Article

Perceived injustice: A risk factor for problematic pain outcomes

Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
The Clinical journal of pain (Impact Factor: 2.7). 07/2012; 28(6):484-8. DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e3182527d13
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Emerging research suggests that perceptions of injustice after musculoskeletal injury can have a significant impact on a number of pain-related outcomes.
The purpose of this paper is to review evidence linking perceptions of injustice to adverse pain outcomes. For the purposes of this paper, perceived injustice is defined as an appraisal cognition comprising elements of the severity of loss consequent to injury ("Most people don't understand how severe my condition is"), blame ("I am suffering because of someone else's negligence"), a sense of unfairness ("It all seems so unfair"), and irreparability of loss ("My life will never be the same").
Cross-sectional studies show that high scores on perceptions of injustice are correlated with pain catastrophizing, fear of movement, and depression. Prospective studies show that high scores on perceived injustice are a prognostic indicator of poor rehabilitation outcomes and prolonged work disability. Research shows that perceptions of injustice interfere not only with physical recovery after injury, but perceptions of injustice also impact negatively on recovery of the mental health problems that might arise subsequent to traumatic injury. Although research has yet to address the process by which perceptions of injustice impact on pain-related outcomes systematically; possible mechanisms include attentional disengagement difficulties, emotional distress, maladaptive coping, heightened displays of pain behavior, anger, and revenge motives.
Perceived injustice appears to be associated with problematic health and mental health recovery trajectories after the onset of a pain condition. Future directions for research and treatment are addressed.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Zina Trost, Apr 06, 2014
1 Follower
 · 
276 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: An initial stratification of acute whiplash patients into seven risk-strata in relation to 1-year work disability as primary outcome is presented. DESIGN: The design was an observational prospective study of risk factors embedded in a randomised controlled study. SETTING: Acute whiplash patients from units, general practitioners in four Danish counties were referred to two research centres. PARTICIPANTS: During a 2-year inclusion period, acute consecutive whiplash-injured (age 18-70 years, rear-end or frontal-end car accident and WAD (whiplash-associated disorders) grades I-III, symptoms within 72 h, examination prior to 10 days postinjury, capable of written/spoken Danish, without other injuries/fractures, pre-existing significant somatic/psychiatric disorder, drug/alcohol abuse and previous significant pain/headache). 688 (438 women and 250 men) participants were interviewed and examined by a study nurse after 5 days; 605 were completed after 1 year. A risk score which included items of initial neck pain/headache intensity, a number of non-painful complaints and active neck mobility was applied. The primary outcome parameter was 1-year work disability. RESULTS: The risk score and number of sick-listing days were related (Kruskal-Wallis, p<0.0001). In stratum 1, less than 4%, but in stratum 7, 68% were work-disabled after 1 year. Early work assessment (p<0.0001), impact of the event questionnaire (p<0.0006), psychophysical pain measures being McGill pain questionnaire parameters (p<0.0001), pressure pain algometry (p<0.0001) and palpation (p<0.0001) showed a significant relationship with risk stratification. ANALYSIS: Findings confirm previous studies reporting intense neck pain/headache and distress as predictors for work disability after whiplash. Neck-mobility was a strong predictor in this study; however, it was a more inconsistent predictor in other studies. CONCLUSIONS: Application of the risk assessment score and use of the risk strata system may be beneficial in future studies and may be considered as a valuable tool to assess return-to-work following injuries; however, further studies are needed.
    BMJ Open 01/2013; 3(1-1). DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002050
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) is an important health issue of our time. Personal as well as economic factors, like suffering pain and experiencing disability on the one hand and enormous and still increasing costs to the economy and society on the other hand, display the importance of the matter. Tremendous research has been conducted in the last few decades on NSLBP. A PubMed search (June 17, 2013) on “low back pain” provided 22,980 hits, and when specifying for “low back pain, systematic review,” 3,134 hits were still generated. Most research has been done examining the development, risk factors, or therapeutic measures of NSLBP, but hardly any literature exists on resources related to NSLBP. The aims of this review are twofold. In order to shade light on the salutogenetic approach of NSLBP, and thus to focus on health instead of illness, the first aim is to facilitate the understanding of which therapeutic measures enhance the ability to cope with chronic NSLBP and enable (more) normal functioning in life. The second aim is to stimulate the understanding of resources protecting against the onset of NSLBP or against the development of chronic NSLBP and its resulting work absence.
    09/2013; 2013. DOI:10.1155/2013/640690
  • Source
    Pain 01/2014; 155(4). DOI:10.1016/j.pain.2014.01.001
Show more