Show simple item record

Pain beliefs: assessment and utility

dc.contributor.authorWilliams, David A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorRobinson, Michael E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorGeisser, Michael E.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-04-10T17:50:50Z
dc.date.available2006-04-10T17:50:50Z
dc.date.issued1994-10en_US
dc.identifier.citationWilliams, David A., Robinson, Michael E., Geisser, Michael E. (1994/10)."Pain beliefs: assessment and utility." Pain 59(1): 71-78. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/31274>en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6T0K-485H9H4-8N/2/4351bef02faeab7d95ab70bd71429c8een_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/31274
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=7854805&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractWhen pain becomes persistent, patients may abandon previously held cultural or personal beliefs about pain to form new pain beliefs that are more consistent with their persistent pain experience. The Pain Beliefs and Perceptions Inventory (PBPI) is an instrument to assess these new beliefs. This paper presents 4 studies examining the utility of the PBPI. Two studies are factor analytic and support recent literature identifying 4 belief factors associated with this instrument. The third and fourth studies used a new scoring method for the PBPI creating 4 scales: Mystery, Self-blame, Pain Permanence, and Pain Constancy. These scales were then correlated with important pain indices such as measures of pain quality, psychological states (i.e., depression and anxiety), personality traits, physical functioning, and coping strategies. Each belief appears to have a unique association with the pain indices thus supporting the rescoring of this instrument with 4 scales. Belief in pain constancy is associated with greater pain self-report, permanence is associated with anxiety, mystery is associated with greatest overall distress, and self-blame is associated with depressive symptoms. An appendix is included that provides clinical norms for the use of the PBPI and a revised scoring key.en_US
dc.format.extent1001902 bytes
dc.format.extent3118 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.titlePain beliefs: assessment and utilityen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelSurgery and Anesthesiologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelNeurosciencesen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelDentistryen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48108, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Psychiatry, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC 20007, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610, USAen_US
dc.identifier.pmid7854805en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/31274/1/0000180.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-3959(94)90049-3en_US
dc.identifier.sourcePainen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.