Clinician and researcher responses to the term pain catastrophizing and whether new terminology is needed: Content analysis of international, cross-sectional, qualitative survey data.

• Tác giả: Devdeep Ahuja, Claire E Ashton-James, Hannah Boyd, Christine Chambers, Laura Connoy, Penny Cowan, Rachel Cox, Geert Crombez, Beth D Darnall, Amanda B Feinstein, Anne Fuqua, Gadi Gilam, Sean C Mackey, Lynn M Martire, Lance M McCracken, Angela Nguyen, Peter O'Sullivan, Kathleen Sluka, Judith A Turner, Christin Veasley, Fiona Webster, Dokyoung S You, Maisa S Ziadni
• Ngôn ngữ: eng
• Thông tin xuất bản: United States : The journal of pain , 2025
• Bộ sưu tập: NCBI
• ID: 721510

Tóm tắt

 Pain catastrophizing is understood as a negative cognitive and emotional response to pain. Researchers, clinicians, advocates, and patients have reported stigmatizing effects of the term on patients when used clinically and in the media. This report describes the results of an international, observational, cross-sectional study investigation of clinician and researcher (professionals) perspectives on the term pain catastrophizing and whether new terminology is needed or desired. Open-ended electronic surveys were distributed to researchers and clinicians by collaborators, stakeholders, and through social media. Professionals reported on their familiarity with the term, its meaning and impacts, and their use of the term with patients. 1397 surveys from professionals in 46 countries (48.5% from the U.S.) were received. The sample was almost two-thirds female (61.3%), with a mean age of 56.67 (SD=4.04) years, and comprised of 78.6% clinicians (63.6%, pain specialists
  n=698) and 20.3% researchers. The majority were familiar with the term (82.2%
  n=1148). Among the 1098 clinicians, 33.6% had used the term in communication with patients. A content analysis of professionals' responses to open-ended questions is presented. Coded responses were synthesized into five content categories or themes: (1) pain catastrophizing is an exaggerated response to pain
  (2) pain catastrophizing is an unhelpful response to pain
  (3) the term pain catastrophizing is stigmatizing
  (4) the term pain catastrophizing is clinically useful
  (5) patients' perception of the term varies. Results highlight the continual controversy surrounding the term pain catastrophizing and the need for additional research and education to incorporate patient-centered approaches into clinical and public communications. Perspective: We present a content analysis of international clinician and researcher perspectives on the term pain catastrophizing. This investigation provides the largest depiction to date of the controversy surrounding pain catastrophizing and may guide future efforts to decrease stigma in patients with chronic pain and improve patient-clinician communication.