Cited by 97Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareMedication Adherence and Compliance

Providers’ roles in enhancing patients’ adherence to pain self management

Open access
Dorflinger, Lindsey, Kerns, Robert D, Auerbach, Stephen M·2013·Translational Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Practice guidelines and empirical research related to pain management encourage clinicians to take active roles in providing education about self management and promoting adoption of a self-management approach. The purpose of the study was to review the relevant literature, summarize aspects of the patient-provider interaction that influence patient engagement in self management for chronic pain, and outline practice recommendations in this area. Review of the literature on aspects of the patient-provider interaction that promote engagement in pain self-management was used. Findings are synthesized into recommendations for providers. Patients benefit from a biopsychosocial and patient-centered approach. Patients are more likely to fully disclose when providers respond empathically, which can improve conceptualization and treatment. Patient education and motivation play important roles in engaging patients in self management. Self management is influenced in part by the patient-provider communication process. Suggestions for communication strategies to facilitate patient engagement in self-management techniques, including empathic discussion of barriers and motivation enhancement, are provided.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s13142-012-0158-z

Cites

95 of 95 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • High retention, attendance, and positive treatment experiences may have related in part to alliance with providers who emphasized patient- and family-centered communication, collaboration, goal setting, and pain education.

    “High retention, attendance, and positive treatment experiences may have related in part to alliance with the providers, who emphasized patient- and family-centered communication, collaboration, goal setting, and pain education”

    From Multi-family pediatric pain group therapy: Capturing acceptance and cultivating change (2017) · cites this paper as [37]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) links a strong provider-patient alliance with adherence and satisfaction, and recommends shared decision-making, attention to patient goals, patient-centered communication, and pain education. The paper does not establish that the citing document’s high retention and attendance resulted from those providers’ approach, nor does it describe family-centered communication as part of that approach. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A stronger patient-physician alliance may enhance adherence to treatment recommendations, thereby promoting better outcomes as observed in this study.

    “which may enhance adherence to treatment recommendations [34], and thereby promote better outcomes as observed in our study.”
  • Physician empathy has been associated with a stronger patient-physician alliance.

    “Physician empathy has been associated with a stronger patient-physician alliance, which may enhance adherence to treatment recommendations [34], and thereby promote better outcomes as observed in our study.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [23]23. Weiss GB. Paternalism modernized. J Med Ethics. 1985;11:184-187.
  2. [87]87. Bea SM, Tesar GE. A primer on referring patients to psychother- apy. Cleve Clin J Med. 2002;69:114-127.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dorflinger, L., Kerns, R. D., & Auerbach, S. M.
Affiliations
  • VA Connecticut Healthcare System (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
Corresponding author
Dorflinger, Lindsey
Venue
Translational Behavioral Medicine
Published
2012-08-10
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
39-46
ISSN
  • 1613-9860 (ISSN-L)
  • 1869-6716
OpenAlex
W2071848554
Cited by
97
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6
FWCI
3.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Translational Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
Keywords
pain self-management, chronic pain, patient-provider interaction, patient engagement, patient education, empathy, patient-centered care, biopsychosocial model, motivation enhancement, patient disclosure, communication strategies

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