Changes in pain catastrophizing predict later changes in fibromyalgia clinical and experimental pain report: cross-lagged panel analyses of dispositional and situational catastrophizing

Introduction: Fibromyalgia (FM), characterized by wide-spread diffuse pain and sensory abnormalities, is associated with elevated indices of distress and pain-related catastrophizing compared to both pain-free samples and those with chronic pain conditions. Catastrophizing is a pervasive negative mental set, and is a strong predictor of negative pain-related outcomes such as clinical pain intensity, and physical disability. Situational catastrophizing, measured in the context of experimentally-induced pain, is strongly related to enhanced pain sensitivity, a core aspect of the pathophysiology of fibromyalgia. However, little is known regarding the temporal course of the association between catastrophizing and pain-related "outcomes". Most studies involve only static assessments of pain and catastrophizing at a single time point, which provides little insight into the direction of the observed associations. We sought to investigate the temporal relationships between catastrophizing and indices of both clinical pain (substudy 1) and experimentally-induced pain (substudy 2) in a larger randomized controlled longitudinal trial. Methods: Fifty-seven patients with FM completed catastrophizing, depression, and pain questionnaires as well as laboratory cold pressor pain testing at baseline, post-intervention and three month follow-up during a lifestyle physical activity study. Cross-lagged panel analyses were used to address these temporal relationships. Results: In substudy 1, analyses revealed that pre-to-post changes in dispositional catastrophizing ratings prospectively accounted for unique variance in subsequent post-to-follow-up changes in clinical pain ratings (p = 0.005), while pre-to-post changes in pain ratings did not account for unique variance in post-to-follow-up changes in catastrophizing ratings. An identical pattern was observed experimentally in substudy 2, with pre-to-post changes in situational catastrophizing ratings prospectively accounting for unique variance in subsequent post-to-follow-up changes in experimental pain ratings (p = 0.014), while pre-to-post changes in pain ratings did not account for unique variance in post-to-follow-up changes in catastrophizing ratings. Specifically, initial alterations in catastrophizing were associated with subsequent alterations in clinical and experimentally induced pain. Controlling for levels of depression did not affect the results. Conclusions: These findings provide empirical evidence that catastrophizing processes might precede and contribute to subsequent alterations in the pain experience for FM patients. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00383084

Catastrophizing delays the analgesic effect of distraction

a b s t r a c t Behavioral analgesic techniques such as distraction reduce pain in both clinical and experimental settings. Individuals differ in the magnitude of distraction-induced analgesia, and additional study is needed to identify the factors that influence the pain relieving effects of distraction. Catastrophizing, a set of negative emotional and cognitive processes, is widely recognized to be associated with increased reports of pain. We sought to evaluate the relationship between catastrophizing and distraction analgesia. Healthy participants completed three sessions in a randomized order. In one session (Pain Alone), pain was induced by topical application of a 10% capsaicin cream and simultaneous administration of a tonic heat stimulus. In another session (Pain + Distraction), identical capsaicin + heat application procedures were followed, but subjects played video games that required a high level of attention. During both sessions, verbal ratings of pain were obtained and participants rated their degree of catastrophizing. During the other session (Distraction Alone) subjects played the video games in the absence of any pain stimulus. Pain was rated significantly lower during the distraction session compared to the ''Pain Alone" session. In addition, high catastrophizers rated pain significantly higher regardless of whether the subjects were distracted. Catastrophizing did not influence the overall degree of distraction analgesia; however, early in the session high catastrophizers had little distraction analgesia, though later in the session low and high catastrophizers rated pain similarly. These results suggest that both distraction and catastrophizing have substantial effects on experimental pain in normal subjects and these variables interact as a function of time.