4.3 Review

Chronic pain and psychopathology: Research findings and theoretical considerations

期刊

PSYCHOSOMATIC MEDICINE
卷 64, 期 5, 页码 773-786

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.PSY.0000024232.11538.54

关键词

chronic pain; psychopathology; psychiatric disorders; psychological disorders

资金

  1. NIDCR NIH HHS [2R01-DE10713] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [2R01-MH46452, 2K02-MH01107] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Numerous studies have documented a strong association between chronic pain and psychopathology. Previous research has shown that chronic pain is most often associated with depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, somatoform disorders, substance use disorders, and personality disorders. The primary objective of this review article is to describe the nature of the relationship between chronic pain and each of these types of psychopathology. In addition, this article will explore how each of these disorders are expressed within the context of chronic pain, with a consideration of both diagnostic and treatment issues. Methods: Medline and PsychLit searches of the chronic pain/psychopathology literature from 1980 through 2000 were conducted using the keywords chronic pain, psychopathology, psychiatric disorders, and psychological disorders. Results: The relationship between chronic pain and psychopathology has generated substantial empirical and theoretical interest, with depressive disorders receiving much of the attention. Conclusions: Although no single theoretical model can fully explain the causal relationship between chronic pain and psychopathology, a diathesis-stress model is emerging as the dominant overarching theoretical perspective. In this model, diatheses are conceptualized as preexisting, semidormant characteristics of the individual before the onset of chronic pain that are then activated and exacerbated by the stress of this chronic condition, eventually resulting in diagnosable psychopathology.

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

4.3
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