Complex factors influence how people report and interpret numerical pain ratings. Such variability can introduce noise and systematic bias into clinical pain assessment. Identification of factors that influence self-rated pain and its interpretation by others may bolster utility of these scales. In this qualitative study, 338 participants described motivations for modulating their own pain reports relative to a numerical pain scale (0–10), as well as perceptions of others’ pain reporting modulation. Responses indicated that people over-report pain to enhance provider belief/responsiveness or the likelihood of pain relief, and out of fear of future pain or potential illness. Concerns of how one’s pain affects and is perceived by others, and financial concerns motivated pain under-reporting. Unprompted, many participants reported never modulating their pain ratings, citing trust in providers and personal ethics. Similar reasons were assumed to motivate others’ pain ratings. However, participants often attributed others’ over-reporting to internal causes, and their own to external. This bias may underlie common assumptions that patients over-report pain for nefarious reasons, distort interpretation of pain reports, and contribute to pain invalidation. Recognition of patient concerns and one’s own personal biases toward others’ pain reporting may improve patient-provider trust and support precision of numerical pain ratings.
Objective Meaning in life is consistently associated with better health outcomes across a range of mental and physical domains. However, meaning in life is a complex construct involving three distinct facets: coherence, purpose, and mattering. While these facets have been studied individually in relation to pain, they have not been assessed concurrently to parse out their potential distinct contributions to pain outcomes. We sought to identify the unique relationships of these individual facets of meaning with pain experiences and specify the components associated with pain-related resilience. Methods The associations of coherence, purpose, and mattering with pain outcomes were examined across three studies. Study 1 used data from the Midlife in the United States National Survey to determine associations between facets and the frequency of various recently experienced pains, and the development of chronic pain nine years later. Study 2 cross-sectionally observed the association between facets and recent pain severity in young adults. Using a diary-type approach, Study 3 captured fluctuations of pain severity in relation to the facets across the span of four weeks. Results Coherence was uniquely associated with less headache, backache, joint, and extremities pain frequency in Study 1, over and above purpose and mattering, controlling for other health variables. Coherence was also associated with lower odds of developing chronic pain. In Study 2, coherence was associated with less pain severity and fully mediated the relationship between global meaning in life and pain. Study 3 found that coherence predicted the most unique variance in weekly pain fluctuations. Conclusion Across three studies and timescales, coherence was uniquely associated with fewer and less severe pain experiences over and above purpose and mattering. These findings provide support for the value of coherence as a resilience factor in the context of pain and suggest a potential benefit for coherence-specific interventions in clinical settings.
Previous research shows that people with high self-esteem cope with threats to the self by reducing the extent to which their self-worth is contingent on the threatened domain (Buckingham, Weber, & Sypher, 2012). The present studies tested the hypothesis that this is a defensive process. In support of this hypothesis, Study 1 (N = 160), showed that self-affirmation attenuates the tendency for people with high self-esteem to reduce their contingencies of self-worth following self-threat. Furthermore, Study 2 (N = 286), showed that this tendency was more prevalent among people with defensive self-esteem than among those with secure self-esteem. The present studies imply that reducing contingent self-worth after self-threat is a defensive process. We discuss implications for theories of contingent self-worth.
The experience of pain is subjective, yet many people have their pain invalidated or not believed. Pain invalidation is associated with poor mental health, including depression and lower well-being. Qualitative investigations of invalidating experiences identify themes of depression, but also social withdrawal, self-criticism, and lower self-worth, all of which are core components of shame. Despite this, no studies have quantitatively assessed the interrelationship between pain invalidation, shame, and depression. To explore this relationship, participants recounted the frequency of experienced pain invalidation from family, friends, and medical professionals, as well as their feelings of internalized shame and depressive symptoms. As shame has been shown to be a precursor for depression, we further explored the role of shame as a mediator between pain invalidation and depressive symptoms. All sources of pain invalidation were positively associated with shame and depressive symptoms, and shame fully mediated the relationship between each source of pain invalidation and depression. Relative to other sources, pain invalidation from family was most closely tied to shame and depression. Overall, findings indicate that one mechanism by which pain invalidation may facilitate depression is via the experience of shame. Future research may explore shame as a potential upstream precursor to depression in the context of pain. Findings provide more insight into the harmful influence of pain invalidation on mental health and highlight the impact of interpersonal treatment on the experiences of people in pain.
Although ethnic differences in pain perception are well documented, the underlying mechanism for these outcomes has not been established. µ-opioid receptor (MOR) function might contribute to this disparity, given that MORs play a key role in pain sensitivity and modulation. However, no study has characterized ethnic differences in MOR physiology. This study sought to address this knowledge gap by examining differences in µ-selective agonist binding potential (BPND; [11C]-Carfentanil) between 27 non-Hispanic black (NHB) and 27 demographically similar, non-Hispanic white participants. Participants completed questionnaires and two 90-minute high-resolution research tomograph positron emission tomography (PET) imaging sessions. During PET imaging, a capsaicin or control cream was applied to individuals' arms, and pain ratings were collected. Bonferroni-corrected PET volumes of interest analyses revealed significantly greater [11C]-Carfentanil BPND among NHB participants in bilateral ventral striatum ([left]: F1,52 = 16.38, P < 0.001; [right]: F1,52 = 21.76, P < 0.001), bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex ([left] F1,52 = 17.3, P < 0.001; [right]: F1,52 = 14.17, P < 0.001), bilateral subgenual anterior cingulate cortex ([left]: F1,52 = 10.4, P = 0.002; [right]: F1,52 = 12.91, P = 0.001), and right insula (F1,52 = 11.0, P = 0.002). However, there were no significant main effects of condition or ethnicity × condition interaction effects across models, likely attributable to individual variability in the direction of change within groups. BPND values were significantly correlated with pain ratings collected during the capsaicin condition (r range = 0.34-0.46, P range = 0.01-0.001). Results suggest that NHB individuals might have generally greater unoccupied MOR density than non-Hispanic white peers. Findings have implications for physiological differences underlying ethnicity-related pain disparities. If replicated, these results further emphasize the need for tailored treatments in historically underserved populations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.