Cited by 21Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and TreatmentPain Mechanisms and Treatments

Development and Validation of the Behavioral Avoidance Test—Back Pain (BAT-Back) for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain

Holzapfel, Sebastian, Riecke, Jenny, Rief, Winfried, Schneider, Jessica, Glombiewski, Julia A.·2016·The Clinical Journal of Pain

Abstract

Objectives: Pain-related fear and avoidance of physical activities are central elements of the fear-avoidance model of musculoskeletal pain. Pain-related fear has typically been measured by self-report instruments. In this study, we developed and validated a Behavioral Avoidance Test (BAT) for chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients with the aim of assessing pain-related avoidance behavior by direct observation. Materials and Methods: The BAT-Back was administered to a group of CLBP patients (N=97) and pain-free controls (N=31). Furthermore, pain, pain-related fear, disability, catastrophizing, and avoidance behavior were measured using self-report instruments. Reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach α. Validity was assessed by examining correlation and regression analysis. Results: The intraclass correlation coefficient for the BAT-Back avoidance score was r=0.76. Internal consistency was α=0.95. CLBP patients and controls differed significantly on BAT-Back avoidance scores as well as self-report measures. BAT-Back avoidance scores were significantly correlated with scores on each of the self-report measures (r s=0.27 to 0.54). They were not significantly correlated with general anxiety and depression, age, body mass index, and pain duration. The BAT-Back avoidance score was able to capture unique variance in disability after controlling for other variables (eg, pain intensity and pain-related fear). Discussion: Results indicate that the BAT-Back is a reliable and valid measure of pain-related avoidance behavior. It may be useful for clinicians in tailoring treatments for chronic pain as well as an outcome measure for exposure treatments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ajp.0000000000000349

Cites

47 of 47 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
Holzapfel, S., Riecke, J., Rief, W., Schneider, J., & Glombiewski, J. A.
Affiliations
  • Philipps University of Marburg (DE)
  • MediClin Clinic for Acute Psychosomatics and Rehabilitation Center Am Hahnberg, Germany
Corresponding author
  • Holzapfel, Sebastian
  • Riecke, Jenny
  • Rief, Winfried
  • Glombiewski, Julia A.
Venue
The Clinical Journal of Pain
Published
2016-11
Volume
32
Issue
11
Pages
940-947
ISSN
0749-8047 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2235859535
Cited by
21
References
47
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
Keywords
chronic low back pain, fear-avoidance model, fear of pain, disability, catastrophizing, exposure therapy, outcome measure development
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Avoidance Learning, Depression, Disability Evaluation, Fear, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Psychometrics, Regression Analysis, Reproducibility of Results, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Low Back Pain, Self Report, Catastrophization, Chronic Pain

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