2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2015.12.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development and Initial Validation of the Activity Patterns Scale in Patients With Chronic Pain

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

21
120
6

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(147 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
21
120
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Recent efforts have been made to take into account these criticisms. Esteve developed the “Activity Patterns Scale” including 3 pacing subscales differentiated by the goal of the behavior[74]. In this study, pacing for increasing activity levels or conserving energy for valued activities was positively associated with daily functioning, whereas pacing for pain reduction was not.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Recent efforts have been made to take into account these criticisms. Esteve developed the “Activity Patterns Scale” including 3 pacing subscales differentiated by the goal of the behavior[74]. In this study, pacing for increasing activity levels or conserving energy for valued activities was positively associated with daily functioning, whereas pacing for pain reduction was not.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Traditionally, three activity patterns have been distinguished: avoidance, persistence, and pacing. However, more specific activity patterns have been identified in patients with chronic pain [ 6 , 7 ]. Avoidance has been divided into two patterns: (a) pain avoidance, which refers to avoidance behaviour in the presence or anticipation of changes in pain (e.g., “I stop what I am doing when my pain starts to get worse”), and (b) activity avoidance, which refers to the patients' condition of being in pain rather than the fluctuating pain experience (e.g., “I have not been able to carry on with my usual level of activity”).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Avoidance has been divided into two patterns: (a) pain avoidance, which refers to avoidance behaviour in the presence or anticipation of changes in pain (e.g., “I stop what I am doing when my pain starts to get worse”), and (b) activity avoidance, which refers to the patients' condition of being in pain rather than the fluctuating pain experience (e.g., “I have not been able to carry on with my usual level of activity”). Research has shown that activity avoidance is associated with poorer physical and psychological functioning, whereas pain avoidance is not related to patient adjustment [ 6 , 7 ]. Three types of persistence have been differentiated: (a) task-contingent persistence, in which patients persist in finishing tasks or activities despite pain (e.g., “Once I start an activity I keep going until it is done”); (b) excessive persistence, referring to doing too much, not respecting one's physical limits (e.g., “I find myself rushing to get everything done before I crash”); and (c) pain-contingent persistence, in which the level of activity fluctuates with and is determined by the pain at that moment (e.g., “When my pain decreases I try to be as active as possible”).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is difficult for FMS sufferers to set goals related to activities that are positive and meaningful for them. Fear of movement, fatigue, low mood, and pain get in the way of their willingness to perform the activities, causing avoidance activity patterns and low motivation and persistence [78]. In the current study, we extended previous findings by higher levels of depression, anxiety and perceived stress, and lower levels of optimism and control 30 .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…Chi-square tests showed no differences between the groups at pre-test in any A student t test revealed no differences between the groups regarding age (t 78 [69] = -1.0; p = 0.169) or years with pain (t [67] = -0.61; p = 0.543). Moreover, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups on any of the outcome variables, which indicated that the random assignment was successful.…”
Section: Pre Intervention Comparisonsmentioning
confidence: 99%