Depression determines illness conviction and pain impact: A structural equation modeling analysis

被引:18
|
作者
Davis, PJ
Reeves, JL
Hastie, BA
Graff-Radford, SB
Naliboff, BD
机构
[1] Alliant Univ, Fresno, CA USA
[2] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Sch Dent, Sect Oral Med & Orofacial Pain, Los Angeles, CA 90024 USA
[3] Cedars Sinai Med Ctr, Pain Ctr, Los Angeles, CA USA
[4] Behav Med Network, Los Angeles, CA USA
[5] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Psychiat, Los Angeles, CA 90024 USA
[6] W Los Angeles VA Hlth Care Ctr, Los Angeles, CA USA
关键词
headache; orofacial pain; factor analysis; structural equation modeling; MMPI-2; MPI; BDI; VAS; depression;
D O I
10.1046/j.1526-4637.2000.00032.x
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Objective. The present study sought to derive an algorithm using factor analysis and structural equation modeling (SEM) to describe headache and orofacial pain patients using measures of behavioral and psychological functioning. This investigation further examined whether the underlying factor structure differed in 3 presumed distinct diagnostic categories: myofascial, neuropathic, and neurovascular pain. Design. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 ((MMPI-2), Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI), Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), and visual analog scale for functional limitation (VAS-FL) were administered to the subjects. A split group design was used. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to describe distinct factor domains in the first group. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using SEM tested this structure in the second group and described causal relationships between the revealed (latent) factors. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test for differences in demographic variables and diagnostic group factor structure. Setting. The Pain Center is a comprehensive, multidisciplinary pain medicine program at Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. Subjects. Three hundred and ninety (N = 390) subjects were assigned to 1 of 3 diagnostic categories: myofascial pain syndrome, neuropathic pain, or neurovascular pain. Results. EFA revealed a 3-factor solution. The factors were labeled Depression, Illness Conviction, and Pain Impact, reflecting the content of their respective variables with highest loadings. CFA using SEM validated the 3-factor solution, and further revealed that Depression was a critical causal factor determining Illness Conviction and Pain Impact. No causal relationship was observed between Illness Conviction and Pain Impact. ANOVA found no differences in demographics. No difference in factor structure emerged for the 3 diagnostic categories. Conclusions. Analysis derived a 3-factor solution. The factors were Pain Impact, Illness Conviction, and Depression. SEM revealed the critical causal pathway showing that Depression determined Illness Conviction and Pain Impact. We conclude that the main target for pain treatment is depression. No differences in factor structure were found for the 3 diagnostic categories of myofascial, neuropathic, or neurovascular pain. This suggests that psychological processes are similar in chronic headache and orofacial pain patients despite their presumed distinct underlying pathophysiological mechanisms. SME is a powerful methodology to construct causal models that has been underutilized in the pain literature.
引用
收藏
页码:238 / 246
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Associations of Cognitive Fusion and Pain Catastrophizing with Fibromyalgia Impact through Fatigue, Pain Severity, and Depression: An Exploratory Study Using Structural Equation Modeling
    Ecija, Carmen
    Luque-Reca, Octavio
    Suso-Ribera, Carlos
    Catala, Patricia
    Penacoba, Cecilia
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2020, 9 (06) : 1 - 13
  • [2] The relationship between personality, social functioning, and depression: A structural equation modeling analysis
    Tse, Wai S.
    Rochelle, Tina L.
    Cheung, Jacky C. K.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2011, 46 (03) : 234 - 240
  • [3] Testing the sequential model of pain processing in IBS: A structural equation modeling analysis
    Lackner, JM
    Jaccard, J
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2003, 124 (04) : A529 - A529
  • [4] Dimensional analysis of the Impact of Event Scale using structural equation modeling
    Larsson, G
    JOURNAL OF TRAUMATIC STRESS, 2000, 13 (02) : 193 - 204
  • [5] Burnout-Depression Overlap: Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling Bifactor Analysis and Network Analysis
    Verkuilen, Jay
    Bianchi, Renzo
    Schonfeld, Irvin Sam
    Laurent, Eric
    ASSESSMENT, 2021, 28 (06) : 1583 - 1600
  • [6] Determines the economic dynamism of tourism of a territory its socioeconomic development? An analysis through structural equation modeling
    Ignacio Pulido-Fernandez, Juan
    Parrilla Gonzalez, Juan Antonio
    REVISTA DE ESTUDIOS REGIONALES, 2016, (107) : 87 - 120
  • [7] Bayesian analysis of structural equation Modeling
    Shigemasu, K
    Hoshino, T
    Ohmori, T
    MEASUREMENT AND MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS, 2002, : 207 - 216
  • [8] Structural Equation Modeling of Pesticide Poisoning, Depression, Safety, and Injury
    Beseler, Cheryl L.
    Stallones, Lorann
    JOURNAL OF AGROMEDICINE, 2013, 18 (04) : 340 - 349
  • [9] Investigating the Factors Affecting Depression By Using Structural Equation Modeling
    Firat, Meryem
    Kanbay, Yalcin
    Gokmen, Burcu Demir
    Utkan, Mehmet
    Okanli, Ayse
    GALICIAN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2021, 28 (01)
  • [10] Seam Puckering: Analysis and Modeling with Structural Equation Modeling
    Suzaini, Abdul Ghani
    Mohamad Faizul, Yahya
    PROGRESS IN POLYMER AND RUBBER TECHNOLOGY, 2013, 812 : 157 - 162