Abstract
To identify why reconceptualization of the problem is difficult in chronic pain, this
study aimed to evaluate whether (1) health professionals and patients can understand
currently accurate information about the neurophysiology of pain and (2) health professionals
accurately estimate the ability of patients to understand the neurophysiology of pain.
Knowledge tests were completed by 276 patients with chronic pain and 288 professionals
either before (untrained) or after (trained) education about the neurophysiology of
pain. Professionals estimated typical patient performance on the test. Untrained participants
performed poorly (mean ± standard deviation, 55% ± 19% and 29% ± 12% for professionals
and patients, respectively), compared to their trained counterparts (78% ± 21% and
61% ± 19%, respectively). The estimated patient score (46% ± 18%) was less than the
actual patient score (P < .005). The results suggest that professionals and patients can understand the neurophysiology
of pain but professionals underestimate patients’ ability to understand. The implications
are that (1) a poor knowledge of currently accurate information about pain and (2)
the underestimation of patients’ ability to understand currently accurate information
about pain represent barriers to reconceptualization of the problem in chronic pain
within the clinical and lay arenas.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to The Journal of PainAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Guidelines for treating low back pain in primary care.Harefuah. 1996; 130: 145-151
- 224
- Population based intervention to change back pain beliefs and disability.BMJ. 2001; 322: 1516-1520
- Psychosocial predictors of outcome in acute and subchronic low back trouble.Spine. 1995; 20: 722-728
- Clinical guidelines in the management of low back pain.Baillieres Clin Rheumatol. 1998; 12: 17-35
- Information and advice to patients with back pain can have a positive effect.Spine. 1999; 24: 2484-2491
- Multidisciplinary rehabilitation for chronic low back pain.BMJ. 2001; 322: 1511-1516
- The physical and psychological experience of pain.Pain. 1998; 77: 41-48
- Users’ guides to the medical literature. Iii. How to use an article about a diagnostic test.JAMA. 1994; 271: 389-391
- Compliance for low-back pain patients in the emergency department.Spine. 1988; 13: 553-556
- Agency for health care policy and research clinical practice guideline for acute low back pain.Arthritis Care Res. 1995; 8: 134-136
- The AHCPR practice guidelines for low back pain.Bull Rheum Dis. 1996; 45: 6-8
- An invisible history of pain.Clin J Pain. 1998; 14: 191-196
Moseley GL. Physiotherapy is effective for chronic low back pain: A randomised controlled trial. Aust J Physiother 48(1):43-9, 2002
- Newest knowledge of low back pain.Clin Orthop. 1992; 279: 8-20
- Evidence based medicine.BMJ. 1996; 312: 71-72
Spitzer WO, Skovron ML, Salmi LR, Cassidy JD, Duranceau J, Suissa S, Zeiss E: Scientific monograph of the Quebec Task Force on whiplash-associated disorders. Spine 20(8 suppl):1s-73s, 1995
- Absence resulting from low back trouble can be reduced by psychosocial intervention at the work place.Spine. 1995; 20: 2738-2745
- Low back pain evidence review. Royal College of General Practitioners, London, UK1996
- On the relation of injury to pain.Bonica lecture. Pain. 1979; 6: 253-264
- Textbook of Pain. 4th edition. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, UK1999
Article info
Publication history
Accepted:
December 5,
2002
Received in revised form:
November 11,
2002
Received:
September 11,
2002
Identification
Copyright
© 2003 American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
