The impact of threatening information about pain on coping and pain tolerance

School of Psychology, James Cook University, Australia.
British Journal of Health Psychology (Impact Factor: 2.7). 10/2005; 10(Pt 3):441-51. DOI: 10.1348/135910705X27587
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study examined the impact of threatening information on coping and pain tolerance in a healthy adult sample. Prior to engaging in a Cold Pressor Test (CPT), 121 college students were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: a threat condition in which they read an orienting passage warning them about symptoms and consequences of frostbite (pain as a signal for nociception), a reassurance condition in which they read an orienting passage about the safety of the CPT (pain independent of nociception), or a control condition in which no orienting passage was read before the experimental task. Only 15.6% of participants in the threat group completed the CPT to its 4-minute duration, compared with 55.6% in the reassurance group and 45.2% of those in the control group. Even though groups did not differ on level of reported pain, threatened participants catastrophized more about the pain and reported less use of cognitive coping strategies (reinterpreting pain sensations, ignoring pain, diverting attention away from pain to other experiences, and using coping self-statements) than other respondents. A path analysis indicated that the relation between threat and pain tolerance was fully mediated by catastrophizing and cognitive coping. Together, findings suggest that pain appraised as threatening contributes to a specific pattern of coping responses associated with a reduced capacity to bear pain.


Available from: Todd Jackson, Apr 24, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this research, meta-analyses were performed to evaluate associations between primary appraisals of pain as a source of threat and/or challenge on responses to (1) noxious laboratory stimuli and (2) chronic, non-cancer pain. Twenty-two laboratory pain studies comprising 2031 participants and 59 chronic pain studies based on 9135 patients were identified for analyses. For laboratory pain, elevated threat appraisals were linked to overall increases in reported pain, reduced pain tolerance and high levels of passive coping. Method of measuring appraisal as well as type and duration of noxious stimulation moderated some of these associations. Challenge appraisals were related to more pain tolerance and less passive coping but not pain intensity. For chronic pain studies, threat appraisals had positive overall correlations with pain intensity, impairment, affective distress and passive coping but were negatively related to active coping. The pattern of associations between challenge appraisals and outcomes was largely complementary. Appraisal scale used and gender were consistent moderators of appraisal-outcome relations in chronic pain samples. In sum, appraisals of pain as a source of potential damage or opportunity have robust associations with responses to acute laboratory pain and ongoing chronic pain. Perspective Meta-analyses evaluated associations between primary appraisals and responses to laboratory pain and chronic pain. Significant effect sizes for most outcomes suggest appraisals of pain as a source of threat and challenge have important implications for functioning in response to pain.
    The journal of pain: official journal of the American Pain Society 06/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.jpain.2014.01.499 · 4.22 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: SUMMARY Use of experimental pain is vital for addressing research questions that would otherwise be impossible to examine in the real world. Experimental induction of pain in children is highly scrutinized given the potential for harm and lack of direct benefit to a vulnerable population. However, its use has critically advanced our understanding of the mechanisms, assessment and treatment of pain in both healthy and chronically ill children. This article introduces various experimental pain modalities, including the cold pressor task, the water load symptom provocation test, thermal pain, pressure pain and conditioned pain modulation, and discusses their application for use with children and adolescents. It addresses practical implementation and ethical issues, as well as the advantages and disadvantages offered by each task. The incredible potential for future research is discussed given the array of experimental pain modalities now available to pediatric researchers.
    03/2014; 4(2):97-111. DOI:10.2217/pmt.13.72
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is an experimental approach for probing endogenous analgesia by which one painful stimulus (the conditioning stimulus) may inhibit the perceived pain of a subsequent stimulus (the test stimulus). Animal studies suggest that CPM is mediated by a spino-bulbo-spinal loop using objective measures such as neuronal firing. In humans, pain ratings are often used as the end point. Because pain self-reports are subject to cognitive influences, we tested whether cognitive factors would impact on CPM results in healthy humans. We conducted a within-subject, crossover study of healthy adults to determine the extent to which CPM is affected by 1) threatening and reassuring evaluation and 2) imagery alone of a cold conditioning stimulus. We used a heat stimulus individualized to 5/10 on a visual analog scale as the testing stimulus and computed the magnitude of CPM by subtracting the postconditioning rating from the baseline pain rating of the heat stimulus. We found that although evaluation can increase the pain rating of the conditioning stimulus, it did not significantly alter the magnitude of CPM. We also found that imagery of cold pain alone did not result in statistically significant CPM effect. Our results suggest that CPM is primarily dependent on sensory input, and that the cortical processes of evaluation and imagery have little impact on CPM. These findings lend support for CPM as a useful tool for probing endogenous analgesia through subcortical mechanisms.
    Journal of Pain Research 01/2014; 7:689-697. DOI:10.2147/JPR.S65607