Cited by 37Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and Treatment

The importance of catastrophizing for successful pharmacological treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain

Open access
Toth, Cory, Brady, Shuana, Hatfield, Melinda·2014·Journal of Pain Research

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Catastrophizing may be a negative predictor of pain-related outcomes. We evaluated the impact of catastrophizing upon success of first-line pharmacotherapy in the management of neuropathic pain (NeP) due to peripheral polyneuropathy. METHODS: Patients with confirmed NeP with NeP Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain severity score ≥4 (0-10 scale) completed the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ) catastrophizing subscale at baseline. Pharmacological therapy consisting of first-line agents gabapentin, pregabalin, or a tricyclic antidepressant was initiated. Other measures examined included the Karnofsky Performance Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, EuroQol Quality of Life Health Questionnaire, and Modified Brief Pain Inventory. At 3 and 6 months, questionnaires were repeated and adverse effect reporting was completed. Outcome measures assessed were pharmacotherapy success (≥30% relief of NeP) and tolerability over 6 months of follow-up. Bivariate relationships using Pearson product-moment correlations were examined for baseline CSQ catastrophizing subscale score and the change in the NeP VAS scores and medication discontinuation. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were screened, 62 subjects participated, and 58 subjects (94%) completed the final follow-up visit. Greater catastrophizing was associated with poor pain relief response and greater likelihood of discontinuation of pharmacotherapy, reports of greater disability, and impaired quality of life. Duration of pain was negatively associated with likelihood of pharmacotherapy success. CONCLUSION: Catastrophizing exerts maladaptive effects on outcomes with pharmacotherapy in NeP patients. Detection of catastrophizing during clinical visits when pharmacological therapy is being considered can be a predictive factor for patient outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2147/jpr.s56883

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In a recent analysis of large acupuncture trials, both patient and provider expectations for treatment success were strong predictors of response, with better pre-treatment expectations predicting improved post-treatment pain and physical functioning.

    “in a recent analysis of large acupuncture trials revealed that both patient and provider expectations for treatment success were strong predictors of response, with better pretreatment expectations predicting improved post-treatment pain and physical functioning 362, 364.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [8]Gore M Sadosky A Stacey BR Tai KS Leslie D The burden of chronic low back pain: clinical comorbidities, treatment patterns, and health care costs in usual care settings Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012 37 11 E668 E677 22146287
  2. [32]Scott W Wideman TH Sullivan MJ Clinically meaningful scores on pain catastrophizing before and after multidisciplinary rehabilitation: a prospective study of individuals with subacute pain after whiplash injury Clin J Pain Epub 4 1 2013 23552561
  3. [39]Moulin DE Clark AJ Gilron I Pharmacological management of chronic neuropathic pain – consensus statement and guidelines from the Canadian Pain Society Pain Res Manag 2007 12 1 13 21 17372630 PMC2670721
  4. [45]Hays RD Stewart AL Sleep measures Stewart AL Ware JE Measuring Functioning and Well-being: The Medical Outcomes Study Approach Durham, NC Duke University Press 1992 235 259
  5. [65]Ruscheweyh R Nees F Marziniak M Evers S Flor H Knecht S Pain catastrophizing and pain-related emotions: influence of age and type of pain Clin J Pain 2011 27 7 578 586 21368662

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Toth, C., Brady, S., & Hatfield, M.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Toth, Cory
Venue
Journal of Pain Research
Published
2014-06
Volume
7
Pages
327
ISSN
1178-7090 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1991328012
Cited by
37
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5
FWCI
3.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Pain Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Dove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
pain catastrophizing, peripheral neuropathic pain, first-line pharmacotherapy, gabapentin, pregabalin, tricyclic antidepressants, treatment response prediction, drug tolerability, drug discontinuation, disability, quality of life, pain duration, coping strategies

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