Zohra Karimi1, Alisha Pilenko2, Sabine Melanie Held2, Monika Ilona Hasenbring2. 1. Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Faculty of Medicine, Ruhr-University of Bochum, Universitätsstraße 150, 44780, Bochum, Germany. zohra.karimi@rub.de. 2. Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Faculty of Medicine, Ruhr-University of Bochum, Universitätsstraße 150, 44780, Bochum, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients' cognitive processing of pain-related information as well as their cognitive, affective and behavioral response pattern when experiencing pain in daily life has been shown to be associated with poorer prognosis in low back pain. However, the relationship between specific cognitive processes such as recall of pain-related material and individual pain responses remains unknown. PURPOSE: The present study sought to investigate recall bias in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) compared to healthy controls. Furthermore, it was aimed to investigate the impact of patients' individual pain-related responses on recall bias, comparing fear-avoidance response (FAR), endurance response (ER) and adaptive response (AR) patterns. METHOD: Thirty-one CLBP patients and 31 controls were tested on a free recall task with three word lists comprising pain words and neutral words. Further, the CLBP group was classified into patients with a FAR, ER and AR pattern, using a short screening including the Avoidance-Endurance Questionnaire (AEQ). Group differences with pain status (CLBP vs. healthy) and AEQ responses (FAR, ER, AR) as between-group factors, word type (pain vs. neutral) as within-group factor and free recall as dependent variable were analysed by means of repeated-measures analysis of (co-) variance. RESULTS: Results revealed different pain processing of pain words between FAR and ER patterns, whereas CLBP patients as a whole did not differ from the healthy controls. FAR patients displayed significantly less recall than ER patients. CONCLUSION: Recall biases in CLBP patients are not only a result of experiencing pain but also effected by patients' pain response pattern with respect to fear-avoidance versus endurance.
BACKGROUND:Patients' cognitive processing of pain-related information as well as their cognitive, affective and behavioral response pattern when experiencing pain in daily life has been shown to be associated with poorer prognosis in low back pain. However, the relationship between specific cognitive processes such as recall of pain-related material and individual pain responses remains unknown. PURPOSE: The present study sought to investigate recall bias in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) compared to healthy controls. Furthermore, it was aimed to investigate the impact of patients' individual pain-related responses on recall bias, comparing fear-avoidance response (FAR), endurance response (ER) and adaptive response (AR) patterns. METHOD: Thirty-one CLBP patients and 31 controls were tested on a free recall task with three word lists comprising pain words and neutral words. Further, the CLBP group was classified into patients with a FAR, ER and AR pattern, using a short screening including the Avoidance-Endurance Questionnaire (AEQ). Group differences with pain status (CLBP vs. healthy) and AEQ responses (FAR, ER, AR) as between-group factors, word type (pain vs. neutral) as within-group factor and free recall as dependent variable were analysed by means of repeated-measures analysis of (co-) variance. RESULTS: Results revealed different pain processing of pain words between FAR and ER patterns, whereas CLBP patients as a whole did not differ from the healthy controls. FAR patients displayed significantly less recall than ER patients. CONCLUSION:Recall biases in CLBP patients are not only a result of experiencing pain but also effected by patients' pain response pattern with respect to fear-avoidance versus endurance.
Authors: Jeffrey Roelofs; Madelon L Peters; Marianne van der Zijden; Frans G J M Thielen; Johan W S Vlaeyen Journal: J Pain Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: John P McCallin; Dan Gazit; Debiao Li; Gadi Pelled; Margaux M Salas; Pei Han; Howard E Gill; Karl A Lautenschlager; Tristan T Lai; Cameron M Shawver; Matthew B Hoch; Brandon J Goff; Aaron M Betts; Zhengwei Zhou; Cody Lynch; Grant Schroeder; Maxim Bez; Marcel M Maya; Catherine Bresee; Zulma Gazit Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-09-28 Impact factor: 4.379