4.2 Article

The Persian Version of the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire

Journal

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY & PSYCHOTHERAPY
Volume 20, Issue 4, Pages 350-358

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cpp.1769

Keywords

Chronic Pain; Acceptance; Validity; Reliability; Persian

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Research on the role of acceptance in adjustment to persisting pain has been facilitated by the development of the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ). However, the CPAQ has not yet been validated amongst Iranian patients with chronic pain. To examine the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the CPAQ (P-CPAQ), 245 Persian-speaking chronic pain patients completed a battery of questionnaires, including: the P-CPAQ, a Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, a slightly modified Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire, the Catastrophizing Scale of the Coping Strategies Questionnaire, the Depression and Anxiety Scales of the Depression Anxiety And Stress Scale-21 and the Pain-Related Interference and Pain Intensity Scales of the Multidimensional Pain Inventory. Furthermore, to evaluate the reliability of the P-CPAQ, the measure was completed by 24 chronic pain patients, on two occasions that are 2weeks apart. The results of the principal component analysis and confirmatory factor analysis yielded a two-factor solution. Furthermore, the reliability and construct validity of the P-CPAQ were confirmed. In general, consistent with studies in other countries, the results of the present study indicate that pain acceptance plays an important role in adjustment to chronic pain regardless of cultural and language differences between countries. Copyright (c) 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Key Practitioner Message Findings obtained with P-CPAQ provide support for the psychometric properties of the P-CPAQ in an Iranian chronic pain population. The P-CPAQ's psychometric strengths provide support for its use in both clinical and research settings.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available