Cited by 164Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and TreatmentMedical Practices and Rehabilitation

Kinesiophobia in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain: differences between men and women

Open access
Bränström, H, Fahlström, M·2008·Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the degree of kinesiophobia in patients with chronic pain, to examine differences in kinesiophobia and other pain-related characteristics between men and women, and to examine differences in pain-related characteristics between patients with high and low levels of kinesiophobia. DESIGN: Postal survey. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS: Eighty-eight men and 173 women with chronic musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: Patients completed questionnaires covering background data, pain variables, disability and psychological characteristics. The Swedish version of Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-SV) was used to measure kinesiophobia. RESULTS: Kinesiophobia (TSK-SV score >37) was found in 56% of patients, with men having a higher frequency (72%) than women (48%). Pain intensity was correlated with TSK-SV score in both men and women. No correlations were found between kinesiophobia and age, pain duration or probable depression/anxiety. Women with high kinesiophobia tended to be younger, had more pain and showed more tiredness, disability, stress, interference and life dissatisfaction compared with women with low kinesiophobia. These differences were not seen in men. CONCLUSION: The results indicate differences between men and women with chronic pain. The use of the TSK-SV questionnaire might assist therapists to identify patients whose fear of movement may negatively impact their rehabilitation. There is some evidence to suggest that optimal cut-off scores may differ between male and female patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2340/16501977-0186

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

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

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bränström, H., & Fahlström, M.
Affiliations
Umeå University (SE)
Venue
Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
Published
2008
Volume
40
Issue
5
Pages
375-380
ISSN
1650-1977 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2042563850
Cited by
164
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine (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 › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
Keywords
kinesiophobia, chronic musculoskeletal pain, sex differences, Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, pain intensity, disability, psychological distress, fatigue, stress, life dissatisfaction, rehabilitation
MeSH terms
Adult, Chronic Disease, Disability Evaluation, Fear, Female, Humans, Male, Musculoskeletal Diseases, Pain, Pain Measurement, Phobic Disorders, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sex Factors

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