4.5 Article

Coping, self-efficacy and psychiatric history in patients with both chronic widespread pain and chronic fatigue

Journal

GENERAL HOSPITAL PSYCHIATRY
Volume 31, Issue 4, Pages 347-352

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2009.03.012

Keywords

Coping behavior; Chronic fatigue-fibromyalgia syndrome; Widespread pain

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To investigate the relationship of coping style and self-efficacy to functional impairment in a group of patients with both chronic widespread pain (CWP) and chronic fatigue, as well as the possible mediating role of psychiatric diagnosis. Methods: We identified 138 consecutive clinic patients who met criteria for CWP and chronic fatigue. We collected demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as measures of emotion-focused and problem-focused coping styles, fatigue-related self-efficacy and self-reported general health. Psychiatric diagnoses were determined with a structured interview. Short Form-36 subscales of pain-related and fatigue-related functioning were the dependent variables in ordinal multiple regression analyses to identify the best-fit model for each. Results: In the final model for pain, increased functional impairment was associated with increased emotion-focused coping as well as less education, lower general health scores and higher body mass index. Conversely, in the final model for fatigue, increased functional impairment was significantly associated with less emotion-focused coping, lower general health scores and lower self-efficacy. Conclusions: The unexpected finding that emotion-focussed coping was associated differently with chronic pain and fatigue among patients who experience both symptoms is discussed in the context of the research on the effects of self-efficacy and possible treatment approaches. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available