Cited by 91Patient-Provider Communication in HealthcareMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationEmpathy and Medical Education

The effect of validating and invalidating communication on satisfaction, pain and affect in nurses suffering from low back pain during a semi-structured interview.

Vangronsveld, K.L., Linton, S.J.·2012·European Journal of Pain

Abstract

When physicians interview patients with ambiguous or nonspecific symptoms, they often try to reassure them with the purpose of explaining that no dangerous illness or disease is causing the symptoms. Unfortunately the evidence suggests that patients with benign (back) pain instead feel misunderstood, frustrated and unsatisfied with the consultation. Validation is a communication method that focuses on understanding and empathy as a platform for problem solving and it may be applicable for interviews in medical settings. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of validation on patient satisfaction, pain and affect. To this end 28 nurses with (re)current back pain were recruited and randomly assigned to be interviewed in a validating or invalidating condition. Patient satisfaction, affect, pain, disability, pain catastrophizing, and fear of movement were assessed immediately after the interview. The results show that the participants in the validated group were more satisfied with the interview than participants in the invalidating condition. Moreover, they showed a significant decrease on all measures of negative affect as well as for pain. For example, there was a significant between group difference in frustration where frustration decreased in the validation group, while it increased in the invalidation condition. A validating communication style seems to be beneficial for enhancing patient satisfaction, as well as diminishing negative affect and pain intensity ratings. Our results suggest that validation might be a viable technique to use in clinical examinations of patients suffering pain.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejpain.2011.07.009

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • A randomized controlled trial found immediate improvements in ratings of sadness, anger, and frustration among patients with low back pain interviewed with a standardized validating communication style, but not in patients interviewed with an invalidating communication style.

    “A randomized controlled trial found immediate improvements in ratings of sadness, anger, and frustration among patients with low back pain who were interviewed with a standardized validating communication style, but not in patients interviewed with an invalidating communication style.6”
  • Researchers increasingly consider whether a person feels validated by how a listener responds.

    “A valuable addition to the conceptualization of validation has been the growing emphasis placed on considering whether or not a person feels validated by a listener’s response.[10; 15]”

    From Validating pain communication: current state of the science (2015) · cites this paper as [15]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vangronsveld, K. L., & Linton, S. J.
Affiliations
Örebro University (SE)
Corresponding author
Vangronsveld, K.L.
Venue
European Journal of Pain
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-01-06
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
239-246
ISSN
  • 1090-3801 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2149
OpenAlex
W1516593405
Cited by
91
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
5.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Empathy and Medical Education
Keywords
low back pain, patient satisfaction, pain intensity, negative affect, frustration, pain catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, nurse-patient communication
MeSH terms
Adult, Empathy, Female, Humans, Interview, Psychological, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Low Back Pain, Mood Disorders, Young Adult

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