Cited by 37Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationBehavioral Health and InterventionsPain Management and Treatment

Stages of change in readiness to adopt a self-management approach to chronic pain: the moderating role of early-treatment stage progression in predicting outcome

Burns, John W., Glenn, Beth, Lofland, Ken, Bruehl, Stephen, Harden, Norman R.·2005·Pain

Abstract

Relative readiness to assume a self-management approach to chronic pain can be conceptualised as a stage model. Although both initial stage (precontemplation, action) and changes in attitudes reflecting stage orientation have been shown to predict treatment outcome, the joint contributions of these factors need to be examined. Sixty-five chronic pain patients, participating in a 4-week multidisciplinary pain program, completed the Pain Stages of Change Questionnaire (PSOCQ), subscales of the Multidimensional Pain Inventory, and the Beck Depression Inventory at pre-, mid- and post-treatment. Patients were assigned to stage group (precontemplation or action) based on whether their Precontemplation or Action subscale scores were highest. Results showed that: (a) stage group interacted with pre- to mid-treatment Precontemplation subscale changes to predict mid- to late-treatment pain severity and interference changes such that precontemplation attitude decreases were related to reduced pain and interference only among patients who were already action stage at pre-treatment; (b) stage group interacted with pre- to mid-treatment Action subscale changes to predict mid- to late-treatment interference and activity changes such that action attitude increases were related to reduced interference and increased activity only among patients at the action stage at pre-treatment; (c) pre- to mid-treatment decreases in depression did not account for these effects. Results suggest that any adv…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pain.2005.03.007

Cites

3 of 3 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
Burns, J. W., Glenn, B., Lofland, K., Bruehl, S., & Harden, N. R.
Affiliations
  • Shirley Ryan AbilityLab (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
Corresponding author
Burns, John W.
Venue
Pain
Published
2005-06
Volume
115
Issue
3
Pages
322-331
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2094135618
Cited by
37
References
3
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
chronic pain, self-management, stages of change, precontemplation, action stage, readiness to change, multidisciplinary pain program, pain intensity, pain interference, activity level, depression, treatment outcomes, moderating effect
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Attitude to Health, Chronic Disease, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Musculoskeletal Diseases, Pain, Pain Measurement, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Predictive Value of Tests, Self Care, Treatment Outcome, Pain Management

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