Sonja V Baumermann, Christina Titze, Monika I Hasenbring
{"title":"[回避-耐力快速筛查:在健康受试者中使用单级和双级反应标度对 AEFS 进行验证]。","authors":"Sonja V Baumermann, Christina Titze, Monika I Hasenbring","doi":"10.1007/s00482-024-00836-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Chronic pain affects an enormous number of patients in Germany. Therefore, early detection is important using easy, quick and reasonable screening methods. The avoidance-endurance fast screen is currently available in two different versions: one asking for pain-related behaviour in light and severe pain and the other assessing overall severe pain-related behaviour. In this study we aim to examine the agreement between both scales and for the first time describe the role of protective psychological features such as resilience and self-compassion in this model.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Epidemiological cross-sectional study (n = 278) of a healthy cohort occasionally experiencing pain (< 3 months). The analysis was done using standard descriptive statistics, correlations (Spearman's rho) and deductive statistics (t-tests and one-factor ANOVA with post hoc Bonferroni correction) and effect sizes (Cohen's d). Matching of the instruments was calculated with Cohen's kappa.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed a moderate agreement for the two versions. A validity check of the subgroups resulted in comparable findings. The one-level version scored higher in terms of pain persistence which caused subgroup changes from adaptive to eustress-endurance responses and from fear-avoidance to distress-endurance responses. The distress-endurance subgroup had significantly lower values of the trait self-compassion.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on the results of this study, the quality of agreement between the two AEFS versions is considered strong. Without the comparison between mild and strong pain, endurance behaviour was reported more often. According to these findings, overestimation of pain persistence behaviour using the one-level version might result. Therefore, future studies should re-evaluate the cut-offs. As reported in previous studies, protective psychological features showed the highest scores in the eustress-endurance subgroup.</p>","PeriodicalId":21572,"journal":{"name":"Schmerz","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Avoidance-endurance fast screen : AEFS validation with one- and two-level response scaling in healthy subjects].\",\"authors\":\"Sonja V Baumermann, Christina Titze, Monika I Hasenbring\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00482-024-00836-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Chronic pain affects an enormous number of patients in Germany. Therefore, early detection is important using easy, quick and reasonable screening methods. The avoidance-endurance fast screen is currently available in two different versions: one asking for pain-related behaviour in light and severe pain and the other assessing overall severe pain-related behaviour. In this study we aim to examine the agreement between both scales and for the first time describe the role of protective psychological features such as resilience and self-compassion in this model.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Epidemiological cross-sectional study (n = 278) of a healthy cohort occasionally experiencing pain (< 3 months). The analysis was done using standard descriptive statistics, correlations (Spearman's rho) and deductive statistics (t-tests and one-factor ANOVA with post hoc Bonferroni correction) and effect sizes (Cohen's d). Matching of the instruments was calculated with Cohen's kappa.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results showed a moderate agreement for the two versions. A validity check of the subgroups resulted in comparable findings. The one-level version scored higher in terms of pain persistence which caused subgroup changes from adaptive to eustress-endurance responses and from fear-avoidance to distress-endurance responses. The distress-endurance subgroup had significantly lower values of the trait self-compassion.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on the results of this study, the quality of agreement between the two AEFS versions is considered strong. Without the comparison between mild and strong pain, endurance behaviour was reported more often. According to these findings, overestimation of pain persistence behaviour using the one-level version might result. Therefore, future studies should re-evaluate the cut-offs. As reported in previous studies, protective psychological features showed the highest scores in the eustress-endurance subgroup.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21572,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Schmerz\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Schmerz\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00482-024-00836-8\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Schmerz","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00482-024-00836-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
[Avoidance-endurance fast screen : AEFS validation with one- and two-level response scaling in healthy subjects].
Background and objectives: Chronic pain affects an enormous number of patients in Germany. Therefore, early detection is important using easy, quick and reasonable screening methods. The avoidance-endurance fast screen is currently available in two different versions: one asking for pain-related behaviour in light and severe pain and the other assessing overall severe pain-related behaviour. In this study we aim to examine the agreement between both scales and for the first time describe the role of protective psychological features such as resilience and self-compassion in this model.
Materials and methods: Epidemiological cross-sectional study (n = 278) of a healthy cohort occasionally experiencing pain (< 3 months). The analysis was done using standard descriptive statistics, correlations (Spearman's rho) and deductive statistics (t-tests and one-factor ANOVA with post hoc Bonferroni correction) and effect sizes (Cohen's d). Matching of the instruments was calculated with Cohen's kappa.
Results: The results showed a moderate agreement for the two versions. A validity check of the subgroups resulted in comparable findings. The one-level version scored higher in terms of pain persistence which caused subgroup changes from adaptive to eustress-endurance responses and from fear-avoidance to distress-endurance responses. The distress-endurance subgroup had significantly lower values of the trait self-compassion.
Conclusions: Based on the results of this study, the quality of agreement between the two AEFS versions is considered strong. Without the comparison between mild and strong pain, endurance behaviour was reported more often. According to these findings, overestimation of pain persistence behaviour using the one-level version might result. Therefore, future studies should re-evaluate the cut-offs. As reported in previous studies, protective psychological features showed the highest scores in the eustress-endurance subgroup.
期刊介绍:
Der Schmerz is an internationally recognized journal and addresses all scientists, practitioners and psychologists, dealing with the treatment of pain patients or working in pain research. The aim of the journal is to enhance the treatment of pain patients in the long run.
Review articles provide an overview on selected topics and offer the reader a summary of current findings from all fields of pain research, pain management and pain symptom management.
Freely submitted original papers allow the presentation of important clinical studies and serve the scientific exchange.
Case reports feature interesting cases and aim at optimizing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.
Review articles under the rubric ''Continuing Medical Education'' present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice.