track records in medicine, psychology, and allied health. To be considered an expert, a minimum number of authorships were required on research articles using self-administered questionnaires to assess these psychosocial factors in relevant patient populations. In round 1, the experts proposed 30 questionnaires to assess the 4 factors. In round 2, experts rated the questionnaires on suitability, considering clinimetric properties, content, feasibility, personal experiences, and expertise. The highest ranked questionnaires (maximally 5 per factor) were retained for round 3, in which the experts made a final assessment of the questionnaires and provided their positive and negative experiences with the questionnaires. Consensus was reached for the following questionnaires to assess (1) fear of movement: Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire and Tampa Scale (full version or 11-item version); (2) coping: Coping Strategies Questionnaire (initial or revised version) and Chronic Pain Coping Index; (3) self-efficacy: Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (full version or 2-item version); and (4) catastrophizing: Pain Catastrophizing Scale and the revised version of the Coping Strategies Questionnaire. Although other questionnaires can be considered in specific circumstances, these questionnaires are recommended in people with musculoskeletal pain.