The Investigation And Psychological Intervention Study For Chronic Pain In Patients With Pain-related Factors

Purpose:To investigate the statue of chronic pain patients’ anxiety, depression, painintensity, quality of life, insomnia, and pain self-efficacy, then explore the relationshipbetween them. Using self-management program for patients with psychologicalintervention.Objective:Chronic pain patients who were willing to take participant were chosen fromMedical University of first and second hospital’s Rheumatology from June toDecember at2013.306patients which confirm the condition had been investigatedand62patients had been taken Psychological Intervention.Method:1. Evaluations of Investigation:Convenience sampling method on306chronic pain hospitalized patients wasconducted to investigate. The patients were investigated with SAS, SDS, SF-MPQ,SF-12, AIS and PESQ.2. Evaluations of Intervention:Recruit31patients as intervention group and31patients as control group. Theintervention group were take with psychological intervention and assist with dailymedication, while the control group did not receive psychological intervention, onlywith daily medication. The content of psychological intervention include: theintroduction of chronic pain, develop a action plan, the introduction ofself-management, self-talk, communication skills, the management of depression, themanagement of sleep, and so on. Intervention carried6times, each needs about90minutes. Before and after the intervention each participant needs to complete the evaluation of anxiety, depression, quality of life, pain, insomnia and painself-efficacy.Result:1. The result of investigation:(1) Different gender chronic pain patients had significant difference in anxiety,depression, emotional pain score and PPI (p<0.05).(2) Different age groups, the number of pain sites, intermittent or persistentchronic pain patients had significant difference in SAS, SDS, feeling score, emotionalscore, PRI, VAS, PPI, PCS, MCS, insomnia and pain self-efficacy (p<0.05).(3) Different level of education chronic pain patients had significant differencein SAS, SDS, PRI, VAS, AIS and PSEQ (p<0.05). Nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis Htest showed that different level of education patients had significant difference inemotional score, PPI, PCS and MCS (p<0.05).(4) Different occupations, rural and urban areas chronic pain patients hadsignificant difference in emotional score, PPI, PCS and MCS (p<0.05).(5) Different marital status chronic pain patients had significant difference indepression, emotional score, VAS and MCS (p<0.05).(6) Different family income chronic pain patients had significant difference inpain self-efficacy (p<0.001). Nonparametric test results showed that patients withdifferent family income had significant differences in the scores of anxiety,depression and PCS (p<0.05).(7) Different physical condition, with or without chronic pain patients hadsignificant difference in anxiety, while the other factors had no significantlydifference (p>0.05).(8) Different religious belief chronic pain patients had significant difference inemotional score, PRI and VAS (p<0.05), while had no significant differences in otherfactors (p>0.05).(9) The correlation analysis showed that it has significant difference betweenanxiety, depression, feeling score, emotional score, PRI, VAS, PPI, PCS, MCS, AISand PSEQ.(10) Multiple regression analysis showed that the factor of gender, history of chronic pain, depression, emotional score and PPI can influence patients’ anxiety; thefactor of age, family income, anxiety, MCS and PSEQ can influence patients’depression; the factor of gender, household income, depression and MCS caninfluence patients’pain self-efficacy.2. The result of intervention:(1) Through psychological intervention, the intervention group and controlgroup had significant differences in anxiety, depression and pain self-efficacy(p<0.05).(2) The control group and intervention group had significant differences inphysical component summary score, mental component summary score, generalhealth, physical functioning, role physical, role emotional, bodily pain and vitality(p<0.05).(3) After psychological intervention, the intervention group and control grouphad significant differences in total score of Athens Insomnia Scale, sleep time, totalsleep time, total sleep quality, daily physical function and daily emotion (p<0.05).Conclusion:1. Different gender, age, educational level, occupation, rural and urban areas,marital status, family income, health, history of chronic pain, the number of pain siteschronic pain patients had difference in anxiety, depression, quality of life, insomniaand pain self-efficacy.2. There is a correlation between depression, pain intensity, quality of life,insomnia, pain and pain self-efficacy for chronic pain patients.3. The psychological intervention have obvious effect on patients who haveanxiety, depression, quality of life, insomnia and pain self-efficacy.