12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Parental Catastrophizing and Goal Pursuit in the Context of Child Chronic Pain: A Daily Diary Study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Despite daily variability in children's chronic pain experiences, little is known about how parents' emotions and goals toward their child's pain are influenced by these daily changes. This diary study examined how daily child pain intensity (as perceived by parents) moderates the associations between parental catastrophic thoughts about child pain on the one hand, and daily parental distress and parents' goals with regard to their child's pain (pain control vs. activity engagement) on the other hand.

          Method: Participants were 25 parents of 20 different children (N = 18; 90% girls). Children, aged 8–14 years ( M = 9.5, SD = 2.09), experienced either chronic headache or functional abdominal pain with an average pain duration of 22.5 months ( SD = 24.5 months). Daily parental responses (i.e., perceived child pain intensity, distress and goal endorsement) were collected through a 3-week daily diary (resulting in 413 valid diary reports). Parents completed the Pain Catastrophizing Scale for Parents prior to starting the diary (PCS-P general) and a daily measure (PCS-P daily) included in the diary. To account for the interdependence of the data, the data were analyzed using multilevel modeling.

          Results: Perceived daily child pain intensity moderated the impact of parental general and daily catastrophic thoughts on parents' daily distress. Only for parents experiencing low general catastrophic thoughts an increase in distress was observed on days when they perceived their child's pain intensity as high. For all parents, high levels of perceived child pain intensity were related to more distress on days where parents reported high levels of catastrophic thinking (i.e., PCS-P daily). Perceived daily child pain intensity also moderated the impact of parental general catastrophic thinking on parents' daily endorsement of goals. Parents with high levels of general catastrophic thinking reported a lower focus on child pain control on days when child pain intensity was perceived to be low. Parents with low general catastrophic thinking reported lower endorsement of the activity engagement goal on days where the child's pain intensity was perceived to be low.

          Conclusion: These findings highlight the complexity of daily fluctuations in parental distress and goals regarding their child's pain. Clinical implications and future directions are critically assessed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The Pain Catastrophizing Scale: Development and validation.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Theoretical perspectives on the relation between catastrophizing and pain.

            The tendency to "catastrophize" during painful stimulation contributes to more intense pain experience and increased emotional distress. Catastrophizing has been broadly conceived as an exaggerated negative "mental set" brought to bear during painful experiences. Although findings have been consistent in showing a relation between catastrophizing and pain, research in this area has proceeded in the relative absence of a guiding theoretical framework. This article reviews the literature on the relation between catastrophizing and pain and examines the relative strengths and limitations of different theoretical models that could be advanced to account for the pattern of available findings. The article evaluates the explanatory power of a schema activation model, an appraisal model, an attention model, and a communal coping model of pain perception. It is suggested that catastrophizing might best be viewed from the perspective of hierarchical levels of analysis, where social factors and social goals may play a role in the development and maintenance of catastrophizing, whereas appraisal-related processes may point to the mechanisms that link catastrophizing to pain experience. Directions for future research are suggested.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Reliability estimation in a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis framework.

              Scales with varying degrees of measurement reliability are often used in the context of multistage sampling, where variance exists at multiple levels of analysis (e.g., individual and group). Because methodological guidance on assessing and reporting reliability at multiple levels of analysis is currently lacking, we discuss the importance of examining level-specific reliability. We present a simulation study and an applied example showing different methods for estimating multilevel reliability using multilevel confirmatory factor analysis and provide supporting Mplus program code. We conclude that (a) single-level estimates will not reflect a scale's actual reliability unless reliability is identical at each level of analysis, (b) 2-level alpha and composite reliability (omega) perform relatively well in most settings, (c) estimates of maximal reliability (H) were more biased when estimated using multilevel data than either alpha or omega, and (d) small cluster size can lead to overestimates of reliability at the between level of analysis. We also show that Monte Carlo confidence intervals and Bayesian credible intervals closely reflect the sampling distribution of reliability estimates under most conditions. We discuss the estimation of credible intervals using Mplus and provide R code for computing Monte Carlo confidence intervals. (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-1078
                01 July 2021
                2021
                : 12
                : 680546
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Division of Psychology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling , Stirling, United Kingdom
                [2] 2Department of Experimental, Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University , Ghent, Belgium
                [3] 3Pediatric Psychology, Department of Pediatrics, Ghent University Hospital , Ghent, Belgium
                [4] 4Department of Internal Medicine and Pediatric, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University Hospital , Ghent, Belgium
                [5] 5AZ Maria Middelares , Ghent, Belgium
                Author notes

                Edited by: Hyemin Han, University of Alabama, United States

                Reviewed by: Somayyeh Mohammadi, University of British Columbia, Canada; Megan Miller, Indiana University, Purdue University Indianapolis, United States

                *Correspondence: Line Caes line.caes@ 123456stir.ac.uk

                This article was submitted to Health Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2021.680546
                8281243
                34276501
                ecb6e994-9ec4-48d9-ad17-29799ad6a374
                Copyright © 2021 Caes, van Gampelaere, Van Hoecke, Van Winckel, Kamoen and Goubert.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 14 March 2021
                : 25 May 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 5, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 44, Pages: 14, Words: 9914
                Funding
                Funded by: Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 10.13039/501100003130
                Funded by: Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds UGent 10.13039/501100007229
                Categories
                Psychology
                Original Research

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                chronic pain,parents,diary,catastrophizing,goals,distress
                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                chronic pain, parents, diary, catastrophizing, goals, distress

                Comments

                Comment on this article