4.6 Article

Multilevel analysis of couple congruence on pain, interference, and disability

期刊

PAIN
卷 118, 期 3, 页码 369-379

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2005.09.003

关键词

pain severity; psychosocial disability; psychological distress; couples; congruence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Couple congruence on ratings of pain severity and disability were examined using hierarchical linear modeling. Older community Individuals with Chronic Pain (ICPs) and their spouses completed the Multidimensional Pain Inventory (pain severity, interference, negative spouse responses to pain), Sickness Impact Profile (physical disability, psychosocial disability), and the Mood and Anxiety Symptom Questionnaire (psychological distress). Both spouses reported on ICPs' pain and disability as well as their own psychological distress. Spousal incongruence was observed on interference and physical disability such that ICPs reported greater disability than their spouses reported for them. No significant incongruence was observed in pain severity or psychosocial disability. Predictors of couples' mean ratings of pain and disability were identified. Specifically, couples in which the ICP was female reported higher couples' ratings of pain severity and interference. ICP distress was related to higher couples' ratings of all pain and disability variables whereas spouse distress was related to higher psychosocial disability ratings. ICPs' perceptions of negative spouse responses were also positively associated with couples' ratings of physical and psychosocial disability. In terms of congruence, ICP distress was associated with incongruence on interference, physical disability, and psychosocial disability whereas spouse distress predicted incongruence on pain severity, and interference. This study suggests that understanding couples' pain outcome ratings involves an awareness of factors that might influence their perceptions and behaviors. (c) 2005 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据