Cited by 65Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsPediatric Pain Management Techniques

Pain Acceptance Decouples the Momentary Associations Between Pain, Pain Interference, and Physical Activity in the Daily Lives of People With Chronic Pain and Spinal Cord Injury

Open access
Kratz, Anna L., Ehde, Dawn M., Bombardier, Charles H., Kalpakjian, Claire Z., Hanks, Robin A.·2017·The Journal of Pain

Abstract

Pain acceptance is a robust predictor of adjustment to chronic pain; however, the dynamics of pain acceptance in daily life are largely unexamined. Furthermore, research on pain acceptance in those with pain and physical disability is needed. To examine pain acceptance in daily life, we collected 7 days of ecological momentary assessments of pain intensity and pain interference (5 times per day) with continuous accelerometry (physical activity) in 128 individuals with chronic pain and spinal cord injury. Multilevel modeling revealed that pain acceptance significantly moderated the momentary association between pain intensity and pain interference; those with higher pain acceptance experienced a blunted increase in interference when pain was high. Pain acceptance also moderated the association between pain intensity and physical activity; high pain acceptance was associated with an increase and low pain acceptance with a decrease in physical activity in the context of high pain. The activities engagement component of pain acceptance was a slightly more robust driver of these interaction effects; whereas activities engagement significantly moderated the association between momentary pain and pain interference as well as physical activity, pain willingness exerted a significant moderating effect on the momentary association between pain intensity and pain interference only. These findings suggest that both components contribute to the decoupling effects of pain acceptance. Task…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jpain.2016.11.006

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Kratz, A. L., Ehde, D. M., Bombardier, C. H., Kalpakjian, C. Z., & Hanks, R. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Wayne State University (US)
Corresponding author
Kratz, Anna L.
Venue
The Journal of Pain
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-03
Volume
18
Issue
3
Pages
319-331
ISSN
1526-5900 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2557831236
Cited by
65
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5
FWCI
4.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Pain (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, chronic pain, spinal cord injury, pain interference, physical activity, pain intensity, task persistence, pain coping, everyday life, moderating effect
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Psychomotor Performance, Surveys and Questionnaires, Spinal Cord Injuries, Exercise, Mood Disorders, Young Adult, Catastrophization, Chronic Pain, Accelerometry

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