The impact of comorbid pain and depression in the United States: results from a nationally representative survey
Abstract
Background and aims: The co-morbidity between pain and depression is a target of interest for treatment. However most of the published literature on the topic has used clinical cohorts as the population of interest. The goal of this study was to use a nationally representative sample to explore how health outcomes varied across pain and depression status in a cohort sampled from the general US population. Methods: This was a cross-sectional analysis of adults ≥18 years in the 2009–2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The cohort was stratified into: no pain/depression, pain alone, depression alone, and pain with depression. The primary outcome was self-reported general health status, and secondary outcomes were healthcare visits, overnight hospital stays and functional limitation. Survey weighted logistic regression was used to adjust for potential confounders. Results: The cohort consisted of 4,213 individuals, of which 186 (4.4%) reported concurrent pain and depression. 597 (14.2%) and 253 (6.0%) were classified with either pain or depression alone, respectively. The majority of individuals with co-morbid pain and depression reported poor health (65.1%, p <0.001) and were significantly more likely than those with neither condition to rate their health as poor after adjustment (OR: 7.77, 95% CI: 4.24–14.26, p <0.001). Those with pain only or depression only were also more likely to rate their health as poor, albeit to a lesser extent (OR: 2.21, 95% CI: 1.21–2.34, p <0.001; OR: 3.75, 95% CI: 2.54–5.54, p <0.001, respectively). A similar pattern was noted across all secondary outcomes. Most notably, those with co-morbid pain and depression were the most likely to endorse functional limitation (OR: 13.15, 95% CI: 8.00–21.61, p <0.001). Comparatively, a similar trend was noted amongst those with pain only or depression only, though with a reduced effect size (OR: 4.23, 95% CI: 3.12–4.77, p <0.001; OR: 5.13, 95% CI: 3.38–7.82, p <0.001). Conclusions: Co-morbid pain and depression in the general population resulted in markedly worse outcomes versus isolated pain or depression. Further, the effect appears to be synergistic. Given the substantial burdens of pain and depression, future treatments should aim to address both conditions simultaneously. Implications: As a result of the co-morbidity between pain and depression, patients presenting with either condition should increase the index of suspicion among clinicians and prompt screening for the reciprocal condition. Early intervention for co-morbid pain and depression has the potential to mitigate future incidence of chronic pain and major depression.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 inclusion of a pain assessment reflects recent findings about the high comorbidity prevalence in depression with respect to chronic pain and the possible efficacy of behavioral pain reduction methods.
“The inclusion of a pain assessment reflects recent findings about the high comorbidity prevalence in depression with respect to chronic pain [47] and the possible efficacy of behavioral pain reduction methods [48,49].”
From Online Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Intervention for Youth With Major Depressive Disorders: Randomized Controlled Trial. (2021) · cites this paper as [47]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 29 · Cited by 38
- Authors
- Dhanju, S., Kennedy, S. H., Abbey, S., Katz, J., Weinrib, A., Clarke, H., Bhat, V., & Ladha, K.
- Affiliations
- University Health Network (CA)
- St. Michael's Hospital (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Ladha, Karim
- Venue
- Scandinavian Journal of Pain
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2019-02-13
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 319-325
- ISSN
- 1877-8860 (ISSN-L)
- 1877-8879
- OpenAlex
- W2913254245
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4
- FWCI
- 2.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Scandinavian Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Keywords
- chronic pain, depression, comorbidities, health status, functional limitations, medical visits, hospitalization, health outcomes, NHANES, United States adults, self-rated health, health care utilization, socioeconomic status, health insurance, health care costs, quality of care
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depression, Female, Health Status, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nutrition Surveys, United States, Cohort Studies, Comorbidity, Incidence, 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