Cited by 282Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPediatric Pain Management Techniques

Acceptance of pain is an independent predictor of mental well-being in patients with chronic pain: empirical evidence and reappraisal

Viane, Ilse, Crombez, Geert, Eccleston, Christopher, Poppe, Carine, Devulder, Jacques, Van Houdenhove, Boudewijn, De Corte, Wilfried·2003·Pain

Abstract

This paper reports upon: (1) the value of acceptance of pain in predicting well-being in patients suffering from chronic pain and (2) the construct validity of acceptance by comparing two questionnaires designed to measure acceptance (the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire, CPAQ, unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, 1992 and the Illness Cognitions Questionnaire, ICQ, J Consult Clin Psychol 69 (2001) 1026). The results of two independent cross-sectional studies are reported. Study 1 included 120 patients seeking help in tertiary care settings. In Study 2, 66 patients were recruited from a self-support group for fibromyalgia patients and from a pain clinic. Both studies revealed that acceptance of pain predicted mental well-being beyond pain severity and pain catastrophizing, but did not account for physical functioning. In both instruments, it was found that acceptance of pain was strongly related to engagement in normal life activities and the recognition that pain may not change. Acceptance in both instruments was strongly related to a cognitive control over pain. Study 2 further revealed that the correlation between the CPAQ and the ICQ is moderate, indicating that both instruments measured different aspects of acceptance. It is concluded that acceptance of chronic pain is best conceived of as the shift away from pain to non-pain aspects of life, and the shift away from a search for a cure with an acknowledgement that pain may not change.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00291-4

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 38 · Cited by 282

Authors
Viane, I., Crombez, G., Eccleston, C., Poppe, C., Devulder, J., Van Houdenhove, B., & De Corte, W.
Affiliations
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases (GB)
  • Ghent University Hospital (BE)
Corresponding author
Viane, Ilse
Venue
Pain
Published
2003-11
Volume
106
Issue
1
Pages
65-72
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1972802931
Cited by
282
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 16
FWCI
10.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Keywords
pain acceptance, chronic pain, psychological well-being, Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire, construct validity, pain catastrophizing, pain intensity, physical function, fibromyalgia, coping with chronic pain
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Attitude to Health, Behavior, Chronic Disease, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Fibromyalgia, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Middle Aged, Pain, Predictive Value of Tests, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self-Help Groups, 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