Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- PublicationEvaluation of the effectiveness of a chronic pain management programmeThirty-two chronic pain patients classified as dysfunc~onal (N=lS); interpersonally distressed (N=9); or adaptive copers (N=8) on the West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory were evaluated before and aftera 3.5 week outpatient multimodal chronic pain management programme. Five patients also participated in a post-treatment focus group in which they gave accounts of their experiences of the programme. The three groups, which were demographically similar, did not differ in their response to the programme. There was an overall significant reduction (p<.Ol) in mean depression scores on the Beck Depression Inventory and a near significant reduction (p<.08) in mean scores on the functional limitations subscale of the Functional Limitations Profile when pre- and post-treatment scores were compared. There was no significant reduction in McGill Pain Questionnaire scores. A thematic content analysis of the focus group transcript showed that patients experienced ~he programme as improving their mood. their capacity to cope with pain and their interpersonal adjustment. , Both formal features of the programme such as education and physiotherapy and informal aspects of the programme such as social support from other partiCipants were perceived as contributing to improvement.
Scopus© Citations 3 351
- PublicationDifferential outcomes to a pain management programme based on coping styleThe study objectives were to investigate whether a heterogeneous sample of Irish chronic pain patients could be classified into subgroups using the Multidimensional Pain Inventory to profile the subgroups’ experiences of pain and distress, and to compare their responses to a multidisciplinary pain management programme. Ninety chronic pain patients completed the Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI), the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) before and after a multidisciplinary pain management programme and at 6–23 months follow-up. Eighty-eight percent of patients were classified as Dysfunctional (DYS), Interpersonally Distressed (ID), or Adaptive Coper (AC) on the basis of their responses to the MPI. The proportions of patients classified into the three MPI groups were similar to those found in previous studies: 21% were AC, 20% were ID, and 47% were DYS. The three groups differed significantly in their levels of pre-treatment pain and distress. Compared with the AC group, the DYS group had greater pain and both the DYS and ID groups had greater distress. For measures of pain intensity and interference, from pre- to post-treatment, the DYS group improved significantly more than the AC group, but for pain intensity, the DYS group had relapsed at follow-up and the AC group’s interference scores had significantly improved. All patients who participated in the programme showed significant improvement in depression and the sense of control they had over their lives; this improvement was partially maintained at follow-up; and participants expressed a high level of satisfaction with all aspects of the programme. In conclusion, Irish chronic pain patients are not a homogeneous group and may be classified into subgroups based on psychological factors. Treatment response may be related to subgroup membership. Future research should evaluate whether tailoring treatments to patient characteristics will improve treatment outcome.
Scopus© Citations 1 453