Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Predictive validity of the Chronic Pain Coping Inventory in subacute low back pain

Truchon, Manona,b,*; Côté, Denisa

doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2005.04.003
Article
Buy
SDC

The Chronic Pain Coping Inventory (CPCI) was developed to assess eight behavioral coping strategies hypothesized to be important for pain adaptation. But the predictive validity of the CPCI has yet to be tested in a longitudinal study. Here, 321 workers on sick leave after a work accident affecting the low back pain (LBP) region completed the CPCI during the subacute stage (T1) of LBP as well as the Catastrophizing scale of the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ). Disability, pain intensity and depressive mood were assessed simultaneously as well as 6 months later (T2). Work status was also determined at follow-up. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that the CPCI (Guarding scale) predicted T1 disability and T2 disability (Relaxation scale), but T1 disability was the best predictor of T2 disability. For T1 pain intensity, the CSQ's Catastrophizing dimension was the best predictor and the CPCI Guarding scale added a small contribution. T1 pain intensity was the best predictor of T2 pain intensity. Catastrophizing and Guarding were the most strongly associated with depressive mood at T1 but at T2, only depressive mood at T1 predicted this same variable. Results indicated also that the Guarding and Catastrophizing scales were able to predict future work status. The present study clearly reveals the usefulness of Guarding from the CPCI and Catastrophizing from the CSQ, when predicting different outcomes of adjustment to low back pain.

aCentre for interdisciplinary research in rehabilitation and social integration, 525, Boul. Hamel, Québec (QC), Canada G1M 2S8

bDépartement des relations industrielles, Université Laval, Québec (QC), Canada G1K 7P4

*Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 418 656 2131x2752; fax: +1 418 656 7688.

E-mail address:manon.truchon@rlt.ulaval.ca

Received 19 November 2004; received in revised form 30 March 2005; accepted 4 April 2005.

© 2005 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.
You currently do not have access to this article

To access this article:

Note: If your society membership provides full-access, you may need to login on your society website