The Effect of Affective Temperament, Pain Catastrophizing, and Anxiety Sensitivity on Pain Severity in Patients With Chronic Pelvic Pain: A Pilot Study.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Özlem Kayacik Günday, Hatice Harmanci, Yiğit Şenol
{"title":"The Effect of Affective Temperament, Pain Catastrophizing, and Anxiety Sensitivity on Pain Severity in Patients With Chronic Pelvic Pain: A Pilot Study.","authors":"Özlem Kayacik Günday, Hatice Harmanci, Yiğit Şenol","doi":"10.1097/PRA.0000000000000742","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The goals of this study were to investigate whether there was a dominant temperament type, and to assess the effect of temperament, pain catastrophizing, and anxiety sensitivity on pain severity, in female patients diagnosed with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) compared with healthy controls.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study involved 51 patients 18 to 65 years of age who were diagnosed with CPP without a history of psychiatric treatment and 97 healthy volunteer women with sociodemographic characteristics similar to those of the study group. A sociodemographic form prepared by the researchers, the Anxiety Sensitivity Index, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, a temperament scale (Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris, and San Diego-Autoquestionnaire), and a visual analog pain scale (VAS) were completed. The results were compared between the patient and control groups. Multiple regression analyses were performed to examine the predictive effects of temperament characteristics, pain catastrophizing, and anxiety sensitivity on pain severity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Scores on the Pain Catastrophizing Scale and the VAS were statistically significantly higher in the CPP group ( P <0.001). The frequency of depressive, cyclothymic, and irritable temperaments was found to be significantly higher in the CPP group (CPP: 7.78±3.32 vs. controls: 6.54±3.19; P =0.027; CPP:10.61±4.41 vs. controls: 8.82±4.21; P =0.017; CPP: 5.22±4.29 vs. controls: 3.75±3.41; P =0.025). According to the model established by temperament traits, anxiety sensitivity, and pain catastrophizing level, pain catastrophizing level explained 11.6% of the variance in pain severity. A 1-unit change in the score for pain catastrophizing level caused a 0.278-point change in the VAS total score ( P <0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Cyclothymic, depressive, and irritable temperament types that increase the risk of affective disease are more common in patients with CPP. The level of pain catastrophizing in patients with CPP affects their perception of the severity of the pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":16909,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychiatric Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychiatric Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRA.0000000000000742","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The goals of this study were to investigate whether there was a dominant temperament type, and to assess the effect of temperament, pain catastrophizing, and anxiety sensitivity on pain severity, in female patients diagnosed with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) compared with healthy controls.

Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 51 patients 18 to 65 years of age who were diagnosed with CPP without a history of psychiatric treatment and 97 healthy volunteer women with sociodemographic characteristics similar to those of the study group. A sociodemographic form prepared by the researchers, the Anxiety Sensitivity Index, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, a temperament scale (Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris, and San Diego-Autoquestionnaire), and a visual analog pain scale (VAS) were completed. The results were compared between the patient and control groups. Multiple regression analyses were performed to examine the predictive effects of temperament characteristics, pain catastrophizing, and anxiety sensitivity on pain severity.

Results: Scores on the Pain Catastrophizing Scale and the VAS were statistically significantly higher in the CPP group ( P <0.001). The frequency of depressive, cyclothymic, and irritable temperaments was found to be significantly higher in the CPP group (CPP: 7.78±3.32 vs. controls: 6.54±3.19; P =0.027; CPP:10.61±4.41 vs. controls: 8.82±4.21; P =0.017; CPP: 5.22±4.29 vs. controls: 3.75±3.41; P =0.025). According to the model established by temperament traits, anxiety sensitivity, and pain catastrophizing level, pain catastrophizing level explained 11.6% of the variance in pain severity. A 1-unit change in the score for pain catastrophizing level caused a 0.278-point change in the VAS total score ( P <0.01).

Conclusions: Cyclothymic, depressive, and irritable temperament types that increase the risk of affective disease are more common in patients with CPP. The level of pain catastrophizing in patients with CPP affects their perception of the severity of the pain.

情感气质、疼痛突变和焦虑敏感性对慢性盆腔疼痛患者疼痛严重程度的影响:一项初步研究。
目的:本研究的目的是调查被诊断为慢性盆腔疼痛(CPP)的女性患者与健康对照组相比,是否存在显性气质类型,并评估气质、疼痛灾难性和焦虑敏感性对疼痛严重程度的影响。方法:这项横断面研究涉及51名18至65岁的无精神病史的CPP患者和97名具有与研究组相似的社会人口学特征的健康志愿者女性。完成了研究人员编制的社会人口统计表、焦虑敏感指数、疼痛灾难量表、气质量表(孟菲斯、比萨、巴黎和圣地亚哥的气质评估自动问卷)和视觉模拟疼痛量表(VAS)。将患者组和对照组的结果进行比较。进行多元回归分析,以检验气质特征、疼痛灾难性和焦虑敏感性对疼痛严重程度的预测作用。结果:CPP组的疼痛突变量表和VAS评分在统计学上显著较高(P结论:增加情感性疾病风险的环胸型、抑郁型和易激型在CPP患者中更常见。CPP患者的疼痛突变水平影响他们对疼痛严重程度的感知。
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
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
10.50%
发文量
159
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Psychiatric Practice® seizes the day with its emphasis on the three Rs — readability, reliability, and relevance. Featuring an eye-catching style, the journal combines clinically applicable reviews, case studies, and articles on treatment advances with practical and informative tips for treating patients. Mental health professionals will want access to this review journal — for sharpening their clinical skills, discovering the best in treatment, and navigating this rapidly changing field. Journal of Psychiatric Practice combines clinically applicable reviews, case studies, and articles on treatment advances with informative "how to" tips for surviving in a managed care environment.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信