4.4 Article

Pain anxiety among chronic pain patients: specific phobia or manifestation of anxiety sensitivity?

期刊

BEHAVIOUR RESEARCH AND THERAPY
卷 41, 期 2, 页码 223-240

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0005-7967(02)00009-8

关键词

pain anxiety; anxiety sensitivity; chronic pain; anxiety-provocation

资金

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [NS37164] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rather than viewing anxiety among chronic pain patients as simply a component of negative affectivity, investigators have developed a model of pain anxiety in which patients develop fear and avoidance of activity linked to pain. We examined whether pain anxiety can be conceptualized as a specific phobia, or whether evidence supported the notion that pain anxiety is better understood as a manifestation of anxiety sensitivity in the context of chronic pain. Chronic musculoskeletal pain patients (N=70) underwent cold pressor and mental arithmetic tasks while cardiovascular, self-report, and behavior indexes were recorded. They completed measures of pain anxiety, anxiety sensitivity, fear of negative evaluation, depression and trait anxiety. Correlation analyses showed pain anxiety was related to pain-relevant responses during cold pressor, but it was also related to evaluation-relevant responses during cold pressor, and to pain- and evaluation-relevant responses (including subtraction accuracy) during mental arithmetic. Regression analyses showed that almost all effects of pain anxiety on task responses were accounted for by anxiety sensitivity. Fear of negative evaluation, in contrast, correlated only with evaluation-relevant responses, and mostly during mental arithmetic. These effects remained significant when depression, trait anxiety, or anxiety sensitivity were statistically controlled. Pain anxiety may be an expression of anxiety sensitivity rather than a circumscribed phobia; a distinction that could profitably guide treatment strategies. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. 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

4.4
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