The German Version of the Treatment Expectations in Chronic Pain Scale: A Cross-Sectional Validation Study.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Pain Research & Management Pub Date : 2025-09-15 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1155/prm/6612087
Fabian Rottstädt, Ilona Croy, Lydia Kahle, Kim Ramisch, Winfried Meissner
{"title":"The German Version of the Treatment Expectations in Chronic Pain Scale: A Cross-Sectional Validation Study.","authors":"Fabian Rottstädt, Ilona Croy, Lydia Kahle, Kim Ramisch, Winfried Meissner","doi":"10.1155/prm/6612087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> This study aimed to develop and validate a German version of the Treatment Expectations in Chronic Pain Scale (TEC) with the goal to provide a reliable instrument for the assessment of treatment expectations in chronic pain patients within the German healthcare context. <b>Methods:</b> A total of 153 chronic pain patients participated in the study. Participants were recruited from the outpatient and day clinics of the University Hospital Jena, which specialize in chronic pain treatment. The TEC scale was translated into German following the International Test Commission Guidelines. Psychometric evaluation was conducted using Mokken Scale Analysis, focusing on unidimensionality, scalability, and local independence. For construct validity, correlations were examined with optimism for convergent validity and with depression and anxiety for discriminant validity. <b>Results:</b> Unidimensionality was supported for the TEC scale overall, but local independence violations were observed for two item pairs on the Ideal Expectations subscale. Furthermore, strong ceiling effects were found in the Ideal Expectations subscale, limiting its discriminatory capacity. Scalability was higher for the Predicted subscale (<i>H</i> = 0.475) than for the Ideal subscale (<i>H</i> = 0.371). Reliability measures supported the internal consistency. No significant correlations with optimism were found for either subscale, contrary to previous findings. <b>Discussion:</b> The German TEC displayed a unidimensional structure and is appropriate for group-level analyses of treatment expectations. For individual comparisons, the Predicted subscale offers sufficient precision. Future studies with larger, more diverse samples should confirm these results and clarify how expectations shape adherence and outcomes. <b>Trial Registration:</b> German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS): DRKS00027071.</p>","PeriodicalId":19913,"journal":{"name":"Pain Research & Management","volume":"2025 ","pages":"6612087"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12453898/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Research & Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/prm/6612087","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to develop and validate a German version of the Treatment Expectations in Chronic Pain Scale (TEC) with the goal to provide a reliable instrument for the assessment of treatment expectations in chronic pain patients within the German healthcare context. Methods: A total of 153 chronic pain patients participated in the study. Participants were recruited from the outpatient and day clinics of the University Hospital Jena, which specialize in chronic pain treatment. The TEC scale was translated into German following the International Test Commission Guidelines. Psychometric evaluation was conducted using Mokken Scale Analysis, focusing on unidimensionality, scalability, and local independence. For construct validity, correlations were examined with optimism for convergent validity and with depression and anxiety for discriminant validity. Results: Unidimensionality was supported for the TEC scale overall, but local independence violations were observed for two item pairs on the Ideal Expectations subscale. Furthermore, strong ceiling effects were found in the Ideal Expectations subscale, limiting its discriminatory capacity. Scalability was higher for the Predicted subscale (H = 0.475) than for the Ideal subscale (H = 0.371). Reliability measures supported the internal consistency. No significant correlations with optimism were found for either subscale, contrary to previous findings. Discussion: The German TEC displayed a unidimensional structure and is appropriate for group-level analyses of treatment expectations. For individual comparisons, the Predicted subscale offers sufficient precision. Future studies with larger, more diverse samples should confirm these results and clarify how expectations shape adherence and outcomes. Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS): DRKS00027071.

Abstract Image

慢性疼痛量表治疗期望的德文版本:一项横断面验证研究。
目的:本研究旨在开发和验证德国版的慢性疼痛治疗期望量表(TEC),目的是为德国医疗保健背景下慢性疼痛患者的治疗期望评估提供可靠的工具。方法:153例慢性疼痛患者参与研究。参与者从耶拿大学医院的门诊和日间诊所招募,该医院专门从事慢性疼痛治疗。TEC量表按照国际考试委员会指南译成德文。采用Mokken量表分析进行心理测量评估,重点关注单维性、可扩展性和局部独立性。对于构念效度,以乐观为趋同效度,以抑郁和焦虑为区别效度。结果:TEC量表总体上支持单向度,但理想期望子量表的两个项目对存在局部独立性违反。此外,在理想期望子量表中发现了很强的天花板效应,限制了其歧视能力。预测子量表的可扩展性(H = 0.475)高于理想子量表(H = 0.371)。可靠性指标支持内部一致性。与之前的研究结果相反,在两个分量表中都没有发现与乐观情绪有显著的相关性。讨论:德国TEC显示单向度结构,适用于治疗期望的组水平分析。对于个体比较,预测子尺度提供了足够的精度。未来有更大、更多样化样本的研究应该证实这些结果,并阐明期望如何影响依从性和结果。试验注册:德国临床试验注册(DRKS): DRKS00027071。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pain Research & Management
Pain Research & Management CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
109
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Pain Research and Management is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies in all areas of pain management. The most recent Impact Factor for Pain Research and Management is 1.685 according to the 2015 Journal Citation Reports released by Thomson Reuters in 2016.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信