Sociodemographic disparities and potential biases in persistent pain estimates: Findings from 5 waves of the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA)

BACKGROUND

Pain is a prevalent, debilitating condition among older adults. Much evidence on this topic comes from cohort studies, which may be affected by attrition and measurement bias. Little is known about the impact of these biases on pain estimates for European older adults. Additionally, there is a lack of longitudinal research on pain and sociodemographic disparities in Irish older adults.

METHODS

We analysed data from 8171 participants (aged ≥50 at baseline) across five waves of the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing. Longitudinal pain severity and sociodemographic disparities in pain were explored visually and using a latent growth curve model. Using multivariate logistic regression, we examined bias due to attrition at later waves associated with reported pain at Wave 1. Measurement biases due to reporting heterogeneity were assessed by investigating associations between sociodemographic factors and pain-related disability for given pain levels.

RESULTS

Wave 1 severe pain was associated with increased odds of attrition due to death by Wave 5 (AOR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.20, 2.19). Not having private health insurance was associated with increased odds of pain-related disability at Wave 1, controlling for pain severity (AOR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.15, 1.64). These results suggested mortality bias and reporting heterogeneity measurement bias, respectively. Sex, education level, and private health insurance status disparities in pain were observed longitudinally.

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality bias and reporting heterogeneity measurement bias must be accounted for to improve older adult pain estimates. There is a need for policymakers to address sociodemographic disparities in older adult pain levels.

SIGNIFICANCE

This study highlights a need to address bias in the estimation of pain in observational studies of older adults. Understanding the sources and extent of these biases is important so that health practices and policies to address pain disparities can be guided by accurate estimates. Women, those with lower educational attainment, and those without private health insurance were found to have the highest pain burden longitudinally, suggesting a need for targeted interventions for these groups in Ireland and internationally.

Patient engagement in designing, conducting, and disseminating clinical pain research: IMMPACT recommended considerations

ABSTRACT

In the traditional clinical research model, patients are typically involved only as participants. However, there has been a shift in recent years highlighting the value and contributions that patients bring as members of the research team, across the clinical research lifecycle. It is becoming increasingly evident that to develop research that is both meaningful to people who have the targeted condition and is feasible, there are important benefits of involving patients in the planning, conduct, and dissemination of research from its earliest stages. In fact, research funders and regulatory agencies are now explicitly encouraging, and sometimes requiring, that patients are engaged as partners in research. Although this approach has become commonplace in some fields of clinical research, it remains the exception in clinical pain research. As such, the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials convened a meeting with patient partners and international representatives from academia, patient advocacy groups, government regulatory agencies, research funding organizations, academic journals, and the biopharmaceutical industry to develop consensus recommendations for advancing patient engagement in all stages of clinical pain research in an effective and purposeful manner. This article summarizes the results of this meeting and offers considerations for meaningful and authentic engagement of patient partners in clinical pain research, including recommendations for representation, timing, continuous engagement, measurement, reporting, and research dissemination.

The geography of arthritis-attributable pain outcomes: a county-level spatial analysis

ABSTRACT

Research on the geographic distribution of pain and arthritis outcomes, especially at the county level, is limited. This is a high-priority topic, however, given the heterogeneity of subnational and substate regions and the importance of county-level governments in shaping population health. Our study provides the most fine-grained picture to date of the geography of pain in the United States. Combining 2011 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data with county-level data from the Census and other sources, we examined arthritis and arthritis-attributable joint pain, severe joint pain, and activity limitations in US counties. We used small area estimation to estimate county-level prevalences and spatial analyses to visualize and model these outcomes. Models considering spatial structures show superiority over nonspatial models. Counties with higher prevalences of arthritis and arthritis-related outcomes are mostly clustered in the Deep South and Appalachia, while severe consequences of arthritis are particularly common in counties in the Southwest, Pacific Northwest, Georgia, Florida, and Maine. Net of arthritis, county-level percentages of racial/ethnic minority groups are negatively associated with joint pain prevalence, but positively associated with severe joint pain prevalence. Severe joint pain is also more common in counties with more female individuals, separated or divorced residents, more high school noncompleters, fewer chiropractors, and higher opioid prescribing rates. Activity limitations are more common in counties with higher percentages of uninsured people. Our findings show that different spatial processes shape the distribution of different arthritis-related pain outcomes, which may inform local policies and programs to reduce the risk of arthritis and its consequences.

A global comparative study of wealth-pain gradients: Investigating individual- and country-level associations

Pain is a significant yet underappreciated dimension of population health. Its associations with individual- and country-level wealth are not well characterized using global data. We estimate both individual- and country-level wealth inequalities in pain in 51 countries by combining data from the World Health Organization's World Health Survey with country-level contextual data. Our research concentrates on three questions: 1) Are inequalities in pain by individual-level wealth observed in countries worldwide? 2) Does country-level wealth also relate to pain prevalence? 3) Can variations in pain reporting also be explained by country-level contextual factors, such as income inequality? Analytical steps include logistic regressions conducted for separate countries, and multilevel models with random wealth slopes and resultant predicted probabilities using a dataset that pools information across countries. Findings show individual-level wealth negatively predicts pain almost universally, but the association strength differs across countries. Country-level contextual factors do not explain away these associations. Pain is generally less prevalent in wealthier countries, but the exact nature of the association between country-level wealth and pain depends on the moderating influence of country-level income inequality, measured by the Gini index. The lower the income inequality, the more likely it is that poor countries experience the highest and rich countries the lowest prevalence of pain. In contrast, the higher the income inequality, the more nonlinear the association between country-level wealth and pain reporting such that the highest prevalence is seen in highly nonegalitarian middle-income countries. Our findings help to characterize the global distribution of pain and pain inequalities, and to identify national-level factors that shape pain inequalities.

Educational disparities in joint pain within and across US states: do macro sociopolitical contexts matter?

ABSTRACT

Despite growing recognition of the importance of social, economic, and political contexts for population health and health inequalities, research on pain disparities relies heavily on individual-level data, while neglecting overarching macrolevel factors such as state-level policies and characteristics. Focusing on moderate or severe arthritis-attributable joint pain-a common form of pain that considerably harms individuals' quality of life-we (1) compared joint pain prevalence across US states; (2) estimated educational disparities in joint pain across states; and (3) assessed whether state sociopolitical contexts help explain these 2 forms of cross-state variation. We linked individual-level data on 407,938 adults (ages 25-80 years) from the 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System with state-level data on 6 measures (eg, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program [SNAP], Earned Income Tax Credit, Gini index, and social cohesion index). We conducted multilevel logistic regressions to identify predictors of joint pain and inequalities therein. Prevalence of joint pain varies strikingly across US states: the age-adjusted prevalence ranges from 6.9% in Minnesota to 23.1% in West Virginia. Educational gradients in joint pain exist in all states but vary substantially in magnitude, primarily due to variation in pain prevalence among the least educated. At all education levels, residents of states with greater educational disparities in pain are at a substantially higher risk of pain than peers in states with lower educational disparities. More generous SNAP programs (odds ratio [OR] = 0.925; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.963-0.957) and higher social cohesion (OR = 0.819; 95% CI: 0.748-0.896) predict lower overall pain prevalence, and state-level Gini predicts higher pain disparities by education.

Self-Reported Pain Treatment Practices Among U.S. and Canadian Adults: Findings From a Population Survey

Background and Objectives

Pain treatments and their efficacy have been studied extensively. Yet surprisingly little is known about the types of treatments, and combinations of treatments, that community-dwelling adults use to manage pain, as well as how treatment types are associated with individual characteristics and national-level context. To fill this gap, we evaluated self-reported pain treatment types among community-dwelling adults in the United States and Canada. We also assessed how treatment types correlate with individuals' pain levels, sociodemographic characteristics, and country of residence, and identified unique clusters of adults in terms of treatment combinations.

Research Design and Methods

We used the 2020 "Recovery and Resilience" United States-Canada general online survey with 2 041 U.S. and 2 072 Canadian community-dwelling adults. Respondents selected up to 10 pain treatment options including medication, physical therapy, exercise, etc., and an open-ended item was available for self-report of any additional treatments. Data were analyzed using descriptive, regression-based, and latent class analyses.

Results

Over-the-counter (OTC) medication was reported most frequently (by 55% of respondents, 95% CI 53%-56%), followed by "just living with pain" (41%, 95% CI 40%-43%) and exercise (40%, 95% CI 38%-41%). The modal response (29%) to the open-ended item was cannabis use. Pain was the most salient correlate, predicting a greater frequency of all pain treatments. Country differences were generally small; a notable exception was alcohol use, which was reported twice as often among U.S. versus Canadian adults. Individuals were grouped into 5 distinct clusters: 2 groups relied predominantly on medication (prescription or OTC), another favored exercise and other self-care approaches, one included adults "just living with" pain, and the cluster with the highest pain levels employed all modalities heavily.

Discussion and Implications

Our findings provide new insights into recent pain treatment strategies among North American adults and identify population subgroups with potentially unmet need for more adaptive and effective pain management.

Chronic pain among U.S. sexual minority adults who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or "something else"

ABSTRACT

This study assesses chronic pain prevalence among sexual minority U.S. adults who self-identify as gay/lesbian, bisexual, or "something else," and examines the role of select covariates in the observed patterns. Analyses are based on 2013 to 2018 waves of the National Health Interview Survey, a leading cross-sectional survey representative of the U.S. population. General chronic pain and chronic pain in 3+ sites among adults aged 18 to 64 years (N = 134,266 and 95,675, respectively) are analyzed using robust Poisson regression and nonlinear decomposition; covariates include demographic, socioeconomic, healthcare, and psychological distress measures. We find large disparities for both pain outcomes. Americans who self-identify as bisexual or "something else" have the highest general chronic pain prevalence (23.7% and 27.0%, respectively), compared with 21.7% among gay/lesbian and 17.2% straight adults. For pain in 3+ sites, disparities are even larger: Age-adjusted prevalence is over twice as high among adults who self-identify as bisexual or "something else" and 50% higher among gay/lesbian, compared with straight adults. Psychological distress is the most salient correlate of the disparities, whereas socioeconomic status and healthcare variables explain only a modest proportion. Findings thus indicate that even in an era of meaningful social and political advances, sexual minority American adults have significantly more chronic pain than their straight counterparts. We call for data collection efforts to include information on perceived discrimination, prejudice, and stigma as potential key upstream factors that drive pain disparities among members of these minoritized groups.

Predictors of Multiwave Opioid Use Among Older American Adults

Background and Objectives

Despite limited analgesic benefits, long-term opioid therapy (L-TOT) is common among older adults with chronic pain. Extended opioid use poses a threat to older adults as aging metabolisms retain opioids for longer, increasing the risk of injury, overdose, and other negative health outcomes. In contrast to predictors of general opioid use, predictors of L-TOT in older adults are not well documented. We aimed to identify such predictors using all available data on self-reported opioid use in the Health and Retirement Study.

Research Design and Methods

Using 5 waves of data, respondents (N = 10,713) aged 51 and older were identified as reporting no opioid use (n = 8,621), a single wave of use (n = 1,410), or multiple waves of use (n = 682). We conducted a multinomial logistic regression to predict both single- and multiwave opioid use relative to no use. Demographic, socioeconomic, geographic, health, and health care-related factors were included in our model.

Results

Multivariable findings show that, relative to nonusers, both single- and multiwave users were significantly more likely to be younger (relative risk ratio [RRR] = 1.33; RRR = 2.88); report lower household wealth (RRR = 1.47; RRR = 2.88); live in the U.S. Midwest (RRR = 1.29; RRR = 1.56), South (RRR = 1.34; RRR = 1.58), or West (RRR = 1.46; RRR = 2.34); experience interfering pain (RRR = 1.59; RRR = 3.39), back pain (RRR = 1.35; RRR = 1.53), or arthritic pain (RRR = 1.46; RRR = 2.32); and see the doctor frequently (RRR = 1.50; RRR = 2.02). Multiwave users were less likely to be Black (RRR = 0.69) or Hispanic (RRR = 0.45), and less likely to be never married (RRR = 0.52).

Discussion and Implications

We identified demographic, socioeconomic, geographic, and health care-related predictors of chronic multiyear opioid use. Our focus on individuals taking opioids for this extended duration is novel. Differences in opioid use by geographic region and frequency of doctor visits particularly warrant attention from policy-makers and researchers. We make additional recommendations based on a sensitivity analysis limited to 2016-2020 data.

Research objectives and general considerations for pragmatic clinical trials of pain treatments: IMMPACT statement

ABSTRACT

Many questions regarding the clinical management of people experiencing pain and related health policy decision-making may best be answered by pragmatic controlled trials. To generate clinically relevant and widely applicable findings, such trials aim to reproduce elements of routine clinical care or are embedded within clinical workflows. In contrast with traditional efficacy trials, pragmatic trials are intended to address a broader set of external validity questions critical for stakeholders (clinicians, healthcare leaders, policymakers, insurers, and patients) in considering the adoption and use of evidence-based treatments in daily clinical care. This article summarizes methodological considerations for pragmatic trials, mainly concerning methods of fundamental importance to the internal validity of trials. The relationship between these methods and common pragmatic trials methods and goals is considered, recognizing that the resulting trial designs are highly dependent on the specific research question under investigation. The basis of this statement was an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) systematic review of methods and a consensus meeting. The meeting was organized by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership. The consensus process was informed by expert presentations, panel and consensus discussions, and a preparatory systematic review. In the context of pragmatic trials of pain treatments, we present fundamental considerations for the planning phase of pragmatic trials, including the specification of trial objectives, the selection of adequate designs, and methods to enhance internal validity while maintaining the ability to answer pragmatic research questions.

Prevalence and correlates of prescription opioid use among US adults, 2019-2020

This study estimates the prevalence of prescription opioid use (POU) in the United States (US) in 2019-2020, both in the general population and specifically among adults with pain. It also identifies key geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic correlates of POU. Data were from the nationally-representative National Health Interview Survey 2019 and 2020 (N = 52,617). We estimated POU prevalence in the prior 12 months among all adults (18+), adults with chronic pain (CP), and adults with high-impact chronic pain (HICP). Modified Poisson regression models estimated POU patterns across covariates. We found POU prevalence of 11.9% (95% CI 11.5, 12.3) in the general population, 29.3% (95% CI 28.2, 30.4) among those with CP, and 41.2% (95% CI 39.2, 43.2) among those with HICP. Findings from fully-adjusted models include the following: In the general population, POU prevalence declined about 9% from 2019 to 2020 (PR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.85, 0.96). POU varied substantially across US geographic regions: It was significantly more common in the Midwest, West, and especially the South, where adults had 40% higher POU (PR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.26, 1.55) than in the Northeast. In contrast, there were no differences by rural/urban residence. In terms of individual characteristics, POU was lowest among immigrants and among the uninsured, and was highest among adults who were food insecure and/or not employed. These findings suggest that prescription opioid use remains high among American adults, especially those with pain. Geographic patterns suggest systemic differences in therapeutic regimes across regions but not rurality, while patterns across social characteristics highlight the complex, opposing effects of limited access to care and socioeconomic precarity. Against the backdrop of continuing debates about benefits and risks of opioid analgesics, this study identifies and invites further research about geographic regions and social groups with particularly high or low prescription opioid use.

A global study of pain prevalence across 52 countries: examining the role of country-level contextual factors

ABSTRACT

There is wide variation in population-level pain prevalence estimates in studies of survey data around the world. The role of country-level social, economic, and political contextual factors in explaining this variation has not been adequately examined. We estimated the prevalence of unspecified pain in adults aged 25+ years across 52 countries using data from the World Health Survey 2002 to 2004. Combining data sources and estimating multilevel regressions, we compared country-level pain prevalence and explored which country-level contextual factors explain cross-country variations in prevalence, accounting for individual-level demographic factors. The overall weighted age- and sex-standardized prevalence of pain across countries was estimated to be 27.5%, with significant variation across countries (ranging from 9.9% to 50.3%). Women, older persons, and rural residents were significantly more likely to report pain. Five country-level variables had robust and significant associations with pain prevalence: the Gini Index, population density, the Gender Inequality Index, life expectancy, and global region. The model including Gender Inequality Index explained the most cross-country variance. However, even when accounting for country-level variables, some variation in pain prevalence remains, suggesting a complex interaction between personal, local, economic, and political impacts, as well as inherent differences in language, interpretations of health, and other difficult to assess cultural idiosyncrasies. The results give new insight into the high prevalence of pain around the world and its demonstrated association with macrofactors, particularly income and gender inequalities, providing justification for regarding pain as a global health priority.

Beyond Black vs White: racial/ethnic disparities in chronic pain including Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and multiracial US adults

ABSTRACT

Previous literature on race/ethnicity and pain has rarely included all major US racial groups or examined the sensitivity of findings to different pain operationalizations. Using data from the 2010 to 2018 National Health Interview Surveys on adults 18 years or older (N = 273,972), we calculated the weighted prevalence of 6 definitions of pain to provide a detailed description of chronic pain in White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and multiracial groups. We also estimated modified Poisson models to obtain relative disparities, net of demographic and socioeconomic (SES) factors including educational attainment, family income, and home ownership; finally, we calculated average predicted probabilities to show prevalence disparities in absolute terms. We found that Asian Americans showed the lowest pain prevalence across all pain definitions and model specifications. By contrast, Native American and multiracial adults had the highest pain prevalence. This excess pain was due to the lower SES among Native Americans but remained significant and unexplained among multiracial adults. The pain prevalence in White, Black, and Hispanic adults fell in between the 2 extremes. In this trio, Hispanics showed the lowest prevalence, an advantage not attributable to immigrant status or SES. Although most previous research focuses on Black-White comparisons, these 2 groups differ relatively little. Blacks report lower prevalence of less severe pain definitions than Whites but slightly higher prevalence of severe pain. Net of SES, however, Blacks experienced significantly lower pain across all definitions. Overall, racial disparities are larger than previously recognized once all major racial groups are included, and these disparities are largely consistent across different operationalizations of pain.

The prevalence of comorbid chronic pain conditions among patients with temporomandibular disorders: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review was designed to evaluate the presence of comorbid conditions among patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMDs).

TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED

The authors reviewed studies that reported the prevalence or incidence of chronic pain conditions or psychiatric disorders (anxiety, mood, personality disorders) among patients with any type of TMD. The authors calculated sample size-weighted prevalence estimates when data were reported in 2 or more studies for the same comorbid condition.

RESULTS

A total of 9 prevalence studies and no incidence studies were eligible for review; 8 of the studies examined chronic pain comorbidities. Weighted estimates showed high prevalence of pain comorbidities across studies, including current chronic back pain (66%), myofascial syndrome (50%), chronic stomach pain (50%), chronic migraine headache (40%), irritable bowel syndrome (19%), and fibromyalgia (14%). A single study examined psychiatric disorders and found that current depression was the most prevalent disorder identified (17.5%).

CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

There is a high prevalence of comorbid chronic pain conditions among patients with TMDs, with more than 50% of patients reporting chronic back pain, myofascial syndrome, and chronic stomach pain. Psychiatric disorders among patients with different types of TMDs were studied less commonly in this pain population. Knowledge of the distribution of these and other comorbid disease conditions among patients with different types of TMDs can help dentists and other health care providers to identify personalized treatment strategies, including the coordination of care across medical specialties.

Peripheral edema: A common and persistent health problem for older Americans

Peripheral edema (i.e., lower limb swelling) can cause pain, weakness, and limited range of motion. However, few studies have examined its prevalence in the U.S. or its association with demographics, comorbidities, activity, or mobility. This study used data from the Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative longitudinal survey of U.S. adults (age 51+/ N = 19,988 for 2016), to evaluate time trends and correlates of peripheral edema using weighted descriptive statistics and logistic regressions, respectively. Peripheral edema was assessed with the question "Have you had… // Persistent swelling in your feet or ankles?" The weighted prevalence of edema among older U.S. adults was 19% to 20% between 2000 and 2016. Peripheral edema was associated with older age, female sex, non-white race, low wealth, obesity, diabetes, hypertension, pain, low activity levels, and mobility limitations (odds ratios ranging from 1.2-5.6; p-values ≤0.001). This study provides the first estimates of national prevalence and correlates of peripheral edema among older Americans. Peripheral edema is common and strongly associated with comorbidities, pain, low activity levels, and mobility limitations, and disproportionately affects poorer and minority groups. Peripheral edema should be a focus of future research in order to develop novel and cost-effective interventions.

Research approaches for evaluating opioid sparing in clinical trials of acute and chronic pain treatments: Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials recommendations

ABSTRACT

Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of opioid analgesics for the treatment of acute and chronic pain conditions, and for some patients, these medications may be the only effective treatment available. Unfortunately, opioid analgesics are also associated with major risks (eg, opioid use disorder) and adverse outcomes (eg, respiratory depression and falls). The risks and adverse outcomes associated with opioid analgesics have prompted efforts to reduce their use in the treatment of both acute and chronic pain. This article presents Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) consensus recommendations for the design of opioid-sparing clinical trials. The recommendations presented in this article are based on the following definition of an opioid-sparing intervention: any intervention that (1) prevents the initiation of treatment with opioid analgesics, (2) decreases the duration of such treatment, (3) reduces the total dosages of opioids that are prescribed for or used by patients, or (4) reduces opioid-related adverse outcomes (without increasing opioid dosages), all without causing an unacceptable increase in pain. These recommendations are based on the results of a background review, presentations and discussions at an IMMPACT consensus meeting, and iterative drafts of this article modified to accommodate input from the co-authors. We discuss opioid sparing definitions, study objectives, outcome measures, the assessment of opioid-related adverse events, incorporation of adequate pain control in trial design, interpretation of research findings, and future research priorities to inform opioid-sparing trial methods. The considerations and recommendations presented in this article are meant to help guide the design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation of future trials.

The Relationship between Pain and Psychological Distress during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Is Social Technology Use Protective?

Objectives

The COVID-19 pandemic and resulting shelter-in-place orders have profoundly changed the everyday social environment. This study examines the relationship between pain and psychological distress (depression, anxiety, and loneliness) among U.S. adults ages 54 and older during the pandemic. We also test whether use of technology for social purposes moderates the association between pain severity and psychological distress.

Methods

Using cross-sectional data on 1,014 adults ages 54 and older (pain free, n = 637; mild pain, n = 106; moderate pain, n = 227; and severe pain, n = 64) from the 2020 Health and Retirement Study COVID-19 Project (Early, Version 1.0), we conducted regression analyses to test the association between pain severity and psychological outcomes and to assess social technology use frequency as a moderator.

Results

Compared with their pain-free peers, participants with mild-to-moderate pain reported more depressive symptoms and greater loneliness; those with severe pain reported higher levels of depression, anxiety, and loneliness. Social technology use was associated with lower levels of depression and loneliness. However, interaction analyses show that social technology use predicted an increase in depression for individuals with pain but a decrease in depression among pain-free individuals. For anxiety and loneliness, no significant effects of social technology use were observed.

Conclusion

Older adults with pain are at high risk of depression, anxiety, and loneliness during the pandemic. Although social technologies have become a common alternative to face-to-face interactions during the COVID-19 crisis, and overall they can provide mental health benefits, our results suggest that social technologies can be detrimental to psychological well-being among people with pain. These findings can inform technology-based interventions aiming to promote well-being among older adults with pain.

Sociology of Chronic Pain

Chronic pain is a common, costly, and consequential health problem. However, despite some important analytic contributions, sociological research on pain has not yet coalesced into a unified subfield. We present three interrelated bodies of evidence and illustrative new empirical findings using 2010 to 2018 National Health Interview Survey data to argue that pain should have a central role in sociological investigations of health. Specifically, we contend that (1) pain is a sensitive barometer of population health and well-being, (2) pain is emblematic of many contested and/or chronic conditions, and (3) pain and pain treatment reflect and have wide-ranging implications for public policy. Overall, whether pain is analyzed quantitatively or qualitatively-focusing on its distribution in the population, its social causes and consequences, or its subjective meanings for individuals-pain reflects social conditions, sociopolitical context, and health-related beliefs of a society. Pain is thus an important frontier for future sociological research.

Racial-ethnic disparities in pain intensity and interference among middle-aged and older U.S. adults

BACKGROUND

This study aims to better understand differing pain experiences across U.S. racial/ethnic subgroups by estimating racial-ethnic disparities in both pain intensity and domain-specific pain-related interference. To address this issue, we use a nationally-representative sample of non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic adults ages 50+ who report recently experiencing pain.

METHODS

Using data from the 2010 wave of the Health and Retirement Study (HRS; N=684), we conducted a series of multivariate analyses to assess possible racial/ethnic disparities in pain intensity and seven domains of pain interference, controlling for relevant sociodemographic variables and other health problems.

RESULTS

Black and Hispanic participants reported higher pain intensity than White participants after controlling for socioeconomic status (SES) and other health conditions. Both Black and Hispanic individuals reported more domain-specific pain interference in bivariate analyses. In multivariate analyses, Black (vs. White) participants reported significantly higher levels of pain interference with family-home responsibilities, occupation, sexual behavior, and daily self-care. We did not find significant Hispanic-White differences in the seven pain interference domains, nor did we find Black-White differences in three domains (recreation, social activities, and essential activities).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the need for using multi-dimensional measures of pain when assessing for possible pain disparities with respect to race/ethnicity. Future studies on pain interventions should consider contextualizing the pain experience across different racial subgroups to help pain patients with diverse needs, with the ultimate goal of reducing racial/ethnic disparities in pain.

Pain Trends Among American Adults, 2002-2018: Patterns, Disparities, and Correlates

Determining long-term trends in chronic pain prevalence is critical for evaluating and shaping U.S. health policies, but little research has examined such trends. This study (1) provides estimates of pain trends among U.S. adults across major population groups; (2) tests whether sociodemographic disparities in pain have widened or narrowed over time; and (3) examines socioeconomic, behavioral, psychological, and medical correlates of pain trends. Regression and decomposition analyses of joint, low back, neck, facial/jaw pain, and headache/migraine using the 2002-2018 National Health Interview Survey for adults aged 25-84 (N  =  441,707) assess the trends and their correlates. We find extensive escalation of pain prevalence in all population subgroups: overall, reports of pain in at least one site increased by 10%, representing an additional 10.5 million adults experiencing pain. Socioeconomic disparities in pain are widening over time, and psychological distress and health behaviors are among the salient correlates of the trends. This study thus comprehensively documents rising pain prevalence among Americans across the adult life span and highlights socioeconomic, behavioral, and psychological factors as important correlates of the trends. Chronic pain is an important dimension of population health, and demographic research should include it when studying health and health disparities.

The Prevalence of Psychiatric and Chronic Pain Comorbidities in Fibromyalgia: an ACTTION systematic review

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic widespread pain condition that overlaps with multiple comorbid health conditions and contributes to considerable patient distress. The aim of this review was to provide a systematic overview of psychiatric and chronic pain comorbidities among patients diagnosed with FM and to inform the development of recommendations for the design of clinical trials. Thirty-one, cross-sectional, clinical epidemiology studies that evaluated patients diagnosed with FM were included for review. None of the reviewed studies reported on the incidence of these comorbidities. Sample size-weighted prevalence estimates were calculated when prevalence data were reported in 2 or more studies for the same comorbid condition. The most prevalent comorbidity across all studies reviewed was depression/major depressive disorder (MDD) with over half of the patients included having this diagnosis in their lifetime (weighted prevalence up to 63%). In addition, nearly one-third of FM patients examined had current or lifetime bipolar disorder, panic disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder. Less common psychiatric disorders reported included generalized anxiety disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, and specific phobias (agoraphobia, social phobia). There were fewer studies that examined chronic pain comorbidities among FM patients, but when evaluated, prevalence was also high ranging from 39% to 76% (i.e., chronic tension-type or migraine headache, irritable bowel syndrome, myofascial pain syndrome, and temporomandibular disorders). The results of the review suggest that depression and chronic pain conditions involving head/jaw pain and IBS were elevated among FM patients compared to other conditions in the clinic-based studies. In contrast, anxiety-related disorders were much less common. Addressing the presence of these comorbid health conditions in clinical trials of treatments for FM would increase the generalizability and real-world applicability of FM research.

Chronic Pain and Friendship among Middle-Aged and Older U.S. Adults

OBJECTIVES

This study examines how chronic pain affects friendship in later life. We test whether onset of pain leads to social network activation, as suggested by research on other health conditions (Latham- Mintus, Forth.), or whether pain-an unverifiable and often stigmatizing condition-functions as a "threat to the social self" (Karos et al., 2018).

METHODS

Using longitudinal data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS; N=4,598; 2006/2008 as Time 1 and 2010/2012 as Time 2), we conducted OLS regressions with the lagged dependent variable approach to assess how new-onset chronic pain predicted (a) respondents' number of close friends and (b) their frequency of in-person meetings with friends, controlling for sociodemographic variables and health conditions.

RESULTS

New-onset severe pain predicted a decrease in number of friends. New-onset moderate pain, in contrast, predicted more friends and more frequent in-person meetings. (Findings were significant or marginally significant depending on model specifications.) Mild pain showed no significant association with either outcome. Pain had a greater effect on men's friendship outcomes than women's.

DISCUSSION

The effects of chronic pain on later-life friendships appear to depend on pain severity, and to differ between men and women. Onset of severe pain serves as a "threat to the social self," while onset of moderate pain contributes to social network activation; both associations are significantly more pronounced among men. These findings highlight the complex associations between health and social outcomes.

Comparing South Korean and US self-rated health using anchoring vignettes

PURPOSE

This study compares the self-rated health (SRH) of South Korean and US respondents, using anchoring vignettes to adjust for reporting heterogeneity, i.e., cross-national differences in use of response categories.

METHODS

Study participants, ages 20 to 59, were recruited from online survey panels retained by Embrain in Korea (N = 1170) and the US (N = 1033). In the analyses, we first examined the two key measurement assumptions of the anchoring vignette method. Response consistency was examined by regressing SRH on vignette ratings and EQ-5D, and was satisfied when the relationship between SRH and vignette ratings was significant and positive. Vignette equivalence was assessed by examining whether respondents correctly rank-ordered vignettes by health status severity. We then compared estimates of the between-country difference in SRH from two models: a standard ordered probit regression, and a hierarchical ordered probit (Hopit) regression, which adjusted for cross-country differences in use of response categories.

RESULTS

The anchoring vignettes satisfied both measurement assumptions. Results from the ordered probit regression indicated that Korean SRH was worse than that in the US. However, results from the Hopit regression revealed that Korean SRH was actually better than that in the US, after adjusting for Korean respondents' significantly higher intercategory thresholds (demarcating between "very bad" and "bad," "bad" and "fair," etc.).

CONCLUSION

The apparently lower SRH of Korean vis-à-vis US respondents is an artifact of Koreans' higher standards for health-related response categories. After adjusting for these different standards, Korean SRH is revealed to be higher than US SRH.

Trends in Pain Prevalence among Adults Aged 50 and Older across Europe, 2004 to 2015

Objectives: We examine recent trends in pain prevalence among adults aged 50+ across Europe. Methods: Data for 15 countries from the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe are examined for two periods: 2004-2011 and 2013-2015. Trends are shown descriptively, using a multilevel modeling strategy controlling for covariates, and modeled on a country-specific basis. Results: Population-level pain prevalence ranges from about 30% to about 60% depending on the country and year. Pain is more prevalent in women and generally increases with age. There is an increase in prevalence over time, net of age, and other predictors. Prevalence increased with an annual average of 2.2% between 2004 and 2011 and 5.8% between 2013 and 2015, in fully adjusted models. Discussion: Trends in pain prevalence have implications for disability, healthcare utilization, productivity, and population health. These findings are not optimistic but align with other population-wide studies, suggesting a global trend of rising pain prevalence.

The Relationship Between Education and Pain Among Adults Aged 30-49 in the United States

Pain is a major health problem among U.S. adults. Surprisingly little, however, is known about educational disparities in pain, especially among the nonelderly. In this study, we analyze disparities in pain across levels of educational attainment. Using data from the 2010 to 2017 National Health Interview Survey among adults aged 30 to 49 (N = 74,051), we estimate logistic regression models of pain prevalence using a dichotomous summary pain index and its 5 constituent pain sites (low back, joint, neck, headache/migraine, and facial/jaw). We find a significant and steep pain gradient: greater levels of educational attainment are associated with less pain, with 2 important exceptions. First, adults with a high-school equivalency diploma (GED) and those with "some college" have significantly higher pain levels than high school graduates despite having an equivalent or higher attainment, respectively. Second, the education-pain gradient is absent for Hispanic adults. After taking into account important covariates including employment, economic resources, health behaviors, physical health conditions, and psychological wellbeing, educational disparities in pain are no longer statistically significant except for the GED and "some college" categories, which still show significantly higher pain levels than high school graduates. We thus document the overall education-pain gradient in most younger U.S. adult populations, and identify groups where pain is higher than expected (certain educational categories) or lower than expected (eg, less-educated Hispanics). Understanding the causes of these anomalous findings could clarify factors shaping pain prevalence and disparities therein. PERSPECTIVE: Over 50% of U.S. adults age 30 to 49 report pain. Overall, more educated Americans report substantially less pain than the less educated. However, adults with a GED and "some college" report more pain than other groups. Understanding the causes could help illuminate the mechanisms through which social factors influence pain.

Use and Opinions of Prescription Opioids Among Older American Adults: Sociodemographic Predictors

OBJECTIVES

This study identifies sociodemographic predictors of prescription opioid use among older adults (age 65+) during the peak decade of U.S. opioid prescription, and tests whether pain level and Medicaid coverage mediate the association between low wealth and opioid use. Predictors of prescription nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use, and of opinions of both drug classes, are also examined.

METHOD

Regressions of opioid and NSAID use on sociodemographic characteristics, pain level, and insurance type were conducted using Health and Retirement Study 2004 core and 2005 Prescription Drug Study data (n = 3,721). Mediation analyses were conducted, and user opinions of drug importance, quality, and side effects were assessed.

RESULTS

Low wealth was a strong, consistent predictor of opioid use. Both pain level and Medicaid coverage significantly, but only partially, mediated this association. Net of wealth, there were no significant associations between education and use of, or opinions of, either class of drugs.

DISCUSSION

Among older American adults, the poorest are disproportionately likely to have been exposed to prescription opioid analgesics. Wealth, rather than education, drove social class differences in mid-2000s opioid use. Opioid-related policies should take into account socioeconomic contributors to opioid use, and the needs and treatment histories of chronic pain patients.

In Pursuit of Anchoring Vignettes That Work: Evaluating Generality Versus Specificity in Vignette Texts

Objective

Anchoring vignettes appear with growing frequency in surveys of health and aging, but little research investigates how to optimize their wording. This study experimentally tests whether mentioning specific health conditions and/or medical procedures enhances or undermines vignette validity.

Methods

Three series of general health anchoring vignettes were fielded to 2,550 respondents in the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study: one mentioning no specific health conditions or procedures, one mentioning heart disease-related ones, and one mentioning diabetes-related ones. Variations on hierarchical ordered probit models were used to test whether vignette wording affected adherence to the key measurement assumptions of vignette equivalence (VE) and response consistency (RC).

Results

While all vignette series showed substantial violations of VE, violations were larger (especially by sex and education) when using disease-specific texts. RC violations appeared relatively minor, but somewhat larger in disease-specific texts.

Discussion

These findings suggest that more general, universal vignette texts may be preferable to ones describing highly specific conditions/procedures. The common advice to prioritize specificity and concreteness in survey texts may be misguided if sociodemographic groups differ in their familiarity or associations with the presented details. Anchoring vignettes are a potentially useful survey tool, but further efforts are needed to optimize their wording.

Sociodemographic disparities in chronic pain, based on 12-year longitudinal data

Existing estimates of sociodemographic disparities in chronic pain in the United States are based on cross-sectional data, often treat pain as a binary construct, and rarely test for nonresponse or other types of bias. This study uses 7 biennial waves of national data from the Health and Retirement Study (1998-2010; n = 19,776) to describe long-term pain disparities among older (age 51+) American adults. It also investigates whether pain severity, reporting heterogeneity, survey nonresponse, and/or mortality selection might bias estimates of social disparities in pain. In the process, the article clarifies whether 2 unexpected patterns observed cross-sectionally-plateauing of pain above age 60, and lower pain among racial/ethnic minorities-are genuine or artefactual. Findings show high prevalence of chronic pain: 27.3% at baseline, increasing to 36.6% thereafter. Multivariate latent growth curve models reveal extremely large disparities in pain by sex, education, and wealth, which manifest primarily as differences in intercept. Net of these variables, there is no racial/ethnic minority disadvantage in pain scores, and indeed a black advantage vis-à-vis whites. Pain levels are predictive of subsequent death, even a decade in the future. No evidence of pain-related survey attrition is found, but surveys not accounting for pain severity and reporting heterogeneity are likely to underestimate socioeconomic disparities in pain. The lack of minority disadvantage (net of socioeconomic status) appears genuine. However, the age-related plateauing of pain observed cross-sectionally is not replicated longitudinally, and seems partially attributable to mortality selection, as well as to rising pain levels by birth cohort.

Promises and Pitfalls of Anchoring Vignettes in Health Survey Research

Data harmonization is a topic of growing importance to demographers, who increasingly conduct domestic or international comparative research. Many self-reported survey items cannot be directly compared across demographic groups or countries because these groups differ in how they use subjective response categories. Anchoring vignettes, already appearing in numerous surveys worldwide, promise to overcome this problem. However, many anchoring vignettes have not been formally evaluated for adherence to the key measurement assumptions of vignette equivalence and response consistency. This article tests these assumptions in some of the most widely fielded anchoring vignettes in the world: the health vignettes in the World Health Organization (WHO) Study on Global AGEing and Adult Health (SAGE) and World Health Survey (WHS) (representing 10 countries; n = 52,388), as well as similar vignettes in the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) (n = 4,528). Findings are encouraging regarding adherence to response consistency, but reveal substantial violations of vignette equivalence both cross-nationally and across socioeconomic groups. That is, members of different sociocultural groups appear to interpret vignettes as depicting fundamentally different levels of health. The evaluated anchoring vignettes do not fulfill their promise of providing interpersonally comparable measures of health. Recommendations for improving future implementations of vignettes are discussed.

Age and Sex Effects in Anchoring Vignette Studies: Methodological and Empirical Contributions

Anchoring vignettes are an increasingly popular tool for identifying and correcting for group differences in use of subjective ordered response categories. However, existing techniques to maximize response consistency (use of the same standards for self-ratings as for vignette-ratings), which center on matching vignette characters' demographic characteristics to respondents' own characteristics, appear at times to be ineffective or to pose interpretive difficulties. Specifically, respondents often appear to neglect instructions to treat vignette characters as age peers. Furthermore, when vignette characters' sex is matched to respondents' sex, interpretation of sex differences in rating style is rendered problematic. This study applies two experimental manipulations to a national American sample (n=1,765) to clarify best practices for enhancing response consistency. First, an analysis of two methods of highlighting vignette characters' age suggests that both yield better response consistency than previous, less prominent means. Second, a comparison of ratings of same- and opposite-sex vignette characters suggests that, with avoidable exceptions, the sex of the respondent rather than of the vignette character drives observed sex differences in rating style. Implications for interpretation and design of anchoring vignette studies are discussed. In addition, this study clarifies the importance of two additional measurement assumptions, cross-respondent vignette equivalence and cross-character vignette equivalence. It also presents empirical findings of significant sex, educational, and racial/ethnic differences in styles of rating health, and racial/ethnic differences in styles of rating political efficacy. These findings underscore the incomparability of unadjusted subjective self-ratings across demographic groups, and thus support the potential utility of the anchoring vignette method.

Using anchoring vignettes to assess group differences in general self-rated health

This article addresses a potentially serious problem with the widely used self-rated health (SRH) survey item: that different groups have systematically different ways of using the item's response categories. Analyses based on unadjusted SRH may thus yield misleading results. The authors evaluate anchoring vignettes as a possible solution to this problem. Using vignettes specifically designed to calibrate the SRH item and data from the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study (WLS; N = 2,625), the authors show how demographic and health-related factors, including sex and education, predict differences in rating styles. Such differences, when not adjusted for statistically, may be sufficiently large to lead to mistakes in rank orderings of groups. In the present sample, unadjusted models show that women have better SRH than men, but this difference disappears in models adjusting for women's greater health-optimism. Anchoring vignettes appear a promising tool for improving intergroup comparability of SRH.