CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 260Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationAttachment and Relationship DynamicsPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The relationship of attachment style to depression, catastrophizing and health care utilization in patients with chronic pain

Ciechanowski, Paul, Sullivan, Mark, Jensen, Mark, Romano, Joan, Summers, Heidi·2003·Pain
DOI 10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00120-9
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Attachment theory and research suggest that patterns of interpersonal relationships may be important determinants of illness behavior, care seeking, and treatment response in individuals with chronic health problems, including chronic pain. Attachment styles have been shown to be associated with psychological adjustment in the context of chronic illness, but little research has been conducted so far examining these relationships in patients with chronic pain. We assessed 111 patients with chronic pain participating in a multidisciplinary pain treatment program to determine if attachment style is associated with pain, depression, catastrophizing and physical disability at pre-treatment and 12-month follow-up, and with change in health care utilization pre-treatment to follow-up. At both pre-treatment and follow-up, fearful attachment style was associated with significantly greater depression and catastrophizing, and secure attachment was associated with significantly lower levels of depression. Preoccupied attachment style was associated with greater than weekly pain-related visits at 12 months follow-up, even after controlling for depression, catastrophizing and pre-treatment pain-related health care utilization. The findings suggest that attachment style may be a useful construct for examining factors affecting adjustment and treatment response of patients with chronic pain.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00120-9

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 60 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 260

Related

Metadata

Authors
Ciechanowski, P., Sullivan, M., Jensen, M., Romano, J., & Summers, H.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Ciechanowski, Paul
ORCID
Venue
Pain
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2003-08
Volume
104
Issue
3
Pages
627-637
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00120-9
OpenAlex
W2029650441
Cited by
260
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 17
FWCI
5.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS031638, R01 NS31638)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Keywords
attachment styles, chronic pain, depression, pain catastrophizing, health care utilization, fearful attachment, secure attachment, preoccupied attachment, multidisciplinary pain management, physical disability, psychological adjustment
MeSH terms
Adult, Chronic Disease, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Object Attachment, Pain, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Logistic Models

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