4.7 Review

Suicidality in chronic pain: a review of the prevalence, risk factors and psychological links

Journal

PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE
Volume 36, Issue 5, Pages 575-586

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291705006859

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust [GR067797] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. This paper reviews and integrates the growing literature concerning the prevalence of and risk factors for suicidality in chronic pain. Method. A series of systematic searches in MEDLINE and PsychlNFO identified 12 relevant articles examining Suicide, suicide attempts, and suicidal ideation in chronic pain. A selection of theoretical and empirical work identifying psychological processes that have been implicated in both the pain and suicide literature and which may be related to increased suicidality was also reviewed. Results. Relative to controls, risk of death by suicide appeared to be at least doubled in chronic pain patients. The lifetime prevalence of suicide attempts was between 5% and 14% in individuals with chronic pain, with the prevalence of suicidal ideation being similar to 20%. Eight risk factors for suicidality in chronic pain were identified, including the type, intensity and duration of pain and sleep-onset insomnia co-occuring with pain, which appeared to be pain-specific. Helplessness and hopelessness about pain, the desire for escape from pain, pain catastrophizing and avoidance, and problem-solving deficits were highlighted as psychological processes relevant to the understanding of suicidality in chronic pain. Conclusions. Programmatic research is urgently required to investigate the role of both general and pain-specific risk factors for suicidality, to examine how the psychological processes mentioned above mediate or exacerbate suicidality, and to develop enhanced interventions for pain patients at risk.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available