PDF(Sci-hub)
Abstract：
The characterization of subtypes of chronic pain patients based on their pain coping profiles may contribute to a better understanding of the pain syndrome, to more specific indications of established treatment options as well as to further development of therapeutic interventions.
The aim of this study was to examine whether different subgroups of chronic pain patients emerge when using the German pain coping questionnaire (FESV) to identify homogeneous subgroups of pain coping patterns. Furthermore, the aim was to examine whether these pain coping subgroups differ in terms of sociodemographic characteristics, as well as pain and treatment-related aspects.
A total of 166 inpatients with a chronic pain disorder according to ICD-10 F45.41 were examined as part of the routine assessment within an interdisciplinary pain treatment program. Cognitive and behavioral pain coping and pain-related psychological impairment were measured with the FESV as components of pain coping. Using cluster analyses, homogeneous patient subgroups were generated on the basis of pain coping data. The resulting subgroups were subsequently compared regarding sociodemographic characteristics, pain-related impairment, global psychological distress, depression, anxiety, perceived stress, utilization of social support and motivation for psychotherapy.
The results revealed three distinct subgroups regarding pain coping patterns: (1) high impairment and high coping, (2) low impairment and high coping and (3) high impairment and low coping. The subgroups differed significantly in almost all characteristics, except for pain duration and pain intensity. The categorization into the abovementioned pain coping subtypes may assist clinicians in tailoring pain treatment to the needs and characteristics of the individual patients.
The aim of this study was to examine whether different subgroups of chronic pain patients emerge when using the German pain coping questionnaire (FESV) to identify homogeneous subgroups of pain coping patterns. Furthermore, the aim was to examine whether these pain coping subgroups differ in terms of sociodemographic characteristics, as well as pain and treatment-related aspects.
A total of 166 inpatients with a chronic pain disorder according to ICD-10 F45.41 were examined as part of the routine assessment within an interdisciplinary pain treatment program. Cognitive and behavioral pain coping and pain-related psychological impairment were measured with the FESV as components of pain coping. Using cluster analyses, homogeneous patient subgroups were generated on the basis of pain coping data. The resulting subgroups were subsequently compared regarding sociodemographic characteristics, pain-related impairment, global psychological distress, depression, anxiety, perceived stress, utilization of social support and motivation for psychotherapy.
The results revealed three distinct subgroups regarding pain coping patterns: (1) high impairment and high coping, (2) low impairment and high coping and (3) high impairment and low coping. The subgroups differed significantly in almost all characteristics, except for pain duration and pain intensity. The categorization into the abovementioned pain coping subtypes may assist clinicians in tailoring pain treatment to the needs and characteristics of the individual patients.
摘要：
根据慢性疼痛患者的疼痛应对概况对其亚型进行表征可能有助于更好地理解疼痛综合征。更具体的已确定治疗方案的适应症，以及进一步发展治疗干预措施。
这项研究的目的是检查在使用德国疼痛应对问卷（FESV）确定疼痛应对模式的同质亚组时，是否会出现不同的慢性疼痛患者亚组。此外，目的是检查这些疼痛应对亚组是否在社会人口统计学特征方面有所不同，以及疼痛和治疗相关的方面。
作为跨学科疼痛治疗计划的常规评估的一部分，对总共166名根据ICD-10F45.41患有慢性疼痛障碍的住院患者进行了检查。使用FESV作为疼痛应对的组成部分来测量认知和行为疼痛应对以及与疼痛相关的心理障碍。使用聚类分析，同质患者亚组是根据疼痛应对数据生成的.随后比较了所得的亚组的社会人口统计学特征，疼痛相关的损害，全球心理困扰，抑郁症,焦虑,感知压力，社会支持和心理治疗动机的利用。
结果显示了关于疼痛应对模式的三个不同的亚组：(1)高损伤和高应对，（2）低损害和高应对；（3）高损害和低应对。亚组几乎在所有特征上都有显著差异，除了疼痛持续时间和疼痛强度。对上述疼痛应对亚型的分类可以帮助临床医生根据个体患者的需求和特征定制疼痛治疗。
这项研究的目的是检查在使用德国疼痛应对问卷（FESV）确定疼痛应对模式的同质亚组时，是否会出现不同的慢性疼痛患者亚组。此外，目的是检查这些疼痛应对亚组是否在社会人口统计学特征方面有所不同，以及疼痛和治疗相关的方面。
作为跨学科疼痛治疗计划的常规评估的一部分，对总共166名根据ICD-10F45.41患有慢性疼痛障碍的住院患者进行了检查。使用FESV作为疼痛应对的组成部分来测量认知和行为疼痛应对以及与疼痛相关的心理障碍。使用聚类分析，同质患者亚组是根据疼痛应对数据生成的.随后比较了所得的亚组的社会人口统计学特征，疼痛相关的损害，全球心理困扰，抑郁症,焦虑,感知压力，社会支持和心理治疗动机的利用。
结果显示了关于疼痛应对模式的三个不同的亚组：(1)高损伤和高应对，（2）低损害和高应对；（3）高损害和低应对。亚组几乎在所有特征上都有显著差异，除了疼痛持续时间和疼痛强度。对上述疼痛应对亚型的分类可以帮助临床医生根据个体患者的需求和特征定制疼痛治疗。
