Cited by 44Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPediatric Pain Management Techniques

Unique Contributions of Acceptance and Catastrophizing on Chronic Pain Adaptation

Craner, Julia R., Sperry, Jeannie A., Koball, Afton M., Morrison, Eleshia J., Gilliam, Wesley P.·2017·International Journal of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Purpose Pain catastrophizing and acceptance represent distinct but interrelated constructs that influence adaptation to chronic pain. Clinical and laboratory research suggest that higher levels of catastrophizing and lower levels of acceptance predict worse functioning; however, findings have been mixed regarding which specific outcomes are associated with each construct. The current study evaluates these constructs in relation to pain, affect, and functioning in a treatment-seeking clinical sample.Method Participants included 249 adult patients who were admitted to an interdisciplinary chronic pain rehabilitation program and completed measures of pain and related psychological and physical functioning.Results Hierarchical multiple regression analyses indicated that pain catastrophizing and acceptance both significantly, but differentially, predicted depressive symptoms and pain-related negative affect. Only pain catastrophizing was a unique predictor of perceived pain severity, whereas acceptance uniquely predicted pain interference and performance in everyday living activities. There were no significant interactions between acceptance and catastrophizing, suggesting no moderation effects.Conclusion Findings from the current study indicate a pattern of results similar to prior studies in which greater levels of catastrophic thinking is associated with higher perceived pain intensity whereas greater levels of acceptance relate to better functioning in activities despite chronic pain. However, in the current study, both acceptance and catastrophizing were associated with negative affect. These relationships were significant beyond the effects of clinical and demographic variables. These results support the role of pain acceptance as an important contribution to chronic pain-related outcomes alongside the well-established role of pain catastrophizing. Results are limited by reliance on self-report data, cross-sectional design, and low racial/ethnic diversity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12529-017-9646-3

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Craner, J. R., Sperry, J. A., Koball, A. M., Morrison, E. J., & Gilliam, W. P.
Affiliations
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Gundersen Health System (US)
Corresponding author
Gilliam, Wesley P.
Venue
International Journal of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2017-03-15
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
542-551
ISSN
  • 1070-5503 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7558
OpenAlex
W2605413882
Cited by
44
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
3.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
pain acceptance, pain catastrophizing, chronic pain, pain adaptation, depressive symptoms, pain interference, activities of daily living, interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation, treatment-seeking patients
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Regression Analysis, Self Report, Catastrophization, Chronic Pain

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review