Literature DB >> 4000688

The McGill Pain Questionnaire reconsidered: confirming the factor structure and examining appropriate uses.

Dennis C Turk1, Thomas E Rudy, Peter Salovey.   

Abstract

A major problem in the understanding and psychological treatment of chronic pain patients is the inadequacy of available assessment procedures. Currently, the most frequently used instrument is the Pain Rating Index (PRI) of the McGill Pain Questionnaire, designed to assess 3 components of pain (i.e., sensory, affective, and evaluative) postulated by the Gate Control Theory. The PRI has been used in many studies to make differential diagnoses, to describe different groups of pain patients, and to identify the factor composition of the instrument itself. To date, however, no study has appropriately tested the a priori structure of the PRI or cross-validated it. Confirmatory factor analytic procedures employed in the present study supported Melzack's postulated tri-component structure of the PRI in 2 diverse samples of pain patients from different hospitals. However, the 3 components were found to be highly intercorrelated. Subsequent analyses revealed that the 3 components of the PRI do not display adequate discriminant validity. The current use of 3 subscales to establish differential diagnoses or patterns of different pain syndromes may lead to inappropriate classification and treatment decisions. The major conclusion of these findings is that use of only the total score of the PRI is appropriate for pain assessment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 4000688     DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(85)90167-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain        ISSN: 0304-3959            Impact factor:   6.961


  29 in total

1.  Differences in pain location, intensity, and quality by pain pattern in outpatients with cancer.

Authors:  Srisuda Ngamkham; Janean E Holden; Diana J Wilkie
Journal:  Cancer Nurs       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.592

2.  Secondary prevention of work disability: community-based psychosocial intervention for musculoskeletal disorders.

Authors:  Michael J L Sullivan; L Charles Ward; Dean Tripp; Douglas J French; Heather Adams; William D Stanish
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2005-09

3.  The role of perceived injustice in the experience of chronic pain and disability: scale development and validation.

Authors:  Michael J L Sullivan; Heather Adams; Sharon Horan; Denise Maher; Dan Boland; Richard Gross
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2008-06-07

4.  The psychological assessment of patients with chronic pain.

Authors:  A H Lebovits
Journal:  Curr Rev Pain       Date:  2000

Review 5.  [Distinctive features of orofacial pain perception].

Authors:  B Steiger; D Ettlin
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.107

6.  Pain Quality by Location in Outpatients with Cancer.

Authors:  Judith M Schlaeger; Li-Chueh Weng; Hsiu-Li Huang; Hsiu-Hsin Tsai; Miho Takayama; Srisuda Ngamkham; Yingwei Yao; Diana J Wilkie
Journal:  Pain Manag Nurs       Date:  2019-05-31       Impact factor: 1.929

7.  Changes in pain catastrophizing following physical therapy for musculoskeletal injury: the influence of depressive and post-traumatic stress symptoms.

Authors:  Peter Slepian; Elena Bernier; Whitney Scott; Nils Georg Niederstrasser; Timothy Wideman; Michael Sullivan
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2014-03

8.  Cognitive testing of PAINReportIt in adult African Americans with sickle cell disease.

Authors:  Aruna Jha; Marie L Suarez; Carol E Ferrans; Robert Molokie; Young Ok Kim; Diana J Wilkie
Journal:  Comput Inform Nurs       Date:  2010 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.985

9.  Psychometric analysis of the audiovisual taxonomy for assessing pain behavior in chronic back-pain patients.

Authors:  C L Kleinke; A S Spangler
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  1988-02

10.  Catastrophizers with chronic pain display more pain behaviour when in a relationship with a low catastrophizing spouse.

Authors:  Nathalie Gauthier; Pascal Thibault; Michael J L Sullivan
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2011 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.037

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.